From The Brookings Register
Posted: January 23, 2010
By John Kubal
Editor's note: This is the second of two interviews by Register reporter John Kubal with lawmakers from District 7 and District 4. Thursday's edition of the Register featured District 7's Democratic Sen. Pam Merchant and Republican Reps. Carol Pitts and Larry Tidemann. Today the newspaper visits with the District 4 trio: Sen. Jim Peterson, D-Revillo ; Rep. Val Rausch, R-Big Stone City; and Rep. Steve Street, D-Revillo .
The reporter who walks through the halls of the state capitol in Pierre or into the lobbies to buttonhole a senator or representative for an on-the-spot interview finds that one issue will ultimately take center stage: the budget.
In the end it comes down to the most basic rule of economics: supply and demand. While our state lawmakers face a near insatiable list of needs and wants, they do so with a limited supply of money. And so the battle wages over who gets what and who gets cut.
On Wednesday, District 4 lawmakers (Brookings, Deuel, Grant and Moody counties) shared their views on the budget with the Register.
Don't impact education
The goal of Sen. Jim Peterson, D-Revillo , is to keep dollars for education intact.
He explained that he wants "ways to balance the budget out there without having a big impact on education . I've always been concerned about the proper funding of education; because I believe that our youth are our future. And we have to be willing to invest in them. I think it can be done."
He sees a need for around $30 million in cuts to balance the budget; there is presently more than a $100 million shortfall. But $70 million in federal stimulus will help whittle that number down.
Peterson said that leaders in both parties say "they want to do it." He added, "There might be some squabbling on how that comes about; but I think in the end we can do it and do it without raising any taxes this year."
But cuts must come.
Over the past 10 years, there has been an average 5.5 percent growth in tax collections. Peterson would like to see education supported in a fashion that is driven by the tax dollars collected.
He explained, "If that had been in place, education would be really adequately funded right now."
Peterson added," We always spend that money," in reference to the dollars that came in at more than a 3 percent growth rate.
He said, "The point is reached where the schools can only do so much cutting, especially our small schools. " They have to have certain key people on their staffs to offer a quality education. So we've got to be very careful there, I feel."
Tough, painful cuts
Using an analogy, Rep. Val Rausch, R-Big Stone City, said, "Households are trying to balance their budgets; and the state is a big household. So we're having those same problems. The driving issue certainly is the budget."
For him a goal is to not use the reserve to balance the budget this fiscal year, 2011. That would allow some of those dollars saved to be used to help the FY 2012 budget with that budget looking to be even tougher to tackle than the FY 2011 budget lawmakers are now working on.
South Dakota faces an anticipated $107 million shortfall in FY 2012.
But does leaving the reserve alone for now mean some painful cuts for FY 2011? "Always ," Rausch said. "We're deficit spending right now; and that's what the reserves would replace. (Federal) stimulus money is in there also; and that's going to end. There won't be any stimulus money in (FY) 2012 that we can bridge."
He sees the potential for cuts for FY 2011 could total $36 million.
"It's going to be tough," he concluded.
'Rubber's meeting the road'
Rep. Steve Street, D-Revillo , summed up the budget challenges succinctly: "We're coming up short."
Revenue projections have not been met, he added. "The rubber's kind of meeting the road."
Street said that for seven of the past eight years, the state "has spent a little more than we took in. It was close; but we've been running a structural deficit, and we all know that. But it's a little more severe this year."
And "The budget cuts are going to be painful; they're not going to be easy to make. It's going to be tough, and I'm not looking forward to it."
FTE's 'a complicated issue'
Like Peterson, Street looked at the potential for FTE ("full-time equivalency," a term that defines a full-time employee) cuts. He noted that the FTEs are "a complicated issue, pointing out that "some FTEs are not individuals . Some FTEs are federally funded; we don't want to send them packing, because that's federal money."
Smiling and laughing a bit, he added, "Maybe some people do, but I don't . I think when we're short of money, we take what we can get."
Money the state is not getting as much of is sales tax revenue, which Street said "is not growing the way we'd like."
He added, "That will change over time; but for right now we have to view them as flat. " We're in the dark; we don't know what's coming. It's hard to know what to expect in this economic climate."
Contact John Kubal at jkubal@brookingsregister .com.
