Saturday, October 18, 2008

Pennsylvania May Be Blue For Elections, But Its Budget is in the Red

Earlier this week, state representative Craig Dally told a Pen Argyl crowd that Pennsylvania has $300 million less in the till than it should at this time of the year. According to a recent report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Pennsylvania is one of twenty-one states facing midyear shortfalls.

Many of these states are already reducing services, including health insurance for children, daycare for seniors, eliminating funds for education and reducing its workforce.

According to The Philadelphia Business Journal, Pennsylvania has imposed a hiring freeze.

Will state governments be the next group to ask for a bailout?


Anonymous said...

I'm at a loss. I thought governor for whom the sheep voted was a man with a plan to keep us fiscally sound? What happened? It was supposed to be easy. Gambling, tax increases, toll increases were the magic prescription! Philly was going to be safer! Businesses and educated people were supposed to stay; not run away like the current stampede. Bob Freeman and the other lapdogs rubber stamped it. It was going to work. What happened to our liberal paradise. Instead we have the party that runs the show calling us racists who cling to guns and God. What happened?

Solution: more higher taxes, tolls, and fees. Some big gummint jobs program - because everyone knows the key to job creation is to just let gummint do it. Those who remain will have to do their patriotic duty and simply pay more. Joe Biden's from Scranton. He knows those racist rednecks will ultimately be overtaken by their patriotism and gladly pay more. They're his people. he knows how simple they are. Joe's made a lucrative family biz out of running for prez and putting kin on the no-show staff at big salaries. That's Pennsylvania values. Joe knows.

PA is blue alright.

Bob Jr said...

Anon 11:27 -- I thought the first state to declare it may need a bailout was California. That state must be run by a GOP-economic girlie-man.
And I thought Bush's tax cuts for the rich and famous --- which McCain still favors -- were supposed to keep our nation fiscally sound. What happened?

Anonymous said...

The Terminator is a bigger liberal than Barry. Look past party affiliation and understand the issues.

J. SPIKE ROGAN said...

Our last Governors Election was "G. Slim Pickens". Rendell the mad whose plan was sell our roads to foreign companies. Versus Lynn Swann, a guy who was clueless to PA issues.

Tweedle Dee and tweetle E-A-G-L_E-S

They should have nominated Howie Long, he beat the Eagles. I mean the logic for the election was football rivalry.

Funny note, the dude that posted the "sidewalk to nowhere" video was the Green Party candidate for Governor in 2002 vs Fast Eddie.

He proposed all PA residents make a Living wage of $11 a hour six years ago. That would have been better considering the raising costs these days.

Must be close to election time. O'hare is in OT mode here. Posting on family visits and on weekends now.

LVR was like the New York Sun or the USA Today for some time.

Anonymous said...

Bob Jr., California's request was for the Fed. Gov't to lend the state $7 billion, which would be repaid through ordinary tax payments that will be occurring in the very near future.

Governmental entities do this fairly regularly through what are called "tax anticipation notes." These notes are short term loans, typically from banks, that governments enter into so that they can access the cash needed to continue operations until the tax revenue is received and the loan is repaid.

Apparently California cannot borrow from banks at this time, and they've asked the Federal Gov't to step in as the lender for their tax anticipation notes.

The $64,000 question is why can't they borrow? Is it because the credit markets are locked up, is California in bad shape, or a combination of the two?

My bet is a combination. And California won't be the only state asking.

The Banker

Bob Jr said...

If anon 11:50 is the same anon 11:27, then you are a hyprocrite.
What I need to understand is why you can't look past "the party that runs the show" and you can't understand the issues. When the national economy tanks, states and eventually local governments follow. And as banker says, California won't be the only state. Let's spend trillions on a foolish war over the past 7 years, cut tax revenues to favor the wealthy over the same time span, let the national debt reach epic heights, and then blame low-income minorities who got home mortgages.

not so casual observer said...

I think Fast Eddie Rendell sold this state a real bill of goods. Didn't anyone wonder where the money for those big checks he wallpapered PA with during his reelection bid came from? We all knew it was taxpayers money for his cronies and contributors in their neighborhoods! Now we are going to have to pay the price with our tax dollars.

skizzrs said...

