As Gov. Chris Gregoire prepares to enter the gravest budget battle of her career, it is instructive to look back with admiration on the actions of former President Bush during a similar crisis.
Oh… not George W. Bush… he was a total moron and dickwad whose irresponsible domestic and foreign policies largely left us in our current economic shithole, and who history will rightly remember as one of our worst presidents ever. No, I’m talking about his father, George H.W. Bush, a rather middling president, but one who was at least well-trained and prepared for the position, and who when push came to shove ultimately sacrificed a huge chunk of political capital (and perhaps his reelection) by abandoning his famous campaign pledge and agreeing to substantial tax increases in the 1990 budget.
Throughout 1988, then Vice-President Bush consistently campaigned on a no-new-tax pledge, and it is safe to say that the most memorable and oft-quoted moment of his Republican nomination speech came in the form of the Peggy Noonan scribed line, “Read my lips: no new taxes!” It was a profoundly irresponsible promise, but it no doubt helped him win the election against an opponent Republicans smeared as “the Governor from Taxachusetts.”
The pledge had been made under the rosy assumption that the fast growth of the late 198o’s would continue indefinitely, but when the economy stumbled and tax revenues fell far short of projections, the nation was faced with a yawning budget deficit… the largest in peacetime history. So in 1990 President Bush did what had to be done; he went back on his word and agreed to a budget that amongst other things, levied a 10% surtax on the income of the wealthiest Americans. The New York Post mocked President Bush for making a mockery of his convention pledge, printing the headline, “Read my Lips: I Lied.”
But it was the pledge that had proven foolish and irresponsible, not the breaking of it, and Bush 41 has always deserved credit for putting governance ahead of politics, at least in that particular situation. The 1990 budget agreement was the first step toward getting our ballooning federal deficits under control, laying the groundwork for a Clinton budget that ultimately led to surpluses by the end of the decade. Given the economic circumstances, raising taxes was the right thing to do, however unpopular and at whatever the political cost.
Gov. Gregoire faces a similar situation, a recent no-new-tax pledge coming back to haunt her as she struggles with a revenue shortfall more than twice as large as even the most pessimistic projections only a few months back. And like Bush 41 before, the press is already preparing to mock her should she ultimately go back on her word.
But unlike Bush, Gregoire’s no-new-tax pledge was never the centerpiece of her campaign, and she never used it to draw a stark ideological distinction with her opponent. Besides, voters simply don’t elect Democrats to hold the line on taxes—it goes against type—so if this really was a top issue for the majority of voters last November, the vocally anti-tax Dino Rossi wouldn’t have lost by 6.5 percentage points.
Gov. Gregoire’s unfortunate acquiescence in ruling out tax increases was ill-advised and ultimately unnecessary, but it was not nearly as forceful or irresponsible as H.W’s signature soundbite. So if a Republican president, facing a revolt from within the ranks of his own party, could swallow his famous words for the good of the nation, then Gregoire, with a Democratic legislature at her back, could certainly do similar for the good of our state.
Facing a record $9 billion projected shortfall and demand for public services at an all time high, the only responsible course is to use all the budgetary tools at our disposal: cuts, deficit spending and tax increases. As President George H.W. Bush proved in 1990, going back on your word can sometimes constitute an extraordinary act of political courage. Here’s hoping Gov. Gregoire proves just as courageous.
At last night’s Sounders FC game, Governor Gregoire received a decidedly mixed greeting from the assemblage. I don’t have a clue as to where those who booed her were coming from. Were they upset that she’s short-circuiting Democratic values? Blaming her for the revenue shortfall? Beats me…
Hmm…
Should we consider raising the toll on the Narrows Bridge could be considered a new tax?
H.W could have ended some entitlement programs or restructured some to save money back then. Why not restrain spending instead of just a tax increase?
I expect a rip back on that, but it is a legitimate question. Look what happened when Clinton worked with R’s to overhaul the welfare system….that lead to saving money and putting those from welfare into someone that can do well and pay taxes. Thus increasing revenue.
