Just How Big Is The Shortfall?
A divide emerged yesterday over just how large the potential state budget shortfall is.
Aides to Gov. Martin O'Malley continued to refer to next year's budget gap as $1.7 billion during hearings taking place on the special session's second day.
But the legislature's chief fiscal analyst, Warren G. Deschenaux, told lawmakers that the Department of Legislative Services now projects a $1.5.billion shortfall.
Deschenaux said that "$1.5 billion is the new $1.7 billion," referring to revised spending and revenue projections for fiscal 2009.
O'Malley spokesman Steve Kearney said later that the governor's office will continue to use $1.7 billion. "It's a matter of their estimates being a little different than our estimates," Kearney said.
Actually, the two branches are closer than they seem, because of rounding. O'Malley puts the figure at $1.667billion. The legislature has it at $1.523.billion, a difference of $144 million.
By Anne Bartlett |
October 31, 2007; 9:36 AM ET
| Category:
John Wagner
Previous: Special Session Round-Up for Tuesday |
Next: Franchot Chides O'Malley On Slots
Posted by: jj | October 31, 2007 10:18 AM
The only numbers O'malley considers are poll numbers and the phone number to Hillary Clinton's appointments manager--he's all about up-and-out. Let's hope he doesn't do to Maryland what he did to Baltimore before leaving.
Posted by: John | October 31, 2007 11:51 AM
The budget until July l, 2008 is balanced. Thge one with the "deficit is the one after that which increases 8.5% over the present balanced one. Mandates imposed by prior legislatures should be reexamined. Aid to local subdivisions has increased from 32% of the state budget 6 years ago to 40% now. We don't need a 20% increase in the regressive state sales tax to fill any real deficit. 70% of voters opposed this sales tax hike according to the
Washington Post poll. Why isn't Progressive Maryland speaking out against this regressive tax hike?
Posted by: Robin Ficker of Robin Realty | October 31, 2007 1:00 PM
Why are so many Marylanders' upset with Gov O'Malley? He was a do nothing tax and spend Mayor in Baltimore. He ran as a liberal candidate for Governor and now that he is elected he is doing exactly what liberal tax and spend liberal does, he taxes and spends. So for all you fine folks that voted for this guy, good for you. You will have less money in your pockets which is ok for you people I guess since the government will take care of your families instead of you taking care of your families. They know better anyway right?
Posted by: Michael Sprinkle | November 1, 2007 9:42 AM
The term "structural deficit" is a made up accounting term by those who want to take our money and spend more of our money. Show me one document that states Maryland has a structural deficit. Maryland has a spending problem not a revenue problems. In the last 15 years the Maryland budget has grown from $3.3 billion to nearly $31 billion in 2007. When is enough, enough? Those who vote for this package will pay the price come the next state election in 2010.
Posted by: JC from AA | November 1, 2007 9:38 PM
Previous poster, "John" hits the proverbial nail right on the head. Boy wonder leprechaun is just biding his time in Annapolis, waiting for "the call" from the Hildabeast should she (shudder) gain the Presidency (in which case we are all SOL!). Should that scenario not play out, betcha a C note that MoM will be after "Babs" Senate seat. You libs are such suckers.
Posted by: antne | November 6, 2007 6:21 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
And, considering that this "shortfall" is STILL an estimate of how revenues line up to what they WANT to spend, not what they have to spend, we still don't have an accurate number. Where is the reporting on what the deficit would be if spending were unchanged from 2007 to 2008? That's what I want to hear about.