Now Is The Time To Have The Public Discussion On 2011 & 2012 Nevada Budget
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
Nevada Farm Bureau’s policy currently takes a very simple approach in advocacy for spending state and local taxpayer dollars, stating -- “We strongly recommend that Nevada state and county governments be fiscally responsible.”
As is the case with other interest, the organization takes a much more extensive policy viewpoint on taxes opposing several specific taxes (business profits as well as a tax on gross income/receipts). In a more comprehensive policy statement, the organization policy makers (farmer/rancher members who participate in the annual policy development process) have said, “We oppose any new taxes, fees or any other schemes that generate additional revenue for government without Farm Bureau involvement and approval.”
Being against taxes is a fairly common human-nature kind of thing, especially those taxes that you will have to pay. As we often see from those who advocate tax increases – they wouldn’t be the ones doing the paying.
Spending Should Actually Be The Focus:
Having watched the way the 2009 Nevada Legislative process unfolded, the real key to more responsible state government isn’t as much taxes as it needs to be spending. Taxes are the things that get rammed through the process after the spending decisions are made behind closed doors with a select group of involved “key” legislators.
Fixing what needs fixing in Nevada’s government needs to include state spending high on the priority list. Now is the time to get that discussion going and interacting with candidates for office on their focus of spending issues must translate into the basis for a reform effort that moves forward when voters make their selections in the June 2010 primaries and the November general election.
Budget Process Doesn’t Require Automatic Increases:
State lawmakers, like those in Washington, D.C. don’t seem to have too much trouble being generous when it comes to spending other people’s money. Those who receive taxpayer dollars are also extremely good at convincing those involved in the decision process to be more generous than they have been in the past.
For some reason there is a rock-solid belief that no matter how much you’ve spent in the past (as a state government) you need to spend more in the coming future. “Things cost more” is one of the reasons given for the pre-determined outcome of expanding government budgets. “We have more people that need our help” is another of the reasons for entering bigger numbers on the line items which total up to increased state spending.
In spite of the hoopla over all the “cutting” the 2009 Nevada Legislature did on budgets, the end result was more being authorized to be spent than the prior budget period. Perhaps a continuing worsening economy might require further special legislative intervention to reduce their approved spending, but regardless of what an incumbent lawmaker might try to suggest otherwise, the 2009 Nevada Legislature approved a bigger budget than what was in place for the two-year period before.
It also needs to be noted that Governor Gibbon’s budget proposal required a tax increase to bring it into balance and as time moved along, the budget didn’t balance as various tax revenue projections fell.
Only one budget proposal that we saw made the grade of balancing and not requiring a tax increase. It was prepared and offered for public consideration by Geoffrey Lawrence of the Nevada Policy Research Institute. Identified as the “Freedom Budget” the significance of what it offers for our continued consideration now, are the principles that were used to construct the proposal.
As a starting point, these concepts need to be the basis for interactions and further fine-tuning as we press for commitments from those who would like our vote in order that they might be elected to be our respective representatives.
We share those budget-building principles that Lawrence put forth and encourage your input/feedback on ways to make these ideas even better…
Nevada Farm Bureau’s policy currently takes a very simple approach in advocacy for spending state and local taxpayer dollars, stating -- “We strongly recommend that Nevada state and county governments be fiscally responsible.”
As is the case with other interest, the organization takes a much more extensive policy viewpoint on taxes opposing several specific taxes (business profits as well as a tax on gross income/receipts). In a more comprehensive policy statement, the organization policy makers (farmer/rancher members who participate in the annual policy development process) have said, “We oppose any new taxes, fees or any other schemes that generate additional revenue for government without Farm Bureau involvement and approval.”
Being against taxes is a fairly common human-nature kind of thing, especially those taxes that you will have to pay. As we often see from those who advocate tax increases – they wouldn’t be the ones doing the paying.
Spending Should Actually Be The Focus:
Having watched the way the 2009 Nevada Legislative process unfolded, the real key to more responsible state government isn’t as much taxes as it needs to be spending. Taxes are the things that get rammed through the process after the spending decisions are made behind closed doors with a select group of involved “key” legislators.
