Krusin' the Capitol
By Nebraska State Senator Lowen Kruse
Legislative Planning
October 14, 2002
Hi
A few of you responded to my last epistle, signing off until January, with a
big "Why do THAT?" The thought was there are surely ideas and feelings that
would be helpful to me. I know that's right!
So I have been trying to pull my questions into concise form, to respond to
this excellent idea for dialog by email. Here it is.
This winter session will focus on re-drawing the landscape for Nebraska
finances, and therefore for the services to be delivered. Though we never do
get there, it is as close to zero-based budgeting as we can get. Every item
must be examined and justified. As an example of the problem, since the
prison system is required, we do not get far in asking for justification for
the program. But I do hope we can challenge how it is done. For example,
failure to do comprehensive drug treatment in prison is going to cost us
mega-dollars in the future. All by itself, it is guaranteed to raise taxes.
With that as a background, here is some of the key info I would like to have:
1. How do you feel about tax shift? Which taxes are the most hurtful to
economic development? To low income persons trying to become productive?
2. What are top priorities for our budget?
3. What are low priorities for our budget?
4. Where are we on health issues? Gaps and overlaps?
5. Where are there a dozen or more persons who would join in a discussion
forum for an hour or two? All my attempts have failed in turnout, though the
discussion has been good.
6. What ideas would you like me to consider?
BACKGROUND FOR THESE QUESTIONS
1. Our present ratio of sales:income:property taxes, on a statewide basis
taking every jurisdiction into account, is 12:14:16. Ten years ago it was
10:9:16.
So we have evened it up a bit. We did tax shift. Is that good? If we are
still short on funds this winter there will be a big push to reduce state aid
to locals, which would increase the 16. Nearly one billion of our budget
(38%) goes to property tax relief. Property taxes would be (on average) 50%
higher if we did not. That sounds like good relief, but is it? I have been
completely unable to get feedback from the business community on this, and I
value their judgment on what enhances economic development.
We will definitely be increasing the base on sales tax because we simply are
out of line with surrounding states. Plus, we must get ready to collect
sales tax on the internet, which means we must have the same base as
coalition states on the goods taxed.
Income taxes were reduced 5 years ago, mainly on middle incomes. We restored
half of that reduction for one year. The easiest way to raise the middle
number would be to extend the time on the half.
President Bush has pushed through "Leave No Child Behind" legislation, with
long range effects. Since I believe that education is economic development I
certainly support his initiative. Put another way, leaving children behind
in my district is costing the state big time. However, the price tag is
steep. Two teachers in large "core academic" classrooms by 2005 (one will be
a paraprofessional) is one startling requirement. Who pays for that? State
or local? (Feds will kick in about 18% more than now, but that clearly will
not pay the bill.)
2 and 3. Priortizing is a tough job, since the items are so diverse. All
are required, in one way or another. For example, the state constitution
requires free education to all persons between 5 and 21 years of age. That
includes aliens, low income, retarded, developmentally disabled, as well as
public schools and colleges. Only 21% of the state budget is used to run the
state, so big cuts there, which we have made, do not show much change.
The list of state responsibilities: University system, state colleges,
community colleges, K-12 local education, special education subsidy (local),
state patrol, court system (including parole and probation), prisons, health,
human services, Medicaid for low income children, Medicaid for seniors in
nursing homes, aid to low income students to get them on an education track,
public assistance, mental health supplement, disability supplement, property
tax aid to low income seniors, aid to cities, aid to counties, aid to ESUs,
governor and constitutional offices, legislature, and 45 agencies which do
basic items (do not take up much of the budget).
4. There is no will to cut seniors in nursing homes, so we focus on
children, which is only 25% of the Medicaid bill. "Spending down" to get on
Medicaid is from a federal guideline. We have complained. Counties are very
frustrated when they get the persons we reject for Medicaid, because first,
most do not know what to do with them, and second, they pay 100% of the cost
while we have match that brings that down to 40%.
This is a strange area. We come close to having universal health care.
Those out of it are mostly males, 40 to 65 years old. Mothers get covered,
if very low income. All mental health is covered, by federal law (county
obligation). Any soul, by Fed law, can go to an emergency room free.
5. I do have a teaching sheet on the budget, which ANYONE can understand,
and have had good reception of presentations on it. But I do need input from
the general public because the services are for them. The public has good
insight if they are well informed.
Ideas and comments are welcome.
Lowen
p.s. Since I wrote this, the governor wants us back in special session, for
the death penalty. Argh. More on that later.
Back to Top
Krusin the Capitol Index
Home Page
|
