Utah’s rosy budget numbers?

by

The newest budget numbers for Utah were released today and show millions more than expected – $17 million in one-time money for the general fund, and an extra $14 million in one-time education funding.  In projected ongoing funds, we are looking at $96 million for the general fund and $167 million in ongoing education funds.  Those numbers leave us $50 million short in funding our structural imbalance, and does not account for the mandatory increases in Medicaid spending.  They also do not fund education growth.

Some are already clamoring to spend, spend, spend, but we’re a fiscally responsible state for a reason.  Modest projected increases in state revenues do not give us license to spend it all.  Not only should we not touch the rainy day fund, but I believe we should take some of these funds and start replenishing that fund.  We’re one small economic hiccup away from coming back and making more cuts.  It seems likely that education will get the bulk of the funding, but there are many needs, not the least of which is continuing to look towards the future.

Advertisements

Tags: , ,

6 Responses to “Utah’s rosy budget numbers?”

  1. Rob Crawford Says:

    Save, Save, Save!

  2. JBT Says:

    It is absolutely essential that funding be provided for the new influx of students into our schools and to provide essential health and human services for Utah’s most needy citizens. Programs and services have already experienced deep cuts in the last two years.

    Republicans have never hesitated in the years of surpluses to give money back in the form of tax breaks for corporations and to create a flat tax where the Huntsmans pay the same rate as a family just above the poverty level. It is only right that in years with deficits that some of those tax cuts be returned to their previous levels in order to supply the needed revenue. Nothing could be more fair and equitable. It can an should work both ways.

    When you as a parent are providing for your children buying food and clothing, you are not thinking “spend, spend, spend”. You are thinking I am meeting their basic needs. If you don’t have the resources to meet their basic needs, you do what needs to be done to generate those resources. The school children and the sick and needy in the state who lack resources are your children too now that you are a legislator. You are responsible to help meet their needs, whatever that takes. Now stop whining about “spend, spend, spend and do your job meeting that responsibility.

  3. Jordan Says:

    I think we should put 10% in a rainy day fund and put the rest towards education (both higher ed and k-12) and transportation.

  4. Greg Says:

    @JBT,

    I’m confused, weren’t you just praising Wisconsin Dems for running away from doing their job? Now you are berating Holly for not doing hers? Unless I’m mistaken she hasn’t left the state and has not missed a vote.

  5. Ronald D. Hunt Says:

    Indiana Dems now to =p.

    Holly,

    The coordination between city road repair and state DoT is a good place to look for some savings. Generally speaking DoT road work is given priority over city road work so its not uncommon for crews to start work on a city road project and then up and leave that project for extended periods of time to work on DoT projects.

    Clearly DoT needs the priority their projects involve a lot more funds, but if they where better coordinated with the cities/county’s a lot of money could be saved with regards to equipment left about and hours of pay for work crews driving around between multiple half finished projects.

  6. JJL9 Says:

    JBT, you say, “It is absolutely essential that funding be provided for the new influx of students into our schools and to provide essential health and human services for Utah’s most needy citizens.”

    Because you say so?

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: