Before going there, my apologies to REP. Vukmir, who is NOT a Senator.
In the original post, I calculated that the increase could be as much as 10.54%, rather than the "nearly 10%" number tossed off by the lovely Representative last week.
It ain't that simple.
You can look at all budget funds:
2005-2007 – 53,673,369,400
Total Increase: 8.5%
Or you could take all funds, plus general revenue bonding:
2005-2007 – 53,902,154,400
2007-2009 – 58,988,614,400
Total Increase: 9.4%
Or you could use all funds, plus all bonding:
2005-2007 – 54,268,817,100
2007-2009 – 60,346,104,400
Total Increase: 11.2%
Umnnnhhhh...I'll take Door #3, which happens to be Total State Spending. But that's not too simple, either:
Further complicating matters however, one has to keep in mind that a portion of the general obligation bonding has been used as a backfill for fund-transfers. In other words, some general obligation bonding has been used to pay for current road projects and other capital projects.
Which is to say that Darth proposes to use MasterCard to make up for his $400million shell-game.
(HE plays the game, and uses TAXPAYER MasterCard. Hell of a deal, for him...)
You are trying to assess a budget built on smoke and mirrors as though it tells an honest story. It does not. The state budget is a matter of fiction on the order of Grimm’s Fairy Tales. It is open to any number of true, but frequently inaccurate observations.
We disagree a bit. Grimm's Fairy Tales had a 'moral to the story.' There are NO morals in the budget story, starting with the top of the chain.
The actual budget increase percentage could accurately be stated as something less than 11.2% and something more than 9.4% making the “nearly 10%” observation within the range of grenade throwing accuracy that typifies the state budget.
For "grenade-throwing" purposes, I'll take the 11.2%. That means an increase of around $400 MILLION DOLLARS, which is offset by
in additional taxes for EVERY DAY of the NEXT TWO YEARS.