Fernald: GOP Not Serious About Deficit Reduction

Mark Fernald, 2002 Democratic nominee for Governor, blames the failure of the serious deficit reduction on Republican lawmakers whose concern is ”ideology, not governing.”

Five changes to our federal tax code — allowing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to expire; eliminating preferential tax rates for dividends and capital gains; eliminating tax breaks for oil and gas; plugging the holes in the corporate income tax so that it brings in revenue similar to other countries; and a financial transactions tax — would bring in $337 billion a year

Simple math dictates a balanced approach to the deficit problem, but Republicans cannot do math any more, they can only do pledges. The Republicans — including Congressman Bass, Congressman Guinta, and Senator Ayotte — are committed to the Grover Norquist pledge not to raise any taxes, the deficit be damned. If Republicans stick by the pledge — and if voters stick by the Republicans — we have no hope of taming the deficit.

Quote of the Day: Governing Is About Making Choices

Governing is about making choices. Our legislature has cut the cigarette tax, and created a waiting list for the severely disabled. It cut the budget of the community colleges by 20 percent, and increased funding for charter schools. It cut the auto registration fee by $30 — a loss of $90 million that will cut paving, road repairs, and the rebuilding of dangerous bridges.

Last winter, the Republican leadership announced that everyone would have to sacrifice in order to balance the budget, but as they hacked large chunks out of our state government, they did not ask anyone to pay one cent more to maintain state services. In a recent UNH poll, 73 percent said we should consider both spending cuts and tax increases to balance the budget. Voters value our state services, and are willing to pay for them. The Legislature is not.

— Mark Fernald, former New Hampshire state senator.

Assessing the Democratic Gubernatorial Candidates

On Blue Hampshire, former State Rep. Jim Splaine, longtime observer of the Granite State political scene, takes a look at the emerging race for the 2012 Democratic gubernatorial nomination. Splaine believes Gov. John Lynch should run and can win big. If Lynch chooses not to run, Splaine lists the leading contenders.

Mark Fernald. [H]e has spoken and written about the needs of our state more and more during these past few months. He’s older and wiser. He’d be a tough competitor. If he can come across on the campaign trail as a more mellowed “professor type” than he was almost a decade ago, he could do it.

Steve Marchand. This guy is fun. He has a friendly, welcoming way to him, even when you disagree with him. … He knows campaigns, understands fundraising, has a message already thought out, and he’s networking every day… And I haven’t talked with a candidate who has such a “can-do” determination since my first meeting with Carol Shea-Porter

Mark Connolly. If he can work the timing out, and if he can do the catch-up that he has to do, he could go all the way. One-on-one he looks you right in the eye. At the podium he exudes his confidence. His ability to absorb issues is impressive. I think his integrity is beyond question. His caring about people is obvious.

Maggie Hassan. She’s smart, quick on her feet, a hard-worker, and determined. … I much admire Maggie’s intensity…. I could get excited about her chances. And she probably generates more excitement among Democratic interest groups than any of the other potential candidates.

Jackie Cilley. She knows issues well, and while in the legislature she made her voice and idealism heard in committees and on the floor. … She might not have the networking and fundraising capabilities of some other candidates, but she would fill those gaps with enthusiasm and intelligence. Many of us could get excited about her in 2012.

NH House Cuts Would Decimate Social Safety Net

Elaine Grant, NHPR, examines the impact the House Finance Committee’s proposed Health and Human Services budget would have on the Granite State’s social safety net.

The House Finance Committee has proposed cuts that would decimate the budgets of hospitals, community health centers, mental health centers and other organizations that make up the social safety net.

“We did a quick assessment of how many patients would lose their health care as a result of those reductions, and we estimate that’s going to be close to 12,000 patients.”

The cuts would be felt keenly in the North Country, where community health centers provide the only primary care in Berlin and Gorham.

And they’ll hurt low-income children in Manchester. In addition to its broad-based cuts, the House Finance Committee has proposed eliminating $75,000 that goes directly to Child Health Services in Manchester. CHS serves 2500 children and teenagers, most of whom live in poverty. … And that means 500 to 800 kids would lose their medical care.

While GOP lawmakers point to the state’s budget shortfall as justification for the draconian cuts, Mark Fernald counters that previous Legislatures would have looked for new revenue sources to maintain basic services.

The current budget crisis is not due to runaway spending; it’s due to a huge drop in revenues. State tax revenues decreased more than 9 percent in 2009 and have yet to re-cover.

In the past, the Legislature would have tinkered with state taxes to maintain state services. Not this Legislature.

The majority party adheres to an ideology that no part of government is so important as to justify any change in our revenue structure. If revenues do not meet needs, then needs will not be met.

Measuring state and local taxes as a percentage of personal income, New Hampshire has the second lowest level of taxation in the country.

We are better than this.

Cross-posted

Runaway Spending Didn’t Cause NH Budget Shortfall

Former state senator Mark Fernald explains New Hampshire’s budget shortfall is due to a huge drop in revenue rather than runaway spending. Fernald points out tax revenue dropped more than 9 percent in 2009 and has yet to recover —while state spending per capita remains fifth-lowest in the nation.

In the past, the Legislature would have tinkered with state taxes to maintain state services. Not this Legislature.

The majority party adheres to an ideology that no part of government is so important as to justify any change in our revenue structure. If revenues do not meet needs, then needs will not be met.

After mass murder by a mentally ill man in Tucson, will our Legislature cut funding for community mental health centers? Will it throw children out of day care centers and take away their health care? Will it cut state aid to schools and municipalities, solving the state’s fiscal problem on the backs of property taxpayers? Will state troopers be laid off?

The answer to all of these questions may be yes, because we have a Legislature that was elected with the belief that state spending is out of control, even though all evidence is to the contrary.