Posted by
Jay Kern on Saturday, August 02, 2008 2:19:48 AM
This is what Governor Rendell had to say about this fiscal year's budget.
Governor Edward G. Rendell hailed Pennsylvania’s major new investments in energy, education and infrastructure in the commonwealth’s $28.3 billion budget for the 2008-09 fiscal year as investments that will benefit Pennsylvanians for decades to come.
“Even in tough national economic times, this budget shows that Pennsylvania has the resources and the resilience to keep moving forward,” Governor Rendell said. “Because we have worked hard over the past five years to trim the cost of government and control spending, we have been able to make major new investments in educating our children, repairing our bridges, and moving toward energy independence in Pennsylvania.
“We accomplished these important goals while preserving the Rainy Day Fund and without increasing taxes,” the Governor said. “With this budget, Pennsylvania is well positioned for whatever lies ahead.”
I have a couple of concerns even with Rendell's statement. He touts working hard to trim the cost of government and control spending. I'll be honest. I'd hate to see what the result would have been over the past 6 years if he hadn't done both. The reality is that Governor Schweiker's last budget was 20.9 billion dollars. This year's budget is 28.3 billion. That's a total increase over the past 6 years of 35.4%!!!! Sadly, there has been no real effort to control spending or reduce the size of government here in PA. And while education and infrastrucure issues are laudable, I do have some issues with that funding as well as the governor's 'energy independence' plan.
I'm going to run down the 'Budget Highlights List' as shown on the PA website.
http://www.budget.state.pa.us/budget/lib/budget/(2008-2009)_executive_budget_documents/2008-09_enacted_budget_highlights/08-09-enacted_budget_highlights.pdf
I'm going to ignore the first section except to mention that in this time of economic downturn when most everyone I know (including myself) is looking to save money and cut costs, the state budget increased 1.1 BILLION DOLLARS. And I truly don't care what the budget's priorities are at this point in this post. In real terms (based on census and budget data), Pennsylvania has a shrinking (and aging) population and an increasing budget. These two facts just do not add up no matter how you look at it. One of them has to break and I'm afraid it's most likely going to be the tax payer.
Section 2: Protecting Our Progress.
I'm not wild about 1.6 billion dollars for the RCA. In my opinion this is simply another fund for legislators and the governor to dole out where they'd like to see it.
The RPII while crucial at this point in time is also shameful that it's reached this point. Roads and bridges SHOULD be one of the state's priorities. Instead we've been subjected to education initiatives, very questionable environmental regulations, and alternative energy.
I can applaud most of what the Energy Independence Strategy is attempting to do, but in my opinion Bio fuels are a total loser. Particularly corn and soy based fuels. While they DO burn cleaner, they aren't as efficient for mileage and it takes more gas to create them than what you save. This year's budget subsidizes bio fuel by 75 cents per gallon. If you can only stay in business due to government intervention, you don't belong in business and it certainly isn't a viable alternative.
In addition, H2O PA is something that should have been taken care of 8 years ago when the Chesapeake Bay Initiative was first being discussed, not as a last minute fix it.
Section 3: Education.
This subject is a total nightmare, because it can be argued that as a bachelor with no children I'm just not qualified to make any comments whatsoever. I don't view it that way, but it's still a nightmare.
Because I couldn't find exact numbers for school enrollment, I'm going to assume 20% of the population. Also, I'm only using the 9.7 billion dollar number for education from K-12. (In all honesty, the first two numbers Governor Rendell posted in the highlights are a bit vague as to whether they're combined or separate. I'm assuming the first is the total and the second is merely a breakdown.) Even with those rough figures, the state of PA is spending over $2,000 per student for education. And that's what the STATE is paying. That doesn't address your local school taxes. In my opinion the entire education structure needs to be revamped. I know a number of my local school board members and a lot of them have good intentions for lowering taxes when they get elected. Then they realize that they can't simply due to all of the hoops and regulations that public schools are required to follow. Public education across the U.S. (including Pennsylvania) is fast becoming a travesty, and lack of funding is NOT the issue.
Section 4: Caring for all Pennsylvanians.
I have some huge issues with certain aspects of this section.
I'll start with Cover All Kids. I'm personally totally against any kind of national health care plan. Many people think we aren't even close to such a reality, but we already have Medicare and here in Pennsylvania we have CHIPS. The government has been very good at making sure that all residents of PA know that ALL kids now qualify for the program regardless of income. (I personally detest the commercial featuring the little kid walking around with a school bag.) I'm not going to sit here and say that no kid needs state assistance, but the facts are that many do NOT. They're already covered by their parents and will continue to be so. This is a feel good program that has good intentions but has run amok.
Moving on to Child Care. I'm going to use the state's numbers, but assume a bit again because total recipients are a bit vague. The state is trumpeting an increase of 52.7 million dollars for child care which includes covering 2,600 more children. Let's assume that 30% of that is for increased costs, which leaves us with 36.9 million dollars for these new kids. That's almost $14,200 per child. Does anyone here pay that much for child care? Even if we assume only half of that increase is for the additional kids, you're still looking at almost 10 grand per year. I'll admit that I may be out of touch on this issue, but $10,000 seems a bit much for child care.
Autism. Yes, autism is a very real problem for those afflicted with it and those affected by it. I do question state funding for the condition. But autism just might be the most over-diagnosed condition here in the United States today. There are a lot of skeptics out there, Michael Savage included. I'm sure you've all seen the highway billboards that state 'every 20 seconds a child is diagnosed with autism.' It's very emotional, but if you actually run the numbers based on that single fact you come up with 1,576,800 children per year being diagnosed with autism. Then, if you use some very conservative numbers you'll find that everyone on the entire earth will be autistic in 300 years. So why worry about global warming when no one will be able to take care of themselves anyway?