Nice huh.
Well, our Gov does not like the idea of raising taxes or the idea of pumping up the gap in equity caused by our regressive system in tough times.
Did she say no new taxes in the campaign. You bet and it was not just a campaign trick as it was for Bush Sr.
Our situation is much different though than the one Bush faced. He proposed those taxes and had a majority to work with and it was good that he did so. On this we agree. The Gov has proposed her budget. Then two forecasts have changed the outlook by a few billion and now the Senate proposes its budget followed by the house. The order of these events is not political or strategic in any way. The state budgets alternate between Gov, House then Senate and Gov, Senate then House avery two years.
In the end we will see new and additional taxes, only if they are supported by voters later this year.
And there will be those who will say liar liar. This expected cry does not figure into what the Governor will sign or help get votes for in a future election. Our states economy and job market will be harmed by new taxes regardless of what form they take and will also be harmed by the deep cuts State government ends up making. The good choices get us 25% of the way to where we need to get. Only bad choices remain and in the end there will be much to dislike. Of this we can be sure.
I’d support small, targeted tax increases. Half of a percent sales tax hike on hiking crap to help keep state parks open, for example.
Goldy,
First
“bro-ken (clap clap clapclapclap) re-cord”
How about cutting spending? And before the “frothers” get hysterical about what to cut, look here.
http://dor.wa.gov/Docs/Reports.....able02.xls
The state took in MORE tax revenue in 2008 than 2007. The fact that the Gov can’t control spending is not the fault of the people who are paying the bill…..
The economy is contracting….so should government.
My opinion which likely will draw fire, is that a surcharge in the state sales tax of between 1 cent and 2 cents, sent to voters as a temporary increase with established benchmarks for rolling it back, would be best.
No smoke. No mirrors. Everything right in your face and as transparent as can be. Then a clear choice. Pass this temp tax and these things continue at the following levels.
Up or down people. Whats it gong to be?
Change laws, sell off liquor stores to private companies. sell off the liquor control board (warehouse distribution) to public interest.
Cancel all union agreements.
We can do the same to our lottery which in the 70’s they lied to us about money going to schools.
It would be refreshing to see out state out of the Sin business.
Your Governor Fraudoire promised no new taxes and denied there was a deficit. Is she a liar? Incompetent? Or both?
Me? I think she’s a fucking liar-just like most “progressive” neo-commies.
Goldy
I agree with most of what you are saying, even the respect shown for Bush 1.0,
That said, the issues here are two. First, Gregoire was either inane or dishonest in the way she dissed Rossi over exactly the budget issue. In either case she would need to show strong leadership and a willingness to sacrifice her reelection if she took the course you advocate.
I would love to see her morph into a leader. A great start might be cutting the visible things most pols will not touch … Husky football is a small example. The aggregate cost of such things is less important than the impact of people’s understanding that the State really does need money.
I feel esp strongly about this in re the UW. Pretending we can cut costs while adding students is psychotic. She should make a budget based on a huge rise in tuition, enough to cover the necessary student aid, or close Tacoma, Bothell, and whatever else the public can SEE,
The legislature and only the legislature can raise taxes.
The legislature and only the legislature can raise taxes.
The legislature and only the legislature can raise taxes.
The legislature and only the legislature can raise taxes.
Repeat as needed until understanding is achieved.
But having said that, I’ll drop into the vernacular of our times and state the Chris Gregoire (the legislature) should raise all the taxes she needs (they need) to in order to maintain our schools and other essential services at non-gutted levels.
6 RS
AND in the last biennium, despite early projections of a revenue shortfall, the budget was balanced. What’s your point?
10 SJ
Why would you want to cut back Husky football, which not only makes money, but makes enough to fund all of the other sports at the UW?
Not so. Government is the spender of last resort.
It didn’t contract during the recession early in Reagan’s term.
