MUTH’S TRUTHS

Republican Governor Jim Gibbons is scheduled to release his proposed budget in a little more than 24 hours…and Republican legislators, at least those claiming to be fiscal conservatives, could well find themselves in a bit of a pickle.

Most of the media stories today, in advance of the governor’s state-of-the-state speech and budget proposal, has focused on specific areas of special interest - how much for education, how much for roads, how much health care, how much for this program, how much for that program? But what’s been lost in these musings is the big picture, the proverbial forest for the trees.

The big “Goldilocks” question which Republican legislators should answer for the public before the Legislature reconvenes in a couple weeks is the following: Do you think the overall amount of money the state government is currently spending is too much, too little…or just right?

A Republican legislator who says too little, especially after the huge increases in spending in 2003 and 2005, should probably just go ahead and consider a party change and get it over with.

A Republican legislator who says too much, however, needs to come up with a list of specific programs and expenses he or she would cut. You can’t keep complaining that the government is spending too much, as so many Republican legislators have done over the last two sessions, without specifically saying WHERE the government is spending too much.

Complaining that the government has grown to big and too fast makes a nice campaign soundbite, but failing to put forward actual budget cut recommendations to roll back government is trying to eat your cake and have it, too. That’s neither honest nor responsible.

For those Republican legislators who say the current cost of government is pretty much just about right, they have a potentially big problem on their hands, which I’ll get to in minute. But first, let’s take a quick trip down Memory Lane…

WHERE ARE THE TAX CUTS?

Back in 2003, an awful lot of Republicans opposed the massive tax hike proposed by then-Gov. Kenny Guinn. The state didn’t need all that new money, they said. Indeed, fifteen Republicans in the Assembly held up passage of the $833 million tax hike by voting “no,” thus denying the 2/3 majority required to pass such a measure (until the Supreme Court shredded the Nevada Constitution).

But here’s the dirty little secret many of those “Mean 15” would prefer you not know about: While they all objected to raising taxes by $833 million, many were perfectly willing to raise taxes by $700 million…or $500 million…or $300 million. Only one member of the “Mean 15,” Sharron Angle, appears to have been opposed to ANY tax hike of any amount…even a dollar.

In other words, except for Angle all of the Republicans in the Assembly in 2003 were tax hikers just like Gov. Guinn…only to different and slightly lesser degrees. They were not the “pure white” tax champions they’ve since held themselves out to be after that session.

The point is, after the huge tax hike in 2003, none of the “Mean 15” Republicans came back in 2005 proposing that it be, in whole or in part, rescinded…despite a huge budget surplus. Instead, they all voted for a new bloated budget which jacked up spending yet again, while giving taxpayers a small, one-time rebate on their overpayment and a small, temporary reduction in the payroll tax for businesses.

And again, to the best of my knowledge, no list of significant budget cuts to existing government spending was proposed by Republican legislators in 2005 who nonetheless continued to beat the government-is-too-big drum.

Republicans who complained that the 2003 tax hike was too big should have proposed rolling it back in 2005. They didn’t. And Republicans who complained that government was too big should have proposed significant budget cuts. They didn’t. So it appears the complaints about taxing and spending by most of these Republicans is really nothing but a lot of hot air.

IS THE SPIRIT OF TASC DEAD?

A little over a year ago, state Sen. Bob Beers (R-Las Vegas) brought forth a new nation, conceived in liberty…wait a minute, that ain’t right.

Sen. Beers brought forth a new ballot proposition called TASC…the Tax and Spending Control Initiative. The essence of TASC was this: Government spending is too big and growing too fast, so we need to put a cap on it. That cap would limit government spending increases to no more than the combined rate of population growth and inflation.

TASC never made it to the ballot, thanks to a minor typo which the Supremes, in all their worldly wisdom, ruled disqualified the measure.

Nevertheless, over 150,000 Nevada taxpayers signed the petition saying they wanted government spending increases to be limited to the combined rate of population growth and inflation. And Sen. Beers, running for governor at the time, told voters that if elected he’d veto any budget bill which exceeded the TASC limit whether or not TASC was approved by voters. A number of other Republican candidates (but not Gov. Gibbons) also came out publicly in support of TASC.

Which brings us back to Gov. Gibbons’ budget to be released tomorrow.

According to Associated Press reporter Brendan Riley yesterday, the proposed Gibbons budget for the next biennium will increase government spending over the current level by a hefty 20 percent. I don’t know if that’s true or not, since I haven’t seen the budget…but if so, it poses a big problem for those GOP legislators who supported TASC and hold themselves out to be fiscal conservatives - because a 20 percent increase in government spending is probably significantly higher than the TASC formula of population growth plus inflation.

Let’s be generous and say the TASC rate this year would be 15 percent. That means the Republican governor’s proposed budget, if the stories are accurate, is going to be at least 5 percent higher than many legislative Republicans, and more than 150,000 TASC-signing taxpayers, have already said it should be.

If - and again this is pure speculation until the actual budget is released - but if Gov. Gibbons proposes to increase government spending by 20 percent tomorrow, how are Republicans who say the government is already spending too much, or who said future government spending should be limited to a rate of population growth plus inflation, how do those Republicans not come out immediately in opposition to Gov. Gibbons’ proposed budget without looking like complete hypocrites?

On the other hand, if these Republicans don’t come out and support the Republican governor’s proposed budget, they’re going to look like bad “team players” in some GOP partisans’ eyes.

Like I said, a lot of Republicans could well find themselves in a bit of a pickle tomorrow.

Some will surely try to blame this all on former Gov. Kenny Guinn, but that dog won’t hunt. Yes, Gov. Guinn left a proposed budget which, I assume, increased spending by 20 percent or more. However, that didn’t mean Gov. Gibbons had to accept it. He’s had two months to find ways to pare Gov. Guinn’s proposal back to within the TASC limit - although, to be fair, Gov. Gibbons never embraced TASC during his campaign for governor.

Regardless of whose budget it is, GOP legislators who supported TASC, and who call themselves fiscal conservatives, simply cannot rationalize away support for a 20 percent increase in overall state spending. No way; no how.

Let’s hope this time around some of them actually come up with a list of real spending cuts which will truly earn them the label “fiscal conservative,” and vote against any budget which exceeds the TASC cap. A serious debate over the proper role of government and the proper level of government spending is LONG overdue by the Legislature. Let the debate begin.

Posted on January 21st, 2007 by Chuck Muth
Filed under: Nevada