Representative Bruce Hanna:

HANNA: BUDGET SHORTFALL THE RESULT OF OVERSPENDING,
FAILURE TO ADDRESS OREGON’S UNEMPLOYMENT

By State Representative Bruce Hanna

SALEM””House Republican Leader Bruce Hanna (R-Roseburg) had the following to say regarding the June 2010 state economic and revenue forecast: “Oregon’s significant budget deficit is a product of the Democrats’ massive overspending and the $1.6 billion in new taxes and fees they’ve passed since 2009. “Despite record unemployment, the current Legislature increased new government spending by over $8 billion while doing nothing to address the state’s escalating pension and benefits costs. We have a staggering shortfall today because the Legislature has consistently ignored reality outside the State Capitol.

“Rather than working with the private sector to encourage job growth, Oregon’s businesses have been stifled by job-killing taxes and mandates. It’s no surprise that April’s tax collections were “˜dismal,’ because the Democratic supermajority has done nothing to improve our private sector economy.

“It’s worth noting that economists are still forecasting robust revenue growth over the next three biennia. The presumed deficit in the “˜current service level’ model only tells us that the Legislature is spending more than Oregonians can afford. In 2011, the Legislature should stop using this model as a baseline for budgeting, and use the revenue we have to prioritize spending and protect essential programs and services.”

###

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 07:00 | Posted in Measure 37 | 9 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Insider

    Yo, Hanna, YOU VOTED FOR THE 2009 SPENDING TOO! You may not have voted for the taxes, but those taxes have absolutely nothing to do with the budget deficit.

    And yo, Hanna, YOU VOTED AGAINST THE JOB-CREATING BILLS passed by the Democrats in 2009 and 2010: Jobs and Transportation Act, Health Care Jobs bill, Housing Construction bill, expanded small business loans, etc.

    Don’t you think anyone will actually look at your voting record when you make these ridiculous claims?

    Nice try, but no cigar.

    • Rob DeHarpport

      YO, Mr. Insider & Retired Professor,
      Have either one of you ever witnessed government create a job? I mean one that actually produces a tangible product or result. My, my, my just how successful was the State of Oregon in the famed “Juniper Thinning” business. That was really a great use of actual borrowed money, and just one example of a miss-guided group of fools and thier decision making. The so called “Job-Creating Bills” that you refer to are similar “make-work” efforts in futility. They should’ve been titled “Tax Payer- Money Wasting Debacle Bills.”
      In the private sector, successfull businesses actually are fluid and able to rapidly adjust to change, i.e. react and reduce workforce when needed. In Government (today) the reaction time is molasses like, due to resistance to reality from the labor unions. That is why Oregon is always reacting to a “crisis.” The real crisis is nothing but extremely high overhead costs and the failure to react in a timely manner, to make it simple for you that means we spend more than we bring in. IN REAL LIFE THAT MEANS…. YOUR OUT OF BUSINESS!
      As your hero Barry Obama’s preacher once famously said… “The chickens have come home to roost.”
      Someday you’ll maybe join the adults in the room and appreciate lawmakers that base thier decisions on factual information and the “real world.” We need more leaders like Bruce Hanna, folks with some common sense. Hanna and Republicans did propose a much more realistic budget proposal, it fell on deaf ears in Salem. November is coming!

      • a retired professor

        I don’t know that you’ve addressed anything I’ve said, certainly not on this article here. But when you say

        “we spend more than we bring in”

        it’s simply not true. The state is required by the state constitution to balance its budget, and it does so.

        One can argue whether it does this in the right way, but it does do it.

        By the way, I didn’t vote for Obama, nor did I vote for the recent Oregon income tax increases. But Oregon voters did. Bruce Hanna’s argument is with the voters, even if he thinks it’s “Salem and the Legislature”. I wish him luck on that.

        I’ve actually made some modest suggestions here about how Oregon could dig itself out of its financial hole, legally.

        Dudley has some of the same ideas I have posted here. Plus, like Kevin Mannix and Allen Alley, he’s been a supporter of Oregon public higher education. He could get my vote!

        But as for November, the Republicans could do well in Oregon, except the usual crazies may well mess it up for them. Just like Rand Paul is doing on the national level.

        • Rob DeHarpport

          Yes, you are right. We do by law have to balance the budget. The fact is that our illustrious majority in Salem base the “balanced budgets” on forcasts that are often generously rosy at best. The current mess is due to actually believing that the economy/revenue would improve at a 3% rate. That has not happened, the majority fails to address the real issues; PERS and government growth. We can’t continue funding PERS shortfalls, nor can we continue hiring on the state level.
          PERS will always be a huge issue, the 8% discount rate (guarantee) is too high, the annual return over the last 100 yrs. is 5.3% according to Warren Buffett and historical data.
          I don’t know anyone who is against public education or higher education, though many have serious concerns as to how we fund both. As well as the constraints due to PERS. It’s also good to know who you voted for and your stance on even more taxes (6 & 67). The bottom line is our leaders in Salem & DC must rein in spending. More Government is not the answer. My apologies for lumping you into the “reckless” category.

          • a retired professor

            I don’t believe the state is “bankrupt”, not that “bankruptcy” has any clear meaning in law for one of the state of the United States.

            To repeat, the state is not bankrupt even in a loose sense. It has a long-range mismatch between revenues, expenditures, and services it provides. Probably on the order of 10% of the general fund budget, maybe a bit more. It could — it will, because the state constitution mandates a balanced budget! — it will solve the problem with some combination, take your pick, of service reductions, cuts in state worker pay or benefits, or increases in taxes.

            10% is a problem, a big problem, maybe a “crisis”, but not a catastrophe, not bankruptcy. Calling it apocalyptic names will not help put people in office who might deal with the problem, in a way you would probably like better than the alternative.

            I’ll tell you, if Republicans ever start talking about declaring “state bankruptcy” this year, they will be slaughtered. But so far, Dudley is going nowhere near there.

  • a retired professor

    Calm down, Bruce, the state budget will be balanced, as it always is. You’ll get your spending cuts now. You should be happy!

  • Bob Clark

    Boy, the Dem wits sure produced very few permanent new tax paying private jobs with their job “creation” bills. Most of the miniscule job gains in Oregon are temporary government workers, like census workers. I guess if you like Great Depression, ala the 1930s, like economic maliase, the Dem wits are right for you.

  • Ron Marquez

    …..”‘current service level’ model only tells us that the Legislature is spending more than Oregonians can afford. In 2011, the Legislature should stop using this model as a baseline for budgeting, and use the revenue we have to prioritize spending and protect essential programs and services.” …..

    Why not zero base budgeting ? Many private sector companies use this model to enable management to see specifically where money is being spent. Might even help government reduce (gasp !) spending.

  • averyoldperson

    After checking Bruce Hanna’s 2009 voting record, he appears to be voting against spending, which is good. There are two types of political parties these days…the liberal-progressives (who is destroying the democrat party) that likes big government and high taxes. Where as the Republican party wants smaller government and fewer taxes. To me it’s a no brainier which party to join…so why is Oregonians complaining about high taxes and over powering government because that’s what’s voted in year after year, after year, after year….etc. Are you all going down with the ship, or will the voters stand up and make a difference this year?

    When a government or private business or an individual spends more than they can afford there is only one place to go….bankrupt!! People need to quit fighting and take a good look at the situation this country is in…things won’t get better unless we all do something to stop this madness…

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)