Gov. Gregoire is preparing the citizenry for an ugly likelihood: an August special session of the legislature to close the gap when $480 million in federal Medicaid money fails to materialize, as now seems almost certain. That somewhat phantom-like money was used to balance the budget, even though it was a long shot. By August 9, the governor's hand will be forced and she says a quickie special session will be necessary.
Or maybe not. If legislative leaders balk at putting their heads in this noose, they may be able to force the governor to make her own across the board cuts, taking all the political heat. (After all, Gregoire isn't running this year and she may even be heading to a D.C. job sometime soon.)
If there is a special session, Republicans will stand back, chuckle, and refuse to help. For Democrats, it would be a nightmare session, damned if they raise taxes, damned if they cut services to key constituencies such as teachers, government workers, or social services. It might have been avoided if the legislative leaders had anticipated the shortfall, rather than crossing fingers while kicking the can down the road for a few months.
Speaking of Medicaid, I'm reminded of oneof Ronald Reagan's more creative suggestions, back in the 1980s. He proposed a mammoth deal where the federal government would take over all Medicaid costs. In exchange, states would assume full costs of education and transportation. The payoff would be that the federal government, with full control over Medicaid rules, would be able to drive down costs over time. States, lacking tempting federal infusions, would get more serious about efficiencies in schools and building (fewer) highways.
At the time, this stillborn idea was part of a New Federalism, an attempt to sort out more rationally all the overlapping authority and funding of many public programs. Instead, Obama's stimulus spending has put the federal government's nose further into the tent, pushing for stronger federal roles at a time when the voters have little appetite for it. Americans historically feel this way, except in times of war and severe depressions.
One other way to deal with this growing and expensive muddle of multiple governments is through "incentivism," along the lines of Education Secretary Arne Duncan's Race to the Top program for education. Instead of the usual federal pattern of spreading programs to every last Congressional District, in order to get support, incentivism sets up a system where only the states doing the best job in reform earn the federal bucks. Locally, King County Executive Dow Constantine is looking at such a model for future Metro bus service: Only cities that stimulate transit by land use planning and density-building get the future service.
To be sure, a quickie legislative session is no time for such creative thinking. Democrats will be thinking only of surviving the November election, so the priority will be saving the skins of the most endangered members, giving them a little something to tell the voters back home about. Before that, they would negotiate hard with Gregoire about what goodies could go into the session to sugar-coat the cuts.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!

Print
Email





Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Fri, Jul 23, 8:52 a.m. Inappropriate
No doubt about it; this August special session, if it happens, is going to be unpleasant. It's scandalous that we're more than two years into this recession and Washington's budget process is still in crisis mode. For too long we've budgeted under the assumption that the money would come rolling in again soon, and so there's been little attention toward getting the process back on a sustainable course.
Tax exemptions have become a bit of a pet issue for me. Washington has over 500 exemptions, according to the last Department of Revenue report, for purposes ranging from affordable housing to agricultural support to Boeing. We put too little effort into studying the impact of these exemptions to insure that they really have enough benefit to justify their cost. Missouri, Iowa, and Colorado have made significant steps toward reviewing their tax codes and cleaning out non-performing exemptions, but not Washington. Incentivism is another idea that is not just about saving money, but putting in potentially revolutionary reforms (if it is done right, of course). The Pew Center on the States also recently put out a report on procurement reform, something that state leaders don't often think about but could also be a potential source of significant savings. We need to be more creative and more willing to challenge some of the assumptions of what we can do rather than just bicker about the level of taxes and spending.
Posted Fri, Jul 23, 11:02 a.m. Inappropriate
A generation-long problem with the Legislature is that it sees windfalls as perpetual revenue streams and plans accordingly. Economic boom time? That money will keep rolling in forever! Tobacco lawsuit payout? Time to start more permanent programs. If you built your household budget around the assumption that you'd get a juicy bonus and win the lottery every year, you'd soon be headed to bankruptcy, just like our state government is.
Posted Fri, Jul 23, 11:54 a.m. Inappropriate
dbreneman - I don't often agree with your politics, but I think you have hit the nail on the head here.
Olympia (and organizations receiving money for these unsustainable programs, for that matter) needs to be less short-sighted. How are you really benefiting our communities when you establish programs then have to pull the rug out from under them after a few years?
To exacerbate the problem, Olympia raises taxes on individuals and businesses to try to temporarily fill the gaps. It's unfair for individuals that need services and unfair to employers and their employees.
I whole heartedly disagree with the Party of No philosophy, but sometimes No is the responsible, yet unpopular, answer.
Posted Sat, Jul 24, 8:28 a.m. Inappropriate
A point of clarification, David: RACE TO THE TOP concerns the distribution of federal funds that are marginal to the core sources of education funding (state and local).
Dow's proposal to link METRO service to land use is NOT analogous.
METRO is the sole transit service providers (+Sound Transit, of course) in King County. We have struggled for years to establish a meaningful land use-transportationn linkage in a fragmented government landscape in which each city controls land use within its borders, subject to local political whim ... but transportation is provided by numerous modes and means, subject to county political district pressures. We have failed to find a politically acceptable way to centralize transportation and transit service distribution, free of the overlapping political interests of cities and council districts. So I applaud Dow's efforts to find some other way to rationalize the service and get the most bang for the public (and transit users') buck.
Posted Sat, Jul 24, 8:38 a.m. Inappropriate
My English grammar teacher would shoot me for having written that paragraph. Sorry.