State isn't required to balance budget

By Evan Rohar

In an odd turn of events, The Seattle Times, obliterating long-held dogma in Washington's politics, recently uncovered that legislators were misinformed or untruthful in their assertions that the state's constitution requires that they pass a balanced budget.

"It's long been accepted gospel by many here: The state must balance its budget and can't borrow money to cover shortfalls like the one lawmakers now face.

"'My brochure for my race said that unlike the federal government we have to balance our budget,' said House Majority Leader Lynn Kessler, D-Hoquiam. 'I seriously believed that.'

"In fact, it's a myth.

"There's no legal barrier that prevents the state from going into deficit spending, according to legislative staff members and the governor's budget office.

"In other words, the state could borrow money long term to help fill a gaping hole in the 2009-11 state budget that the governor says could reach nearly $6 billion. The current two-year budget totals $33.6 billion." ("State isn't required to balance budget, but it's still the goal," 12/8/08)

This could potentially change the tone of the debate during the legislative session. Deficit spending on the state level, however, is a dangerous road to travel. If the state balances the budget with debt, the same budget items legislators are trying to slash this year will be on the chopping block in 2011. We need a long-term solution to this crisis so we have a future as well as short term solutions to minimize suffering in the present. The state needs immediate aid from the federal government to continue vital services as well as a progressive tax code which taxes corporations and the wealthy to provide a consistent and predictable source of revenue.