Fixing what needs fixing in Nevada’s government needs to include state spending high on the priority list. Now is the time to get that discussion going and interacting with candidates for office on their focus of spending issues must translate into the basis for a reform effort that moves forward when voters make their selections in the June 2010 primaries and the November general election.
Budget Process Doesn’t Require Automatic Increases:
State lawmakers, like those in Washington, D.C. don’t seem to have too much trouble being generous when it comes to spending other people’s money. Those who receive taxpayer dollars are also extremely good at convincing those involved in the decision process to be more generous than they have been in the past.
For some reason there is a rock-solid belief that no matter how much you’ve spent in the past (as a state government) you need to spend more in the coming future. “Things cost more” is one of the reasons given for the pre-determined outcome of expanding government budgets. “We have more people that need our help” is another of the reasons for entering bigger numbers on the line items which total up to increased state spending.
In spite of the hoopla over all the “cutting” the 2009 Nevada Legislature did on budgets, the end result was more being authorized to be spent than the prior budget period. Perhaps a continuing worsening economy might require further special legislative intervention to reduce their approved spending, but regardless of what an incumbent lawmaker might try to suggest otherwise, the 2009 Nevada Legislature approved a bigger budget than what was in place for the two-year period before.
It also needs to be noted that Governor Gibbon’s budget proposal required a tax increase to bring it into balance and as time moved along, the budget didn’t balance as various tax revenue projections fell.
Only one budget proposal that we saw made the grade of balancing and not requiring a tax increase. It was prepared and offered for public consideration by Geoffrey Lawrence of the Nevada Policy Research Institute. Identified as the “Freedom Budget” the significance of what it offers for our continued consideration now, are the principles that were used to construct the proposal.
As a starting point, these concepts need to be the basis for interactions and further fine-tuning as we press for commitments from those who would like our vote in order that they might be elected to be our respective representatives.
We share those budget-building principles that Lawrence put forth and encourage your input/feedback on ways to make these ideas even better…
Guiding Principles
This alternative budget was influenced by a set of guiding principles that provide insight and clarity into how Nevada's state government should be structured. These principles are:
- 1. Setting Priorities: When resources are limited, it is necessary to set clear priorities and determine which programs are most important to the long-term health of Nevadans and which are relatively expendable. In addition, public funds should be budgeted for the purchase of demonstrable results that are of meaningful benefit to the state. As such, any programs that have not demonstrated themselves to be effective at achieving their purported goals should be discarded in favor of higher-priority uses of public money.
- 2. Consistency: State fiscal policy should take a consistent approach that treats all individuals fairly and equitably. Tax breaks and government expenditures that benefit only specific groups at the expense of all others should be eliminated and discouraged in the future.
- 3. Agency Thrift: Often the individuals with the greatest knowledge on how to reduce the cost of government services are the government employees who provide those services. The institutional knowledge of these employees can inform them of specific incidences of inefficiency within their agencies that can be corrected by altering the methods of operation. Hence, when agency officials claim the ability to accomplish a task at lower cost than the governor requests on their behalf, this budget recommends that the agency's request be granted. While the governor's requests may often reflect admirable intentions of expanding funding to worthwhile endeavors, this budget cycle is regrettably characterized by significant fiscal challenges and any thrift that can be provided by government agencies should be pursued aggressively.
- 4. Last In, First Out: The Freedom Budget recognizes that government programs have recently expanded rapidly in the Silver State. Following the largest tax increases in Nevada's history in 2003, tax revenues rose to record levels. Policymakers eagerly responded to flush coffers by creating a bevy of new government programs or program expansions in the 2005 and 2007 legislative sessions. Yet, the Silver State experienced vibrant health and economic growth prior to the existence of these new programs. As a result, the Freedom Budget curtails these new or expanded programs first.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 7/27/2009 6:03 AM 
Categories: 2010 Elections
Tags: Nevada Taxes Government Spending
Categories: 2010 Elections
Tags: Nevada Taxes Government Spending
Comments