With a tenuous economic recovery under way and a heated election season looming, state Democratic and Republican leaders trotted out competing spending proposals Monday.
While both plans fund higher wages for home care workers and do not raise taxes, the similarities end there.
House Democrats propose $224 million in new spending, including $30 million for increased college enrollments, a return to free medical coverage for the state’s poorest children and lower health care premiums for state employees,
"The crisis in revenue appears to be over," House Majority Leader Lynn Kessler, D-Hoquiam, said as she and other members of the Appropriations Committee outlined their ideas at a midday news conference.
But an hour after the release of that proposal, Sen. Joe Zarelli, R-Ridgefield, laid out the Republican’s plan, contending the economy cannot handle significant expenditures.
"We must take heed of next year’s deficit," he said, referring to estimates of a $1 billion shortfall in the next two-year budget cycle.
The Republicans plan of $69 million in overall new spending is the result of blending tax incentives, tort reform savings and an across-the-board 10 percent cut in government spending.
They propose tightening eligibility rules for and trimming $7 million from the state’s General Assistance Program — an idea that drew a rebuke from Gov. Gary Locke, who charged that cut would "move thousands of the state’s poorest people from minimum state aid."
Since the state adopts a new budget every two years, this year’s budget is supplemental; 2004 is the second year in the cycle.
The Democratic plan leaves $199 million in the reserve, while the Republicans favor a plan that leaves twice that in the kitty.
Rep. Barry Sehlin, R-Oak Harbor, said the Democratic plan is fiscally irresponsible.
"We’re only eight months into the two-year budget cycle," Sehlin said. "The Democrat budget is oblivious to the serious budget problem that is looming in the next biennium."
Rep. Hans Dunshee, D-Snohomish, vehemently disagreed about what would benefit the state’s fiscal climate.
"(The Republicans) are killing the economy," Dunshee said. "We cut $2.7 million last year. We’ve got to put a little in this year."
One of the major differences is in higher education — a field into which Democrats advocate investing $30 million toward satisfying skyrocketing college enrollment figures. The Republicans allot $2.5 million for the same purpose.
Neglecting to fund higher education would leave Washington’s baby-boom echo jobless, Dunshee said.
Sen. Dave Schmidt, R-Bothell, believes the money is more desperately needed in the business sector.
"If we don’t give those dollars to the high-tech community, those jobs will leave the state," he said.
The House and Senate both passed the Locke-ordered bill (ESHB 2546), which provided for $52.4 million in tax credits for the high-tech industry.
The Republican-planned reserve of $400 million is still under what it should be, Schmidt said. He added that the money is the bare minimum for what needs to be set aside for emergency situations, such as fires or social worker caseloads.
Rep. John Lovick, D-Mill Creek, found it hard to find the "compassionate conservatism" in this year’s Republican budget.
Lovick, the speaker pro tem, said the budget difference will be difficult to resolve.
"How can you look at a veteran that can’t afford medicine and say you can’t go to Canada?" Lovick asked.
"The state budget isn’t really about numbers — it’s about real people," he said.
House and Senate committees began debating the proposed budgets Monday. Ultimately, differences in the two plans will be ironed out in a conference committee. The legislative session is scheduled to end March 11.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