It didn’t contract during the recession of 2001 (or even subsequently) when Bush ran things nor should it now.
8 J4
There was no deficit. The budget has been balanced every year, and will continue to be.
Um, do you know what a deficit is?
100% inheritance tax.
@3 “Look what happened when Clinton worked with R’s to overhaul the welfare system….that lead to saving money and putting those from welfare into someone that can do well and pay taxes. Thus increasing revenue.”
Welfare rolls are bigger than ever in Washington State. The 1995 “welfare reform” did nothing but increase expenditures by contracting out services that had previously been provided more cheaply and efficiently by public employees. So the result was not that more welfare recipients went to work, the result was that an entire industry dependent upon government expenditures was created. The jobs created by this industry are generally low-paying and without healthcare or retirement benefits.
I’ll give you an example. The USDA has implemented a Food Stamp Outreach program. The contracted agency helps the applicant fill out and send in the application for benefits. For every approved application they are paid $341 in Washington. This process takes about a half an hour and the employees at these agencies are paid minimum wage with no benefits (and are frequently recipients of some form of public assistance, like child care or Medicaid, themselves). Pretty sweet, huh?
On the other hand, the number of FTEs allocated to the DSHS Community Services Offices for processing these applications has decreased over the last decade by roughly 6% while the number of headquarters FTEs (management positions) has increased. More applications, fewer workers to process, more mid-level managers, and public money going to private agencies. Doesn’t make a bit of sense, does it?
The real corker for me in all of this was that there was a contractor who overbilled the state to the tune of over $200,000. And what did our Republican (and presumably fiscally responsible) Attorney General do? Settled the case for $40,000 and the contractor was allowed to renew the contract.
(That confection, by the way, came from the always-reliable liberal-progressive New Republic.)
Anyway … GHWB was ‘middling’? He gave us hives, back in the day, particularly with his no-new-taxes taxes. But he also gave us astonishingly competent leadership.
There’s some debate about ascribing the downfall of the evil empire and its wall to Reagan, but debate’s over on who gets credit for deftly managing the aftermath of Gorbachev’s collapse. Old Bush was almost faultless in steering through disaster: a broken USSR, remember, was even more dangerous than a nominally viable USSR. Strobe Talbot says GHWB was masterful, so it must be true.
Masterful also was the first Gulf War that stopped Saddam from annexing Saudi Arabia … his probable intent after taking Kuwait. If Bush hadn’t done the right thing (April Glaspie to the contrary), Saddam would probably be our energy czar.
Not marching to Baghdad in 1991, to take down the regime, also looks like the right thing … despite the deplorable and unintended consequence of not invading: we (he) abandoned the Kurds and left them holding the Baghdad bag.
Remember the left’s complaint that Baby Bush’s coalition of the willing was not a real coalition? And that the imprimature of a real coalition was required for the United States to (try to) act in its (alleged) best interests? Well, old Bush and old Baker and old Cheney built a real coalition in 1990, a coalition with strange bedfellows on the same side of the bed.
Guess who deplored Baby Bush for his faux coalition in 2003, and guess who followed behind old Bush, Cheney, and Baker in 1990, from nation to nation, trying to break apart our laboriously built coalition? Jimmy Carter’s the man who tried to highjack our foreign policy in 1990 and who tried to destroy our Gulf War coalition. Douglas Brinkley in a fat bio of Carter briefly recounts his destructive grandstanding in 1990, and then cuts right to the nut of the matter: treason.
Good stuff @17, assuming it’s true. 110 years ago the public sector seemed to be a manipulated adjunct of overweening corporations. TR was supposed to have progressively asserted public sector primacy, or at least parity, but in the manic recession of 1907 TR waved his little detumescent stick and groveled for J.P. Morgan’s competent intervention.
Now? Role reversal big time. Privatization in retrospect seems to have been another big government welfare program for a ‘private’ sector that’s just a flailing little appendage of big government.
We’ve learned since September that the public/private divide is no divide at all … except when it comes to Steve telling us about the public toilets where Republicans do dirty sex.
@13 Daddy Love
The idea that the football team makes money and even funds other sports is a myth. At best they break even. If we simply cut off all support ,,, faculty effort, admin and physical facilties, they would lose money.
The only reason the Huskies exist is because of the political pressure their fans create. In effect this is pork .. or more historically, “bread and games” as in Rome.
The UW, like other schould afflicted by semi pro sports, also has a large impact to consider. The teams have terrible effects, for example, on minority academic recruitment. About 50% of the AA students on campus are on ath. scholarship!
The public responds to what it can see. As long as they huskies are clad in new uniforms and win some games, it is hard to believe that the UDub has a financial problem.
@16,
Everyone will just give it away before they die. Money that flows to government at death is money wasted.
@17
Very interesting, can you provide a link for this horrible crime?
Very good, SJ. I apologize for losing my temper with you last week. (There’s just something creepy and reprehensible about one creepy reprehensible HA-tard threatening to out another creepy and reprehensible HA-tard.)
And surely we can both agree on this: Willingham-Palin 2012.
Have a nice day. Oy vey.
@20 “About 50% of the AA students on campus are on ath. scholarship!”
Please tell me that you didn’t pull that one from your ass. Link, please.
My guess, 22, is that our Lady of the Food Stamps works for those people. The horror.
M’self? Saw something similar at DOC, but wasn’t close enough to the budget to get the down-low lowdown.
@14 Daddy Love
Yup. I know what a deficit is and what Gregoire did to deceive the public about the issue. Under state law the budget is DEFINED as balanced so it is .. on paper. However, it seems clear that CG knew we were in deep and oncoming trpuble ..which what Rossi said!
Now imagine if the campaign .. on both their parts .. had been fought based on real facts! The debate might have done us all a lot of good. Cuts made in 08 would certainly have mitigated the pain we now must face.
Look, I voted for CG .. but mostly against Rossi. BUT, we seem in WASTATE to have a recent penchant for governors who are ineffectual.
Long term problems, eg the now clearly illegal way we fund the schools are swept under the rug until a horrible crisis occurs. Last year there was an effort by some school districts to sue the State. I am not sure what happened to that effort but, IMHO, we would all be better off if Gregoire had the ovaries needed to stand up and tell us all the truth.
@24 ,, Steve
I don’t have the time to get you a link but I sit on a committee at the UW that has had long talks about this problem.
The issue is this. WASTATE has a very small AA population. AA, however, are heavily over represented on the semi pro teams. As a result, atheletes make up a very disproportionate part of the AA student body.
Moreover, the reputation this creates for us in the AA community is disastrous. Many and perhaps most AA kids believe quite wrongly that the UW IS racist and only interested in black kids who can jump or throw a tackle.
Personally, I think college sports shuld be based on the school’s “natural” population. That is we should do little or no recruiting out of state so that WASTATE kids have the maximum opportunity to participate.
I also believe the UW should get out of the PAC10 and compete only with similar schools with high academic standards. Stanford, for example, has high requirements for its players. They will choose the academically gifted athlete over an athlete who is better at her sport. We are in many ways, as good an academic school as Stanford. I think we should compete for stheletes better able to use our faculty and classrooms.
@23 ,,, Irgun
I have no idea what you are talking about. If there was an exchange in anger, I must have not been there.
[Deleted — off topic, see HA Comment Policy]
@20 “About 50% of the AA students on campus are on ath. scholarship!”
@27 “I don’t have the time to get you a link but I sit on a committee at the UW that has had long talks about this problem.”
That’s OK. I have time.
http://depts.washington.edu/re.....index.html
Spring 2008. A quick look and I see a total 845 undergraduate blacks. Not many. That aside, do you now say that roughly 423 of these students have athletic scholarships?
Last week you averred that you were digging deep into the deep cover of … probably Mr. Cynical, and that you were going to blow his cover. Which isn’t a bit like being blown. Sort of creeped me out.
