A PROMISE TO KEEP: 5%
A Ballot Committee of Citizens for Limited Taxation


 Telegram & Gazette
Worcester, Mass.
Sunday, August 15, 1999

Editorial

Spend, spend, spend
Supplemental budget ignores fiscal realities


While the state's fiscal 2000 budget remains stuck in conference committee, likely to set a new record in foot-dragging, the Legislature has approved a supplemental capital spending bill and a transportation bond bill amounting to more than $1 billion.

The Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, a trusted fiscal watchdog, has warned that such a high level of spending is not supported by revenues.

That legislative leaders seem unable to come to grips with fiscal realities is cause for concern.

While using part of the surplus for infrastructure improvement is prudent, the size of the supplemental bill is disappointing.

Originally, the House called for $242 million package, and the Senate asked for $475 million. But by the time all the local pork was added, a $609 million measure emerged.

The prospect of a future budget crisis is clearly reflected in Big Dig finances.

The Legislature also has approved an additional $450 million of a total of $1.5 billion of "grant anticipation note financing" for the Central Artery. The new borrowing must be repaid from future federal money Washington will provide for all highway projects across the state. Thus the Big Dig will consume up to one-half of the state's entire federal highway assistance funding through 2015.

Michael Widmer, executive director of the taxpayer foundation, said the way the Legislature handled the capital supplement may indicate a penchant for spending in the long-overdue regular state budget as well.

The foundation warned that fiscal 2000 spending should not exceed the $20.8 billion that already has been approved by both chambers. Even that amount would represent a 7 percent increase -- way beyond the rate of inflation.

Gov. Paul Cellucci is expected to veto $140 million in the supplemental budget, mostly from local pork-barrel projects. Cutting excess fat would help.

But unless policy-makers learn to restrict their appetite for spending, Massachusetts will face an uncomfortably tight fiscal environment in 2000 and beyond.


NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml