The escalating war of words between GOP legislators and Gov. Timothy M. Kaine over Kaine’s proposed budget is getting some attention in the press. Garren Shipley at the Northern Virginia Daily and the editorial writers at Washington Examiner focus on the $180 million in transportation spending that Kaine wants to defer. The issues don’t appear to have evolved much since we covered them in this blog, but the differences are getting aired.
Meanwhile, Chelyen Davis at the Free Lance-Star gives ink to the unease that GOP legislators have with Kaine’s two-year revenue forecasts.
In a letter to the govenror, House Speaker William J. Howell, R-Stafford, and House Appropriations Chairman Del. Lacey Putney expressed concern that the Governor’s revenue forecasts are not based on the most current expectations of economic performance. Since the November 19 meeting of the Governor’s Advisory Council on Revenue Estimates (GACRE), “the national economy has continued to see wild swings,” while “the sustained decline in the housing and subprime mortgage markets further affect consumer and financial confidence.” The lawmakers continue:
Subsequently, the Commonwealth’s economic and forecasting consultant Global Insight has updated their forecast based on more recent economic data, including assumed GDP growth of less than 1 percent over the next three quarters. In turn, these financial experts have raised the probability of a recession from 30 percent to 40 percent.
Howell and Putney called upon the Governor to reconvene a meeting of the Advisory Council in January to update the budget projections on the basis of the most current data.
According to Davis, Kaine spokesperson Delacey Skinner responded that GACRE met in November, and agreed then to stick with the revenue forecast from August, which reflected the weakening economy. The governor’s office has a regularly scheduled review of the forecast in mid-February, and that it wouldn’t be prudent to call another meeting of GACRE just a month beforehand. Said Skinner: “Calling a special meeting would send a message to the public that we’re panicked, and that would be an unwise message to send.”
Bacon’s bottom line: So, Skinner doesn’t want to send a message that, “We’re panicked.” Personally, I think it would send a message that, “We’re prudent.” Instead, Skinner prefers to send a message that the Kaine administration is content for budgetary deliberations to rely upon what will be, by January, five-month-old data. Given the volatility of the economy, I think the Howell/Putney proposal makes sense.
