February 19, 2010 08:17 PM UTC

So You Like "Cutting Spending," Do You?

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

As the Grand Junction Sentinel reports:

Gov. Bill Ritter presented his budget-balancing plan Thursday that addresses yet another $1 billion to cover an expected revenue shortfall.

The governor said balancing next year’s budget was particularly hard because it comes on top of more than $2 billion the state has addressed over the past two budgets.

As with previous cuts, Ritter said these won’t come without pain for just about everyone…

On Thursday, legislators approved a slew of bills reducing about $377 million in spending from all state agencies, but part of that called for transferring nearly $113 million from various cash accounts.

This is the part that opponents of the plan to recoup a fraction of this expected shortfall with the repeal of certain tax exemptions didn’t want to talk about last week.

Actually, that’s not completely fair, they were happy to talk. But the suggestions for alternatives were based on hopelessly flawed math, and–most importantly–the actual decisions of what to cut were left to the majority Democrats. So here you go, hundreds of millions in new and painful budget cuts, seemingly just what the Republicans in the General Assembly wanted.

Now if you were hoping that this latest round of cuts would in some way ameliorate the election-focused GOP caucus, we’re sorry to disappoint you:

Senate Minority Leader Josh Penry, R-Grand Junction, said Ritter is again using gimmicks to balance the budget. He said more than half of the governor’s plan calls for using federal stimulus money and transferring funds from cash accounts.

“The governor and the Democrats shouldn’t break their collective arm patting themselves on the back,” he said. ” Oh, and by the way, the governor failed to mention that the single largest action Democrats have taken to balance the budget is to raise taxes on business, families and seniors by hundreds of millions of dollars.”

Penry was referring to a series of bills Ritter is expected to sign in the next week that eliminates or suspends several tax exemptions, which are estimated to generate about $118 million over the next two years.

The “single largest action?” Uh, what about that $377 million that was just cut from the budget. We’re no math geniuses, but isn’t $377 million more than $118 million?

Like we said at the beginning, the repealed exemptions make up a fraction of the total amount that has to be cut or raised somewhere to balance the budget. Focusing on those select exemptions–instead of the much bigger budget cuts being made at the same time–is disingenuous political posturing. And you recall that the last big round of cuts was met with indignation by the very same Josh Penry because they impacted a medical facility in his district, right? And that the Republican counterproposal makes no suggestions on what to cut other than nebulous suggestions to “cut state payroll,” right? As for the federal stimulus money backfilling many of the most painful cuts–would Penry seriously not accept it? Does he think that Colorado would somehow pay less tax if we turned down that money–as if Colorado doesn’t already pay more in taxes than it receives in federal services? And what would he do to make up all the extra hundreds of millions we’re short without those funds? Withdrawing from cash accounts meant for a variety of important local projects isn’t desirable, but again, what is the alternative?

At some point this year, a reporter with a little fortitude (although The Denver Post has done a fair job of late in calling out the GOP) needs to do the responsible thing and tell the simple truth: nothing is going to make them happy, the GOP is going to find a way to condemn every plan the Democrats come up with to balance the budget–because electoral objectives have totally eclipsed every other consideration for them, even when it comes to what they otherwise claim to support like “cutting spending.” They don’t want to face the consequences now that it’s time to make those “hard choices” they’re always prattling on about, they want to manipulate those choices for their own hypocritical advantage.

What the voters need to understand is whose vision this all represents.