GOP budget balancing act doesn't warrant applause

Not one Democrat voted for a bill, passed last week by the Ohio General Assembly, that is designed to close a projected $1.7 billion shortfall in the state operating budget. That fact alone raises a question as to whether the Republican majority took the politically safe route in dealing with Ohio's fiscal crisis.
But there's another aspect to this legislative initiative that cannot be ignored. It was articulated by Sen. Eric Fingerhut, D-Cleveland, when he asked: "What is the plan for the future of the state of Ohio? We've done all these things, but we still haven't solved the problem."
What is the problem? Not too long ago, Republican Gov. Bob Taft described it when he said, "There needs to be substantial, new, ongoing revenues to balance [next year's budget] and help with future years."
The bill adopted by the House and Senate -- Taft is expected to sign it into law this week -- does not provide for "new, ongoing revenues," and that spells trouble for the state.
Indeed, the cut-and-paste approach to budgeting makes it clear that the Republicans weren't willing to take any action that would jeopardize their control over every non-judicial statewide office in the November general election. Thus, there was no discussion about the options available to increase revenue, and there was no mention of the school funding issue.
School funding
There is a strong possibility that the Ohio Supreme Court will order the state to increase the per student spending for public primary and secondary schools, which could force the legislature to come up with $1.2 billion. Where would the state find the money? As a result of the latest budget-balancing act, the $600 million rainy day fund is being depleted, $345 million will be borrowed from a school construction trust fund that was set up with Ohio's share of the national tobacco settlement, and the state tax on cigarettes is being increased by 31 cents, which many Republican legislators say is as high as they're willing to go.
In other words, there isn't a Peter to rob in order to pay Paul.
While Democrats insist that their refusal to vote for the budget-balancing bill stems from the fact that they weren't invited to participate in the development of the plan, they, too, have shied away from talking about a tax increase to fund education.
Sooner, rather than later, someone in state government is going to realize that cutting agency budgets to the bone, reducing the amount of state aid for higher education, and bringing important economic development initiatives to a screeching halt are not the answer to Ohio's economic problems.
What is needed is an honest appraisal of the state's short-term and long-term fiscal condition, but as last week showed, political expediency wins over truth in government every time.