From: enews@nyaprs.org [mailto:enews@nyaprs.org]
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 1:45 PM
To: rgumson@mail.nysed.gov
Subject: Post-Standard: State Budget Could Be Latest One Ever

 

 

State budget might be the latest one ever, experts say

State's highest court says Legislature can't change policies included in governor's budget plan

By Erik Kriss  

 Syracuse Post Standard    

January 31, 2005

 

State budget negotiations are entering uncharted waters this year, with predictions that the 2005-06 budget could be the latest ever.

 

The dire forecast comes as the public outcry for a timely budget - following 20 straight late ones - is louder than ever. It stems from a ruling by the state's highest court last month that state lawmakers can't amend policies or policy changes written into the governor's budget proposal. Lawmakers can only reduce or eliminate the money the governor wants to spend.

 

Changing policy directives is something legislators have done historically - and something Democrats say is seriously needed in the budget Gov. George Pataki proposed this month.

 

No one's sure what will happen next And those who depend on state budget money are nervous.

 

Take New York's educators. Pataki rewrote the state school aid formula as part of his $105.5 billion budget proposal. Democrats already are saying the formula would shortchange many schools.

 

But under the Court of Appeals' ruling, the main thing lawmakers can do about it is the one thing they don't want to do: delete or reduce appropriations.

 

School districts, heavily dependent on state aid and required to propose their own budgets not long after the state's is due, are unusually anxious.

 

"We've had20 years of late budgets and now there's this new, huge factor that's going to complicate the relationships and negotiations," said David Ernst, spokesman for the New York State School Boards Association. "Our view is that it's only natural, when the environment has changed as substantially as it has, that people are going to go slow and carefully because it's all uncharted territory."

 

Pataki's budget also proposes raising taxes on hospitals and nursing homes. It proposes withholding half the tuition assistance money the state offers public college students until they graduate. It proposes raising tuition at the state university system by $500 annually and using some of the money for general state expenses.

 

Lawmakers say that because of the court ruling, there's little they can do about any of that, short of rejecting the entire budget. And if they do that, they can't substitute their own. They could add separate areas of spending, but Pataki could veto them.

 

Their only other option, as the Court of Appeals itself decided late last year, is to delay and try to force Pataki to the negotiating table.

 

"It puts the Legislature in the untenable position of acting in an obstructionist way," said Frank Mauro, a former top Democratic Assembly budget negotiator who now heads the labor-backed Fiscal Policy Institute. "The dilemma for the Legislature is that is exactly what the public doesn't want them to do. The governor is putting them in a bind."

 

Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, D-Westchester, a leading Pataki critic, put it more bluntly.

 

"We are at a fundamental crisis of democracy," he said. "This is not a small, inside-baseball, maneuvering-in-Albany thing. This is absurd, irrational, destructive."

 

Democrats aren't the only ones expressing concern. Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, R-Brunswick, has suggested the ruling could make the 2005-06 budget the latest ever - if it happens at all. Lawmakers presumably could have to accept a string of emergency budget extensions proposed by Pataki as he and the Legislature wrangle.

 

Top Pataki aides say the Legislature has more budget-making power than it admits.

 

For instance, if lawmakers disagree with Pataki's school aid formula, they can add appropriations for specific districts, according to Richard Platkin, counsel to the governor.

 

And acting state budget director John Cape suggested lawmakers could reduce the overall school appropriation, then add separate school spending with corresponding language to reflect their own priorities.

 

The Court of Appeals, though, cautioned that substitutions - as opposed to additions for distinct purposes - are unconstitutional. And Pataki can line-item veto any added spending.

 

E.J. McMahon, a conservative fiscal analyst for the Manhattan Institute who used to work for Pataki and Assembly Republicans, said lawmakers have helped create the problem.

 

"They do not have an orderly, transparent process for dealing with the budget," said McMahon, noting the Senate and Assembly do not regularly reveal their own budget proposals - including how they would pay for the extra spending they invariably desire.

 

"They have to get their house in order," McMahon said. "They kvetch and complain, but they never put their cards on the table. I don't think they're on the high ground here."

 

McMahon said one tack lawmakers could take is to force Pataki to the table by deleting all appropriations for the governor's staff and favored programs.

 

"That's their nuclear weapon," he said.

 

But as Brodsky put it, "that's no way to run a system - 'He found a gimmick and we found a counter-gimmick.' "

 

McMahon and Ernst say the governor's sweeping powers aren't all bad.

 

Ernst noted Pataki has proposed something school boards have long sought: repeal of the Wicks Law, which school administrators say inflates the cost of school construction projects by requiring separate bids on building contracts. He said Pataki is now in a better position to insist on Wicks Law repeal.

 

Assembly Minority Leader Charles Nesbitt, R-Albion, Pataki's staunchest legislative ally, said the reason the constitution gave the governor sweeping budget powers during the 1920s is still valid: "to help the executive control the spending, at that time, of the Legislature. And I don't think that's changed very much since."

 

McMahon, Mauro and Brodsky agree it's time to change the state's budget process by amending the constitution. Pataki and legislative leaders have been discussing legislation to change the process, but they haven't been able to agree.

 

Lawmakers did give first passage last year to a constitutional amendment that would essentially carry over the prior year's budget automatically if a new one is not in place in time.

 

Second passage of that amendment this year would put the matter before voters in November. And on this issue, Pataki has no power other than the bully pulpit. 



Source:  Syracuse Post-Standard