The point @ 25 is that there probably isn’t a link or citation for what our little cowgirl was telling us about food stamps, and about the co-optation of predatory private businesses for playing the game. Cowgirl may be an actual factual witness to a permitted but sleazy process. She’ s probably a whistleblower waiting for our favorite source of nooz, the Seattle P-I, to follow her lead and to trawl for a Pulitzer. (Any prize that can be given to David Horsey, and that can be given to him again, is not worth having.)
Foo Stamps: We were all pleased to learn recently that there are FS recruiters. But who knew, before Obama/Pelosi, that Food Stamps are stimulus? Probably at least as stimulative as subsidized tattoo removal.
But to be fair and balanced, remember that a crisis du jour from the early 1960s was the exorbitant cost of food storage. We’d gone in about two generations from sub-subsistence agrigulture to an agriculture that produced way more than we could eat. Billyuns and billyuns of bushels of uneaten grain stored in tax-paid silos at taxpayer expense.
At that point farm-state legislators, such as Erectile Bob Dole, decided the Dole made more sense than storage. Short-sell our grain to the Reds, and throw the rest at welfare queens. Made perfect sense. Are we a great country, or what?
@2 Since workers are giving up wage cuts, and the state is losing revenue, shouldn’t the private toll company give up some of its profits before tolls are raised?
@27 “I also believe the UW should get out of the PAC10 and compete only with similar schools with high academic standards. Stanford, for example, has high requirements for its players.”
Stanford? You mean our PAC-10 foes?
http://www.pac-10.org/
How is being in the PAC-10 hurting the UW but not hurting Stanford?
@3 Welfare was never more than 3% of the federal budget, and welfare reform is not how Clinton converted deficits to surpluses.
@7 Nope. Loading more sales tax on those least able to pay is not the answer. It’s time to starting taxing the huge pool of upper class income that has escaped state taxation for 100 years.
@9 There’s no state budget deficit, and never has been.
Oh! AA Americans are Afro-African Americans! Thought you meant Asian American Americans, of whom there are very very many at UW, overachievers that they are.
(Oooops! I did it again. Can’t say AA Asian Americans are overachievers, ’cause that’s a demeaning stereotype, almost as bad as saying that AA Asian Americans are a model minority. But not as bad as saying that Afro African Americans, unlike white men, can jump. This stuff is sooooooo complicated.)
Anyway, my best friend in the U-District, Black Rudy the Street Drunk, told me before he died that he resented the overrepresentation of the other AAs, the Asians, on the Dub campus and in the community. 30 percent plus, he said, undergrad and graduate. What’s with that?
(Oh, and never ever use the word Oriental unless you’re talking rugs. And even then, be careful. We white guys who can’t jump have been entirely too careless about the damage we’ve inflicted on the world. Of course we’re under-represented at UW, but nevermind. And about AA Asian Americans in the NBA? What’s with that?)
Damn straight, 35. Get Daschle, Geithner, and Rangel to start paying their fair share. Problem solved.
Ahhhhhh yes, George H.W. “READ MY LIPS” Bush.
The jerk-off who fell into the tax trap.
Well, boys, guess who else just put their collective feet into the same bear trap?
Yep, Eric Cantor and the yum-yum anti-tax conservatives who voted to raise the marginal tax rate from 35% to 90% on the AIG Executives.
If they’re so willing to raise the marginal tax rate to 90%, then surely letting the Bush tax cuts expire and return to 39% isn’t out of reach. After all, that’s 51% less than the rate they just voted for.
What ever happened to the well disciplined message machine that was the hallmark of the conservative party?
My oh my how far the mighty have fallen. This vote for increasing taxes, possibly an unconstitutional tax increase won’t play well in commercials during the next election cycle. You know “principles” and all will be called into question. Hehehe
The Huskies or Cougars making a BCS ballgame would bring the schools Millions….just being in a bowlgame helps. That money is spread around the campus and to other programs. Yes they spend a lot, but the ROI is high as there is more than just pure $$….though a strong program in the national spotlight will drive more donations…thus more money!
