What would you cut?

[Tom Clark]

So we've all paid really close attention (right) to the 25th Special session whereby our state elected officials were put into the unenviable position of shaking up the budget so we'll survive this fiscal year. Yes, just THIS fiscal year. The changes made simply curb the bleeding until June 30, 2009.

Beginning in February the Regular Legislative Session begins and the most important issue will be to fund the budget for the next two years amid a continued decline in sales, gaming, property tax, et al and a Governor who remains steadfast in his committment to no new taxes. Cuts will (must) be made.

if you were in this position, where would you cut? What service(s) that the state provides would be on your proverbial chopping block? Remember NO NEW TAXES!

[Elisa Maser]

Interesting that the discussion on dumpster diving is getting more comment than this question - which will have a PROFOUND effect on us all for years to come.

After the special session, I hardly think the Governor can say he's been pure to his "no new taxes" pledge. So, I hardly think we would have to accept that limitation ourselves.

Here's the question I asked Ty Cobb: Some agencies are using this crisis to really look at how the business of government gets done ... and restructure or reorganize if that makes more sense. Others use a strategy of employing the "meanest cuts" to stir up public response.

How do we reward and encourage the first? And minimize the second?

[Mike Jamieson]

I second what Elisa said regarding reorganizing and restructuring how the government does business.

The focus of the government (here) is already pretty much limited to essential services. Which can't
and shouldn't be cut. See Barbara Buckley's http://www.nevada2020.com for the details on our sources
of revenues and on our mandatory services.

We don't need to raise taxes. We just need to be creative and find new revenue sources.

[Mike Jamieson]

The resources you will need to answer this question (i.e. the full budget and a link to a summary of it also) is here:



The truth is (so far as I can see right now based on what I've read to date from above link) that not much can be cut.
And, what MAY seem unnecessary or frivilous or wasteful is not even close to making a dent in the deficit. Sorry to be such a contrarian (to Tom's request here), but those are the facts. So....we go to new sources of revenues. Barbara Buckley's updated paper addressing all this identifies one key new potential source, on page 42 here:

(Go to the link on that page for her paper/pdf.)

There she identifies actual resources (BLM land) and what can be done with them (lease to alternative energy operations). What she identifies on the immediately preceding pages there is just nickling and diming.

I'm feeling a bit bolder (which is pretty damn lame actually, given that my subject is not in fact taboo or sensitive) and will outline my own proposal for a major revenue source. Thankfully, there are small examples of how what I'm thinking has already been tried by the federal government (but not as a means to gain revenue) on an extremely small or limited scale. Also, Santa Cruz, California in the late 90s contemplated doing what I'm going to suggest here soon in a seperate discussion thread (so I won't be insulting Tom by not giving answers to his actual question). Let's just say that if my proposal is actualized, you will likely see a lot less puke on the streets of downtown Reno.

[Mike Jamieson]

http://budget.state.nv.us/budget%5F2007%5F09/ (first link that didn't show up using hypertext chain icon)

second link:

http://www.nv2020.com

And, another sentence to add on to above final remarks:
And, you will see a lot of money regularly and reliably flowing into the state's general funds.

[Ryan Jerz]

Are you going to propose outlawing the Wine Walk? Say it ain't so!

[Mike Jamieson]

Not to worry. My proposal will likely entail the instituting of the Ganja Bong Walk! (Seeing how that medicine is anit-emetic, we will leave less work for the city street cleaners.) The only think I'm trying to sort out before presenting the proposal of the state selling medical marijuana directly to patients is how much money that will bring in. At a minimum, probably at least $10,000,000 (after costs) a month. That would represent about a third of what we need to fill the current shortfall overall. But, I think
it would likely go higher when more doctors (like mine) are reluctant to prescribe extremely dangerous
pain killers and steroids. "We need to get that stuff out there", sayeth my doctor.

There are things in the budget that people might think are frivilous. Like the Tourism Agency. Well, I was just reading what happened in Colorado and a couple of other states where they cut that in half.
Turns out tourism dropped by half as a result. For now, the state has an option for the short term:
borrow money. Significant cuts anywhere in the budget is NOT an option.

[Elisa Maser]

Sadly, $10 million a month ($120m a year) would only be about 10% of what they'll be cutting in 2009, as I understand it. We've already cut, what $1.2 BILLION.

But 10% is a good start!

[Mike Jamieson]

Yes, I think they need to cut $339 million more. They also have this line of credit for $160 million.

My estimate was a very conservative one on purpose. I see a very widely expanded medical marijuana program with the state being the grower and distributor (so they can collect ALL
the money). The state is really missing out here. You either have to go through a cumbersome and expensive process to get licensed by the Dept. of Agriculture.....or, if you have the medical conditon, an okay from your doctor, and possess only an ounce, you can assert an affirmative defense and not be prosecuted. Both ways, the state is not getting anything except fees from about 1000 people (most of whom can't grow the stuff, black thumbs, according to a RGJ article) who have registered with the Dept. of Ag.

The estimate I put out there so far equals the intake from cigarette taxes on a yearly basis now (a little over $100 million dollars a year) and is three times the intake from liquor taxes
(about $40 million a year). I would love to see a TRIPLING of taxes on both deadly substances.
Nicotine and alcohol are not endogenous to the brain. Cannaboids ARE! And, it's medical benefits are simply awesome in range and scope.

BTW, that got me thinking. How much money can we cut from the Dept of Corrections if we boot ALL marijuana "offenders" out of the state prison system??

I might be a little fuzzy on the details here ('cause I'm relying on memory now), but there are at least three mandatory (dictated by the constitution) areas that the state has to spend money on: education, health and human services, and public safety. Our budgets are devised as a two year blueprint for spending. I think the YEARLY spending for education is just under $2 billion, just over a billion for health and human services, and about $350 million for public safety. (So, just multiply above numbers by two in order to get the full, two-year, budget appropriation for these areas.)

[Elisa Maser]

Tom - getting what you were looking for?

[Tom Clark]

Elisa, not really. Mike is proposing a larger medical marijuana program (never going to pass the legislature) and not specific cuts. For example, I propose we cut the medical marijuana program from the Department of Agriculture.

[Elisa Maser]

For tiny cuts - I'd recommend we stop funding abstinence only-only-only programs ... which have been proven over and over to be a waste of taxpayers money.

Big cuts - like I said on NV Newsmakers - I can't believe the SAGE Comm. is recommending cutting health benefits for retired workers (sorry, we know we promised to pay for this and you kept up your part of the deal ....) while in the second to last special session (maybe, I'm losing track) the pay raises for teachers weren't on the table.

No sacred cows, really.

[Mike Jamieson]

I know that what the state of California pays in the way of my monthly health premiums (I'm a CalPers retiree) is simply obscene. I barely even go to the doctor....just annual lab tests and renewal of my blood pressure medication prescription. Hopefully, health care reforms will result in lower premium costs. (Which should happen when everyone, everywhere, gets covered with health insurance.)