Tight Times Call For Tough Choices; Legislature Ought To Make Them

By Scott R Cooper, Crook County Judge
Published in the Central Oregonian, November 2002

With the November general election over, one thing is clear: Oregon voters are in no mood for additional taxes, and the outlook for the income tax measures to be voted on in January is slim. Most legislators seem to have accepted the inevitable, and the rhetoric now is all about how best to proceed with cutting the budget.

Exactly how the newly elected governor and the legislature are supposed to undertake this, they don’t seem to know. Governor and legislators, Republicans and Democrats alike all seem to agree that preserving funding for schools is a priority, but beyond that, we’ve heard no concrete ideas.

Personally, I’m glad I’m not a legislator. The problem is enormous. How to cut $500 million from state services after you have already cut $750 million. I suppose it could be done easily if all the legislators would agree among themselves that none of them are going to run for re-election, and they are just going to go to Salem and do what needs to be done without worrying about the political fallout, but that’s not likely to happen. So they need a framework in which to consider what to do next.

May I suggest a solution that I like to call: “Back to Basics”?

I recently ran across a report issued by the National Association of State Budget Officers. The report is an annual publication issued this past summer which examines how much 49 states (Alaska isn’t included for some reason) spent in 2001 and what the breakdown was of those expenditures. Policy wonks and numbers junkies can look at the report themselves on the web at http://www.nasbo.org/Publications.html

On page 10 of the report, Oregon’s problem shows up.

That page reflects a categorized breakdown of state expenditures. The report shows the amount states spent as a percentage of their total expenditures in fiscal year 2001 for education, higher education, public assistance, Medicaid, corrections, transportation and all other.

I think most people would agree that those specific categories listed first are the essentials people want from their state governments: educate our kids, help the needy, keep criminals off the streets and make sure we have decent roads to carry us from point A to point B. Admittedly, we want lots of other things, but few people are willing to give up these essentials to get the other services governments can provide if they have means to do so.

So with that in mind, how is Oregon doing, compared to other state’s, in its ability to fund the “essentials”? The numbers may surprise you.
In funding for public assistance (we used to call it welfare, before that term was deemed demeaning), Oregon ranks 17th in the nation. In funding for corrections, Oregon ranks 20th. In funding higher education, Oregon ranks 23rd. And that’s the good new! In funding for Medicaid, Oregon ranks 42nd. In funding for elementary and secondary education, Oregon ranks 47th. In funding for transportation, Oregon ranks dead last: 49 of 49 reporting states.

But take heart: we do rank first in the nation in the one remaining category. Oregon has the distinction of outspending all other states in the category of “Other.”

What exactly is in “Other.” Some specific programs are called out later in the report. They include pension payments, health benefits for state employees, public health, mental health, environmental programs, parks and recreation, housing, and general aid to local governments.

Obviously, there is a constituency for all these programs. But how many Oregonians are willing to argue that would shortchange essential funding to educate kids, maintain our roads or bridges or keep our streets safe from crime in order to fund these nice-but-optional programs.

Could the root of our budget problem be that Oregon simply wants too much from its government and that we are having a hard time “cutting the fat” in order to ensure that the “essentials” are funded?

When the legislature convenes in January, I suggest the governor, the 30 dedicated men and women who will sit in the Senate and the dedicated 60 men and women who sit in the House lock themselves in a big room for as long as it takes and go through the exercise of ranking and prioritizing the essential functions of state government. Don’t attach budget numbers. Just decide where roads, schools and police rank in relationship to health, welfare, housing, parks and preserving the environment.

Once you’ve answered that question, cut from the bottom.

When you’ve lived beyond your means for as long as Oregon has, it’s hard to adjust your lifestyle to fit your income. But eventually, the bills catch up with you, and you have to decide what your family priorities are. Those are the rules Oregon tells its citizens they must live by. The State should do not less.