Governor makes budget proposal
By Bill Vander Weele
Sidney Herald

Published on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 8:07 PM MST

At least on the surface, the proposed Montana budget announced by Gov. Brian Schweitzer appears to be a workable start, Rep. Walt McNutt, R-Sidney, told the Herald on Monday.

“We need to look at it and do some digesting,” McNutt said of the proposal.

He likes the idea that the state will keep $250 million of its surplus as a safeguard.

Schweitzer

“That’s a good idea because the economy probably hasn’t fully hit us yet,” McNutt said.

The representative said the surplus projection was about $800 million a few months ago and is now about $370 million because of the downswing of the economy. A projection last week by the Legislative Fiscal Division is a surplus of $287 million.

Schweitzer’s two-year budget proposal includes cuts in overall state spending by 2.5 percent, no new taxes or fees and no tax rebates.

“Montana’s economy is holding up pretty well, but nationally we know that these are difficult times,” Schweitzer said in a news release. “My budget is balanced. We have $250 million in the bank and we want to keep it there just in case the worst happens. But we still make critically needed investments, especially for our kids.”

McNutt has concerns about the general fund spending increasing by $337 million over the two-year period. He also is disappointed there’s no proposal to reduce the equipment tax.

“I really would like to see that eliminated,” McNutt said of the tax.

The budget proposal includes $20 million annually to implement the voter-approved child health insurance program.

“I guess we’re bound to fund that,” McNutt said. He’s been told the program will create 62 new state jobs.

The proposal also includes an increase of $88 million in K-12 education and a $35 million increase for the university system.

Education might be a hot topic again because of the funding issue heading back into the court system. “It’s going to get a lot of attention for sure,” McNutt said. “There’s still a lot of talk of redoing the funding formula.”

Energy remains a priority for Schweitzer. His budget proposes investing $25 million one-time money in retrofitting state and university buildings to reduce state government energy consumption by 20 percent by 2010, providing long-term savings for taxpayers.

“America’s dependence on foreign energy supplies is a threat to our economic security. Developing the state’s energy resources continues with modest increases in the budget for engineering and resource development,” Schweitzer said. “These two investments go hand-in-hand: enhance Montana’s energy development; conserve it where we can.”

The governor acknowledges that not everyone will like his budget and not everyone will get much more this time. “I know inflation is eating away at all of us. But I’ve said since last January that this session would feel like a belt-tightening one. But we’ll get through this as Montanans always have.”

McNutt says there will be a lot of discussion in the next couple weeks about the budget proposal and where improvements should be made.

The House will have a 50-50 split of Republicans and Democrats for the session that begins in January.

“It can work OK, if we get the right people in the right places,” McNutt said of the 50-50 split. “Both parties have said we want to work together.”

editor@sidneyherald.com

Print this story Post A Comment

Comments

The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of the Sidney Herald.

john larsen wrote on Nov 21, 2008 11:17 PM:

" There is no doubt that over the past forty years, Eastern Montanans have paid, due in large measure to energy development, far more in state taxes than we have received in state services. The danger in the forthcoming legislative session is that if the state budget contest is between Democrats and Republicans, Eastern Montana will be the only loser. Eastern Montana's legislators MUST put aside their party loyalty in favor of being Eastern Montanans. There needs to be three "on the ground" caucus's in the 2009 Legislative Session: a Democratic caucus, a Republican caucus and an Eastern Montana caucus. It has been done in the past very effectively and it must be done again. Otherwise state services will be reduced, not in Western Montana or in Billings, but in Eastern Montana while the taxes paid by Eastern Montanans will not decrease. Without an Eastern Montana caucus it will mean Eastern Montanans will suffer things like fewer highway patrol officers responding to accidents, fewer snow plows keeping highways open, fewer nursing home beds for our elderly, fewer dollars for ag research and longer bus rides for our kids while Billings and Western Montana keep their services the same while reducing ours. Make no mistake, Republicans in Billings and Western Montana will rob Eastern Montana in a heartbeat (as well as Democrats)if they can. Republicans and Democrats in Eastern Montana NO LONGER have the luxury of playing the political party games of the recent past. If the partisan games do continue, only Eastern Montana will play the price. We deserve better and demand better from our legislative delegation. John Larsen, Miles City, Montana "

WRITE A COMMENT

Comments Policy:

All comments transmitted through, or linked from the site, are the sole responsibility of the person from whom such content originated. www.sidneyherald.com encourages our readers to engage in civil discussions about issues. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. Comments that are submitted are not posted to the site immediately, but are reviewed by Herald staff. The Herald cannot edit or change your submissions.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.

There are some exceptions to the above rules when public figures are involved. We define public figures as individuals who work in the public’s eye and/or are candidates for public office and/or their position is paid with tax dollars.

Thank you for your comments!