Friday, February 18, 2011

Idle Threats

The past few years of state and city budget woes has witnessed leaders issuing threats of massive cuts as a way to exert pressure and ultimately mitigate the cuts:

Witness Ron Huberman at the CTA in 2007, using threats to seek emergency funds from Springfield.

Or Pat Quinn in 2010, using school funding threats to seek an income tax hike.

Here in 2011, Quinn is threatening brutal cuts to health and human services, while seeking to borrow $8 Billion, some of which would surely be used to mitigate these funding cuts.

But all of this maneuvering masks and distracts from the central task -- the need to make sacrifices across the board, in all areas of government. This can only happen if the people demand it and we develop a shared sense of sacrifice - that everyone is giving something up for the greater good and long-term stability. It is not easy, but to have any chance, we need leaders who can appeal to a wide public and speak in plain English, rather than leaders who try to exploit threats and paper over problems with temporary fixes.

Governor's Borrowing Proposal

Governor Quinn is proposing to borrow $8.75 billion to pay unpaid bills and help balance budget for FY12.

Chicago Commons does not take a position on this.

However, for those so inclined, here is a summary of the PRO and CON positions:

1. PRO -- State of Illinois has already borrowed money from all of the providers and contractors like Chicago Commons. So Quinn’s proposal can be described as just “refinancing” existing debt in a more responsible, less expensive manner.

2. CON -- Some of this borrowing will allow the State to avoid some budget cuts in FY12, effectively "kicking the can down the road". The borrowing just allows the State to dig its long-term hole deeper, delaying cuts and avoiding decisions.

Ultimately, the answer is somewhere in the middle.

For example the State may have to borrow something to pay some of its unpaid bills, but it must not borrow in order to defer hard decisions.

Sun Times Editorial did a good job, I think, of communicating this balanced message.