Utah and the Economic Downturn
The time to prepare for a storm is before the storm. Same with economic cycles. Once a downturn hits, the thing most governments do is wish they’d done things differently leading up to the downturn.
As Rep. Dave Clark is fond of saying, calm seas don’t make good sailors. Those of us who were around in 2001-02 learned a few lessons. We determinedly plowed money into rainy day funds, citizens’ pockets (through tax cuts), and capital projects (instead of relying exclusively on bonding). And – as I’ve repeatedly said – when the downturn hit, we got in early to match budgets to the economy. Thank you, again, Gov. Huntsman, President Valentine, and Speaker Curtis for leading out. These steps allow us to maintain some of the important gains we’ve made in public education and higher education funding. While other states will have to take jolting actions, like laying off employees and cutting services (just what a downturn doesn’t need), we should be able to ride this one out with some trimming here and there. It won’t be easy, but we’ll get through it.
Of course, I’m quick to add that we don’t know how tough things will get. But, in any case, we should ride it out better than other states. While it is good sport to bash legislatures (and, heaven knows, I enjoy it myself), I’m proud of the work that my colleagues and I have done on the budget over the last few years. The battles were intense and hard fought, but they seem to have been worth it.
The goal is to be one of the last states to enter the downturn and one of the first to emerge. Utah is well-positioned to do that.
As Rep. Dave Clark is fond of saying, calm seas don’t make good sailors. Those of us who were around in 2001-02 learned a few lessons. We determinedly plowed money into rainy day funds, citizens’ pockets (through tax cuts), and capital projects (instead of relying exclusively on bonding). And – as I’ve repeatedly said – when the downturn hit, we got in early to match budgets to the economy. Thank you, again, Gov. Huntsman, President Valentine, and Speaker Curtis for leading out. These steps allow us to maintain some of the important gains we’ve made in public education and higher education funding. While other states will have to take jolting actions, like laying off employees and cutting services (just what a downturn doesn’t need), we should be able to ride this one out with some trimming here and there. It won’t be easy, but we’ll get through it.
Of course, I’m quick to add that we don’t know how tough things will get. But, in any case, we should ride it out better than other states. While it is good sport to bash legislatures (and, heaven knows, I enjoy it myself), I’m proud of the work that my colleagues and I have done on the budget over the last few years. The battles were intense and hard fought, but they seem to have been worth it.
The goal is to be one of the last states to enter the downturn and one of the first to emerge. Utah is well-positioned to do that.
posted by steve u. at 10/14/2008
Subscribe
9 Comments:
Are you going to respond to the Liar's Club accusation?
Craig,
I wasn’t going to, but okay.
A Trib op-ed called me a liar regarding the financing of Lake Powell, because I said that the State was going to contribute to the project.
SB 27 (2006) – Lake Powell Financing Act – states:
(1) The board shall allocate project costs based on the economic costs and benefits of
the developed water and electricity among the following water uses:
(a) municipal and industrial;
(b) electricity;
(c) public recreation; and
(d) fish and wildlife.
(2) The state shall pay the nonreimbursable project costs allocated to recreation and
fish and wildlife.
Not to get overly technical, but where a statute says, “The state shall pay,” that is interpreted to mean that the state shall pay.
Just because someone throws out an accusation doesn’t necessarily mean that it has substance. The Trib turns over its space, so that one of my opponent’s supporters can make up facts to call me a liar. In October of an election year. Imagine that.
Thank you, again, Gov. Huntsman, President Valentine, and Speaker Curtis for leading out.
Boy you guys really know how to lead with the Mark Walker now pleading a deal. Please don't throw me in jail and I'll tell you who all is involved in the bribe. Well lets see everyone squill like a pig. sue eeeee.
There goes the election and the pigs. October suprise!!! Right! I say October falling down and can't get up.
Us democrats are angry because the Republicans eat more babies behind the closed doors in the legislature. We want are fair share of fetuses, we will win more seats and eat more babies so hold on to your hat!
See the back room deals-
You really should write your comments in word and think about them for a little bit before you post. And then, if they still seem like a good idea a few hours later just copy and paste.
Just a tip that may keep you from constantly sounding like a complete idiot.
Josh,
I got an education so don't knock me. It looks like you understood just fine.
Hey Steve, nice try on trying to paper over what you said about who would be paying for the Powell Pipeline.
You didn't say the state would CONTRIBUTE. You said
"The state will pay for a BIG CHUNK of this pipeline."
You should explain to your readers how the relative pittance the state will pay for impacts the pipeline might cause to "fish and wildlife" and "recreation" compares to the total projected cost to plan and build the pipeline.
Every objective analysis of the funding mechanisms recognizes the state contribution will be so small relative to the total 2 billion dollar cost that it doesn't even merit mentioning. If you believe it is a "BIG CHUNK" you ought to back that up with a percentage of the total cost.
As for what goes on in October of an election year, perhaps you could explain why you chose that time to mislead the public on how the Powell Pipeline would be finianced.
Bruce
Bruce,
I have submitted an op-ed to the Trib in response to your piece. Though it's not as splashy as an ad hominem attack, I analyze the statute in question, to show that the State plays a major role in funding the Lake Powell pipeline. If the Trib doesn't publish it by Tuesday, I will do so here.
In the meanwhile, please describe where you disagree with the following Q&A, since, as you say, we should be looking for honesty on the pipeline.
Who pays to construct the pipeline? (The State).
When is the State reimbursed? (When the District TAKES the water, not when the project is completed).
When will the District take the water? (In blocks, sometime between project completion and 50 years after).
During that time, who services the construction costs? (The State).
Hmm.
How much are those carrying costs? (a big chunk of change).
If the water district pays cash for each block of water it takes during the 50 years, how much will it pay in interest? ($0)
Hmm, again.
While we see whether the Tribune wants to print the correct information on the pipeline, please list the authors of "every objective analysis" that concludes the State's contribution will be small. If we're worrying about admission to the Liar's Club, let's take applications, because I agree with your premise that claims about pipeline financing are boosting membership numbers.
Steve,
Looking forward to your complete analysis of the funding of the pipeline in the Tribune.
Bruce
<< Home