January 12, 2009
Union Leader
Think-tank testimony: Will Concord listen to all views?
We are going to take a wild guess here and suggest that the Democrats in control of the Legislature are the ones who invited the head of a left-leaning “think tank” to come before them last week and testify that the state can’t possibly solve its budget problems by cutting spending alone. It’s just a guess.
Steve Norton of the New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies told a state Senate committee his conclusion that it will need to raise taxes and revenues. He helpfully cited some possibilities: an 8 percent inheritance tax and video slots. He said the state could save money by letting convicts out early (here we go, again).
Now, there is nothing wrong with hearing, and weighing, such options.
But have the Democrats in charge, or even the Republican minority, heard from or plan to invite the head of a right-leaning New Hampshire “think tank” to Concord to hear his views?
They should. But if they don’t, they can read Charles M. Arlinghaus, president of the Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy, each Wednesday in the New Hampshire Union Leader.
(Those “right” and “left” descriptions are our own. Both outfits would no doubt insist that they are thoroughly nonpartisan.)
Just before Christmas, Arlinghaus addressed the state budget problem in his column. He wrote that this year, “traditional approaches to solving the state budget deficit won’t work. The governor and Legislature should adopt a priority-based governing approach that will create a path to fiscal balance based on a strategic set of priorities.”
He then cited the case of Washington state in the last recession.
“Gary Locke (the Democratic governor) faced a budget shortfall in the billions of dollars. Rather than nibble and tweak at the existing budget, he established a priorities-based budgeting model to find a better way to balance the budget.
“The priorities model doesn’t presume an ideology. It was established by a liberal governor and has been championed by a free-market think tank, the Evergreen Freedom Foundation.
“Essentially what Gov. Locke did (and what Gov. John Lynch could do) was to establish a set of core priorities for government action. Funding those core priorities becomes the first claim on available tax revenue. Programs of a lesser priority are cut first or receive funding last. The highest priorities receive funding first.
“On some level, we all do this in our heads. Obviously aid to people with developmental disabilities is a substantially higher priority than running a ski area. It would be foolish to balance the budget by cutting each of those programs 10 percent as if they were of equal weight.
“Priority-based budgeting formalizes that internal process. If we have the money, we fund the first eight items on our list. If the economy picks up and revenues come in, we fund nine and 10. An increased slowdown and we drop item eight.”
Gov. Lynch sounds like he may have heard Arlinghaus. The governor noted in his inaugural address that the state won’t be able to fund everything it might want to, or even everything it should, this year. Will the Legislature listen, too?