×

Right answers remain elusive in Harrisburg

Republicans in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives have been busy working on a package of bills aimed at making changes to the annual budget-preparation process.

The GOP lawmakers envision that the steps they are proposing will make inroads toward averting repeats of the consternation that has dogged budget-making during recent years.

The effort currently underway is commendable. Unfortunately, it’s not enough.

The reason: It’s not built upon the most pressing need — ensuring a healthy amount of recurring revenue. The consistent lack of an adequate supply of recurring money is the reason the state’s budget deficit has continued to creep upward.

Going into 2017-18 budget preparation last February, the state was facing a $2 billion-plus budget shortfall, and what emerged after all the wrangling — and from the months that the Legislature worked beyond the June 30 budget-preparation deadline to fully fund the approved spending plan — was a budget in which boosting recurring revenue was basically ignored.

Options for guaranteeing enough recurring revenue are tax and fee increases; new taxes, such as a severance tax on Marcellus Shale gas drilling that has been proposed but never implemented; cutting state programs and spending; or some combination of the available options.

Some lawmakers continue embracing the view that this year’s expansion of gambling options will help ease a big chunk of the commonwealth’s fiscal woes, but there’s no guarantee that the money currently being envisioned will be attained or be sustainable.

Nonetheless, even though it’s not a panacea, what the GOP’s package of bills seeks to accomplish represents a meaningful step toward progress on the budget-preparation front, even though many Democrats don’t foresee the optimistic benefits that GOP lawmakers anticipate.

Some of what Republicans’ measures in the House are proposing:

n That the budget secretary be required to put funds in reserve to bring the budget into balance in the event of revenue shortfalls.

n That the budget secretary’s authority to use lapsed funds for new or expanded programs be limited.

n That more information be required to support requests for supplemental appropriations.

n That the administration be required to provide quarterly reports regarding the amounts committed and awarded from more than 200 special funds that support transportation, environmental and other designated programs.

n That limits be imposed on a governor’s ability to handle finances during a budget stalemate.

Failing to gain support were Democratic proposals revolving around suspending the pay of elected officials during a stalemate, including the governor, lieutenant governor, cabinet members and legislative leaders, until a balanced budget is enacted.

There are reasons why such a requirement could be bad as well as good. There are other GOP-initiated budget-related proposals that also merit notice but whose fate remains uncertain.

One would require the administration to repay new capital debt using a different payment approach that purportedly would reduce the amount spent on interest, while another proposal centers on a state constitutional amendment aimed at tying state spending to increases in the Consumer Price Index and state population growth.

They’re reasonable ideas, but the real key to putting the state on a solid fiscal road is recurring revenue, by implementation of temporary or permanent measures. However, Harrisburg has remained deaf to that solution.

NEWSLETTER

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

COMMENTS

Starting at $4.39/week.

Subscribe Today