Gov. Gregoire’s unfortunate acquiescence in ruling out tax increases was ill-advised and ultimately unnecessary, but it was not nearly as forceful or irresponsible as H.W’s signature soundbite.
———————
Acquiescence? Where do you come up with this word?
The Govenor LED THE WAY time and again, up and down the state, and in debate on this issue. She stated VERY forcefully that raising taxes during a recession was poor policy. This was clearly a central element of her campaign, and it’s one reason people voted for her.
You voted for her leadership, including her judgement on taxes, and now you’re getting cold feet. The time to raise objections was during the campaign, when other people were questioning her pledge.
You’re just a little late to the discussion, Goldy.
@32
What happens if we stop making payments on the bridge? Good luck and God speed trying to repo the thing!
I thought the private company bid the job?
If so T.S.
@42
“What happens if we stop making payments on the bridge? Good luck and God speed trying to repo the thing!”
Sounds like this came from a liberal.
Stop paying and watch WA state ratings hit bottom .
@43
It sounds like I was joking around and setting someone else up to crack wise about Emilio Estevez and Harry Dean Stanton.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repo_Man_(film)
@14
I can agree with you when talking about the Federal Gov. I was speaking about our state ecnonomy and budget.
Since we (State of WA) cannot print money, We cannot be the spender of last resort.
DL – Are you saying that spending didn’t outpace revenues? The FACT is that spending rose at a rate far outpacing growth. The FACTS are that the legislature raises taxes and THE GOV HAS TO SIGN IT. At least SJ is honest about the FACT that CG was missleading when she claimed a surplus and balanced budget. Had she been a Republican, she would be rolled out as a complete liar….
[Deleted — off topic, see HA Comment Policy]
@40 Dengle
Sorruy, this is just untrue. There have been several studies of semi pro college sportsm and they all show the same thing.
There are only two ways the numbers can be cooked to make the teams profitable or at least nto losing money. Them simplest is by not claculating support costs. This is absurd .. any business needs to pay rent and of course there are admin salaries, police and … hell even libraries. The normal charge for such thinsg at the UW is abouit 60%.
The other way is by claiming the teams cause donors to give $$. This may be true if you consider the teams as NOT part of the University. but there is no evidence that sports lead to contributions to any other part of campus.
Finally, and most importnat, there is a belief that legislatures fund public universities out of sports based loyalties. People I respect believe that so it could be true.
In the meantime, the UW has essentially no non-pro sports programs.
Roger
There most certainly IS a state budget deficit, we just do nto call it that.
We pay off huge sums in bond issues. These are suposedly not used for operational funding .. unless you consider maintenance operations.
State agencies, moreover, do have work arounds that allow us to go into debt. Safeco Tower and the SLU campus are both financed.
Finally, if the State fails to pay its essential bills it builds up another kind of debt .. the future loss of value.
Rossi was right. Gregoire, as she did in her first election, lacked the fortitude to campaign on the truth.
Courageous means raise taxes??
You are sick Goldy.
Raising taxes means Gregoire is a LIAR.
Gregoire and the Democrats have created he worst Buget Deficit (considering size of State) in the entire Country.
Time to clean house.
Hey-it’s seven years to the day since Goldy’s pal Dan Savage wrote his famous “Say Yes to War on Iraq” article ridiculing the anti-war liberals, and calling for killing Iraqi children for their own good.
Yes he did! Google it!
Delete this Goldy1 It’s off-topic like 90% of the other comments in this thread.
@32
If you are going to get your feet wet jump in and say what you really mean.
Boeing profits and wages are to high it’s time for the state to add caps on these outrages price and take the remaining money to pay off the debt. Feel free to add other companies to this list need to go fast as the loser has been looking at this as extra revenue.