Has anyone ever considered cutting the budget? Do we really believe there is no WASTEFUL spending in local, state, or federal government. Why is the argument always about where we should spend more and how to generate more revenues? Live within our means.

Anonymous said...

bob jr. should reread the post and stick to the subject. already wrong about his california retort, he jumps into the bush/wars bunker (yeah, those wars. the ones that hillary and biden voted to get into and fund at higher and higher rates).

pa is a mess and bob's boy made it that way, despite promises of magical tax/toll/gambling schemes to the contrary. it's easier (albeit disingenuous) to change the subject and/or blame it on bush. i personally hold him responsible for global warming, a persistent grub problem in my lawn, and the fact that it rained on my golf game two weeks back.

rendell won't have to answer for his disaster anymore. his sheep (freeman, et. al.) should have to answer for their robotic loyalty to the failed rendell schemes by which they were bamboozled. and bob should stop making excuses for an unmitigated mistake in the governor's mansion - and his lapdogs in the legislature.

Bob Jr said...

I got 2 words for you, anon. President Obama.

Anonymous said...

As a result of the horrible situation the State budget is in, we, the people of PA, have an opportunity to actually answer the only three question that really matter: What functions should the State Government be involved in? IF State Government should be involved in something, how and to what extent (i.e. as the sole entity or working in combination with either local governments or private partners)? How do we pay for these services?

In a perfect world, once the people AND their representatives figure out what Government should be doing, finding the way to pay for it should be easy. Anything that is day-to-day expenses should be paid for exclusively with tax money, not financing. You (hopefully) don't finance your groceries with your Visa card, Government shouldn't pay for basic functions with a bond. Infastructure, however, should be financed with a clear plan for paying down the debt.

This is not a red and blue issue; this is not a Dem./Rep. issue; what it is is the need for a commonsense way to run Government efficiently and provide the services we, the people, desire, in a cost efficient manner.

Unfortunately we have career politicians like Rep. Dally and Gov. Rendell who are worried more about fringe issues like gay marriage or helping out their buddies with government handouts then effective governing.

Anonymous said...

Has anyone ever considered cutting the budget? Do we really believe there is no WASTEFUL spending in local, state, or federal government. Why is the argument always about where we should spend more and how to generate more revenues? Live within our means.

One idea is to merge rinky dink school districts and cut down on administrative expenses. There are 501 school districts in PA. Each has a handful of highly paid administrators. Send the weak administrators back to teaching and that will cut back on incompetent management.

Alan Earnshaw said...

Anon. 8:41:

Every dollar spent by any governmental body has an advocate. Deciding "what functions...the State Government [should] be involved in" is an ongoing source of debate with no clear, universally accepted answers. For example, I personally do not think the state government should be in the gambling business (i.e. the lottery); I'm sure there are many others who passionately support it, both as a source of revenue and as a legitimate government enterprise. How do we decide who is right? Where do we draw the line? These are thorny issues that make cutting the budget so very difficult.

Chris Miller said...

bob jr.
You are correct when you say that we need to look pass the party running the show. The fact of the matter is that we have allowed both parties to spend to the point that they are giving drunken sailors and gold digging women a bad name. While I realize that you and others are angry over the war the fact of the matter is that at this point were there no war these guys in Congress would be spending it on something else that would continue our practice of not being responsible. If we do not turn back to personal responsibility and common sense we are destined to live in a nanny state under a president Obama.
We, who get up and go to work every day make countless decisions, buying homes, cars, life insurance, carry on successful businesses, purchase home insurance, engage in preparing our kids college plan and our own retirement, some how we become incompetent fools when it comes to health care. We should demand an immediate program to phase out social security, medicare and medicaid, and the elimination of a ton of wasteful programs suchh as farm subsidies. This will mean that we will have to return to a frugal life but it just might bring us some benefits. Better releationships with our families. Less time in front of the TV and computer. A lessening of crime, and respect for one another. We have become fools and our representatives know it.