Back Seat Budgeter

Reply

Don Posted: 17 Mar 2011 8:49 AM

rated by 0 users

This web site is a cute idea, but it doesn't show enough detail to do anything useful.  Some places I would start reducing the budget would be:

• From the transportation budget, remove all money for transit or other expenses other than repair and maintenance of roads and bridges.  I do not object to transit, but since it serves local areas, I think it should be paid by the people it serves, not the whole state.  Everyone is served by roads and bridges.  I suspect, but can't prove that taxes collected from users of roads and bridges, including not only fuel taxes, but sales taxes on vehicles, all taxes on vehicle parts and repairs including taxes on wages, taxes collected on goods and services transported over roads and bridges, and other vehicle related taxes will more than pay for maintenance of roads and bridges.
• Eliminate all tax funding of private "non-profit" organizations.  Many of these organizations provide useful services, but I believe they should be funded with voluntary donations, not tax money extracted involuntarily from our poorest and unemployed citizens.
• Eliminate all tax funding of entertainment facilities.  I have no objection to building and using stadiums, concert venues, golf courses, and other entertainment venues, but I think they should be paid for by the people who use them.  I would cut off all direct funding to these facilities and all indirect funding where state tax money goes to any entitiy including county, city, or school districts that fund these types of facilities either directly or indirectly with tax money.
• To the extent possible, I would eliminate all state funding of other government entities such as cities, counties, or school districts.  These other government entities tend to look at state money as free money.  It is not free.  Let them make spending decisions based on the money they can raise from their citizens, not based on taxing strangers from afar.  Remember that taxes do not pay for "services".  Services are things people will pay for voluntarily.  Taxes are a means to force prople to pay for things they won't pay for vountarily.
• To the extent possible, I would avoid taking federal matching funds, becasue the matching funds always come with mandates concerning how the money is spent.  By stopping the matching funds, it would be possible to stop the mandates.
• I would reduce employee expenses by either reducing salaries, charging more for benefits, or both. 
• Medical costs could be reduced significantly if everyone paid for their medical insurance personally instead of having it paid by an employer.  The current system creates a disconnect between the source of payment and the delivery of services.  I would want a new car every year with all the toys if someone else was paying the bills.  Because I have to pay for my cars, I make other choices.  I think medical costs would drop dramatically if users of medical services simply had to pay the full costs for the insurance.  Many people don't seem to realize that the cost of medical insurance affects the wages an employer can pay when they are competing with a person in China or India for a job.
• I would look at some kind of voucher system for schools that not only looked at student performance, but also school costs.  I would reward schools for delivering good performance in reading, writing and math at low costs.  Provide some measure and incentive for schools to deliver great education experiences at minimum cost.
• Eliminate tenure and hold school managers accountable for both results and costs.  Have teacher salaries set per position, not all the same.  Easy to fill positions would pay less.  Harder to fill positions would pay more.  Teachers who delivered good outcomes would be paid more.  Teachers with poor outcomes would be paid less.  This type system would cause teachers to move to the positions they do best.  With the present system, we have many under or over qualified people in less than optimum positions.
• Raise speed limits on roads like I-25, US36, and others to increase fuel tax collections without rasing tax rates.

The above list is a start.  There is plenty of additional room for change.

Reply

DHR replied on 29 Mar 2011 4:01 PM

rated by 0 users

I like a lot of these ideas. It's going to take creative solutions that involve all the stakeholders. We don't trust each other and so everyone keeps their cards in their hands instead of laying them on the table. This backseatbudgeter is a good idea, but too limited. Denver Post Editorial Page keeps trying to engage the public also. They've done some good work in this area of trying to put forward different options. I don't agree with their proposals, but I do agree with getting all the stakeholders to compromise. Don's post above has some ideas with merit. I wish some of these options were in backseat budgeter. I see too many that refuse to listen to creative solutions.