Mom briefly worked in my dad’s tire shop when she couldn’t balance our family’s modest budget. Dad did a great job of selling tires and expanding his, but our family was borrowing money. She told him to set priorities, cut costs, raise revenue, and reduce borrowing. He disagreed. She left for a job as research librarian and solved our budget crisis. Mom turned out to right about Dad’s business also.

    Consequently I decided to use Mom’s principles to review the 2010 Washington legislature’s budget balancing. She’d praise, scold, and shake her head in disbelief.

    Mom’s first praise would be for balancing the budget. Dad didn’t. Congress won’t. Democrats forced an extra session during which they raised politically insane taxes, but they balanced it. Give them credit.

    Second, she’d praise prudent spending to relieve people’s recession pain. Overwhelmed agencies need funds to serve people’s needs. Government spending creates jobs. Capital expenditures are more economical when construction expenses are lower. The state funded a rainy day reserve for hard times, so use it.

    Prudent spending would use the amount available from rainy day funds and federal stimulus funds. The state almost matched the $1.4 billon increased DSHS spending with stimulus money for enhanced federal Medicaid and a hospital assessment.  It drained the meager rainy day fund. Mom liked compassionate policies, but would warn recipients they won’t be available next budget.

    Legislators cut expenses by $3.6 billion such as postponing voter-approved initiatives to reduce class sizes and pay cost-of-living for K-12 staff. They promised to pay them in the future because we passed those requirements in statewide initiatives. Blame us for demanding those without considering the tradeoffs. However, Mom would have scolded them for avoiding budget reform, such as Rep Armstrong’s cost-cutting proposal to restructure DSHS.

    Accepting permanent taxes to cut socials sins would have been acceptable to Mom. Cigarettes and candy endanger all of us. The special privilege of water bottles as non-recyclables is transparently ridiculous. 

    She’d have questioned the temporary BNO tax on services. Either it fills a gap in our tax code as a progressive tax that falls less on lower-income than on higher income residents or it’s unfair. If it closes a loophole make it permanent. Don’t be wimpy.

    She’d have shook her head in disbelief at temporarily taxing beer and soda pop for $160 million in a $60 billion dollar budget in a recession. That debate for one-third of one percent for the whole budget could have been redirected to tax reform. 

    The cash legislators borrowed would have brought on a tongue-lashing. They borrowed money from this year’s state pension funds and capital expenditure funds. Bad ideas. Borrowing pension payments betrays an addiction to easy cash. Pension balances are too low now. And capital accounts should be spent in this economy.

    But what would have disappointed her most would be new, lavish $2.0 billion promises for educational funding while avoiding budget reform. The legislature promised new redistribution formulas in K-12 and enhanced levy equalization even though it must fund smaller class sizes and increase cola coverage. A summary by Sen. Joe Zarrelli estimates the bow wave of budget decisions on those items is more than $4 billion by 2013-15.  Mom would have said, “Those are worthy, but not now. Let’s see where we are next year.”

    Mom had the compassion to put people first, the principles to avoid easy choices, and the courage to be honest about what we could and couldn’t do. The legislature got some of it right, but made it harder for itself and us. Let’s hope they face it next time.