Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Walker's working on a near Billion Dollar Deficit in two years.

It’s no small campaign issue: Scott Walker reverses the $700+ million surplus to a $700+ deficit in the next budget.

That’s would require even more austere spending cuts. And with the Republican legislatures penchant for passing more costly laws, like refusing Medicaid expansion, voucher funding and business tax cuts, we’re in for some real trouble.

Here’s WISC’s coverage of the legislature’s decision to cut property taxes, and Rep. John Nygren’s jaw dropping ridiculous upside down false premise:
"As a legislature, we're forced with the spend the money, on another program, increasing the size of government, or in this case giving it back to the taxpayers..." 
Nygren presented a false premise so he could slip in a "big government" talking point: the money wouldn't be used for "another program, increasing the size of government," it would be used to pay off deficits and/or fund needed government business. Anyone solve the transportation funding problem yet? Didn't think so. This is typical charge card Republican budgeting. 

This hasn’t gone unnoticed by the Huffington Post, giving it national exposure:
nonpartisan analysis revealed Tuesday that initiatives pushed by Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) would add to his state's budget shortfall over time.

The figures released by Wisconsin's Legislative Fiscal Bureau show that Walker's proposals to cut property taxes and install worker training bills stand to add $180 million in costs. Implementation would swing a current surplus to a $725 million deficit for the 2015-2017 calendar period, according to the report.
Democrats will unfortunately have their fingerprints all over this "emergency" property tax cut too. They should have voted no, pointing to the 2015-2017 budget deficit projections. Instead, this was their response:
Some Democrats contend otherwise, with state Sen. Jennifer Shilling (D-La Crosse)telling the Journal-Sentinel Tuesday that Walker's tax savings are minimal in scope.
What's wrong with these guys?

1 comment: