Cash-Strapped Governors Angry About Limited Access to Bush

Associated Press ^

[RCW2001]

WASHINGTON—Democrats said Saturday that the White House was taking unprecedented steps to limit conversation at Monday's scheduled policy discussion between governors and President Bush.

With their states' economies in tatters, members of the National Governors Association - who began their four-day winter meeting Saturday - are hoping to win more federal aid to cover soaring costs for health care, homeland security and education.

But the governors have been told that most of them won't be able to directly question the president during Monday's White House gathering, according to Nicole Harburger, communications director for the Democratic Governors Association.

"Several of the governors are considering not attending the meeting," Harburger said. "The governors are upset and concerned that the White House is not interested in a dialogue."

She said the governors have been told they will be restricted to two questions overall, submitted in writing beforehand.

Washington Gov. Gary Locke, chairman of the Democratic governors, said, "There are many Democratic governors talking about not even attending under these circumstances."

"It's always been a very candid exchange," Locke said. "It's more important now than ever before to have a frank, open discussion."

Republican Dirk Kempthorne of Idaho, vice chairman of the national association, said there still would be an opportunity to ask questions of Bush, and that the changes were a constructive attempt to focus closely on top concerns.

Bush also closed to the press Sunday's formal dinner with the governors; in years past, it had been open. Locke said the White House has even set limits on Kentucky Gov. Paul Patton's toast at the dinner.

State governments' dire finances and disagreements on what would help threatened to strain the traditionally bipartisan tone of the NGA.

"We have serious issues," said Patton, the group's Democratic chairman. "It may be more difficult to get consensus than it has in the past."

"We'll thrash it out," said Kempthorne.

Governors met Saturday with Education Secretary Rod Paige, and planned to see Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson and leading lawmakers later during the four-day weekend.

Democrats sharply criticized Bush's budget proposals, and even fellow Republicans questioned the details.

There also was some dismay that the governors' association, seeking a unified position on behalf of the states, was too harsh in assessing Bush's spending plan.

Bush's successor as Texas governor, Republican Rick Perry, quit the organization, partly to save $160,000 in annual fees and partly because he was unhappy with what he felt was its criticism of the Bush administration, spokeswoman Kathy Walt said.

"Open criticism of the president is not an approach Gov. Perry favors," she said.

GOP Govs. John Rowland of Connecticut, Jeb Bush of Florida and Bill Owens of Colorado have all been pushing to counter what they see as partisan attacks from the group, Rowland said.

Among the issues on the governors' agenda:

• Bush's Medicaid overhaul, which would give more flexibility and increased federal funding in the short term to states that choose to participate.
  
  
• Reauthorization of the federal transportation act, which distributes federal funds for state and local transportation needs.
  
  
• Money to help states meet new obligations for homeland security.
  
  Underlying the policy discussions is the financial crisis facing the states. New figures released Saturday predict a combined $30 billion shortfall for the current budget year.
  
  Next year looks worse, with shortfalls estimated at $82 billion. Because all states except for Vermont are barred from running a deficit, governors and legislators must agree to cut spending or raise taxes. Three years of cuts are taking their toll.
  
  "I didn't mind making cuts when the cuts inconvenienced people," said Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, one of several GOP governors who have stepped away from their party's usual anti-tax stance and proposed raising taxes.
  
  "Telling an elderly woman that she's going to have to cut her blood pressure medication in half - that hurts her. I'm not willing to hurt her."
  
  Huckabee said he particularly wants to hear more details about changes proposed for Medicaid, the fastest growing portion of most state budgets. "We don't have room to make mistakes in our budgets," he said.
  
  Democratic governors, who won several seats in the past election but still are outnumbered 26-24 by Republicans, have stepped forward to focus their national party's stance on domestic issues.
  
  "We hear from the White House about partnership. But when you get past the rhetoric of partnership, we see no money" -- on homeland security, rising Medicaid costs or other pressing needs, said Democrat Bob Holden of Missouri.
  
  After the Republican governors gathered to discuss politics and policy Saturday, Owens - the group's chairman - announced that they were pleased with Bush's budget proposals, from Medicaid to tax cuts.
  
  Several Democrats said they were concerned that Washington's focus overseas was shortchanging domestic needs. Tennessee's Phil Bredesen recounted meeting with the president with other governors just before Christmas.
  
  "It was great and I was honored to be there, but we spent the entire 45 minutes talking about Iraq," he said. "Myself, and many other governors, Republicans and Democrats, would like to have had some discussion about education, about how we're going to get the economy back on track."

[arasina]

Have state Governors forgotten how to govern without the assistance of Big Federal Daddy? What innovative solutions do these whiners have to bring to the table?

[joesnuffy]

When a grown spoiled child cant/wont live within its means...it goes crying to the parent for mo money When its govt. they raise taxes and buy a bigger justice thug dept.

[Free the USA]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[George W. Bush]

With their states' economies in tatters,...

The bubble of recession-proof economic expansion has burst. RINOs and Dims run to Daddy. But Daddy is prepared to practice a little tough love.

Didn't Clinton clip a few wings in the NGA too? Colorado's Romer got a little pushy, as I recall.

Every last one of these states need to stop fluffing their schools with non-academic crap. The governors need to clean up their own backyards and cut out-of-control state spending.

Hopefully, Bush will hold the line and ignore them.

Bravo for Rick Perry, who served his state best by saving $160,000 by dropping out of the stupid NGA.

[OldFriend]

They overspent and now want the federal government to bail them, all the while whining about the federal deficit. Talk about deceit!

[Go Gordon]

They overspent and now want the federal government to bail them, all the while whining about the federal deficit. Talk about deceit!

First question FROM Bush: "How can you help get the RAT senators to accelerate the tax cuts?"

Second Question FROM Bush: "What the hell did you do with the tobacco settlement money?"

After the states answer, then they can question the administration.

[irish_lad]

I closely monitor state budgets and know that most states are in dire financial straits. Many states have already cut programs, and the next step is to cut into the bone rather than the fat. California is facing a $35 billion shortfall, and Texas is $10 billion. These aren't small number folks.

I am a die-hard Bush republican, but I also know that without some aid from the Feds, further cuts will lead to further economic contraction at the state level, thus prolonging an already slow recovery.

The problem is two-fold at the state level. Econcomic forecasts (and thus budgets) were predicated on an improving economy. For instance, Connecticut is facing a severe shortfall and will likely layoff about 3,600 state workers. The reason is that a large revenue item in their budget is the tax on capital gains from many wealthy residents. Since the market has tanked, no capital gains means budget problems. The other problem is that states, when times were good, foolishly increased spending on social programs above practical rates. They will cut those but the revenue shortfalls may force states to make cuts that WILL hurt many people (especially the elderly and children who are the biggest recipients of state aid).

So what to do? Federal loan guarantees to states that implement fiscal discipline in spending. Some states will be forced to raise taxes and fees to balance their spending. This problem will not get much better until the economy gets a lot better.

[madfly]

fyi

[Cicero]

Right. But it doesn't help to send the tax dollars first up to Washington and then back down to the states--after taking a bureaucratic slice out of them.

Better to cut federal taxes and let the states and localities raise the money if they need it.

The best thing Bush could do for the states would be to cut taxes, cut spending, and return more responsibilities to the governmental levels that are closer to the problems.

[Cicero]

Plus, the federal government could help by cutting federal mandates. Higher levels of government have gotten into the habit that they know better than the locals what's good for them. Clinton was responsible for a lot of new mandates, but Republicans share the blame.

[RnMomof7]

Better to cut federal taxes and let the states and localities raise the money if they need it.
Plus, the federal government could help by cutting federal mandates. Higher levels of government have gotten into the habit that they know better than the locals what's good for them. Clinton was responsible for a lot of new mandates, but Republicans share the blame.

And this is the issue..first the states are already over extended much of it by UNFUNDED federal mandates..often the ones that were funded had the funds cut..

But just as the state budgets have alot of waste so does the federal . We are paying for so much junk science and governmental pay offs to contractors it is a sin

The problem is the feds cut the funding but not the federal taxes ...so the state has to raise taxes for things that we are still being taxed for at the federal level..The states can not continue to raise taxes and drive businesses away (ask NY about that) but the loss of funds for mandated spending makes it necessary to get money from somewhere

Look at your phone bill or cable bill or electric bill.Look at the fees..we pay 40 or 50 dollars a month on them ...

Washington need to remove all state mandates and allow states to determine for themselves what programs they want to have..there should be no more federal money going to States..(look at the big dig)

Cut all the state money out of the federal budget and them cut the taxes that funded them..then let the state raise the state taxes as they need it for the programs that THEY want, not the one the Feds want..allow the "free market" to work in states ..

[George W. Bush]

The other problem is that states, when times were good, foolishly increased spending on social programs above practical rates.

This is the real problem. You should have seen what my state, supposedly a die-hard conservative bastion, did with huge gobs of money. They spent like drunken sailors. And they seeded a lot of worthless programs. Even last year, with shortfalls evident, they expanded state spending by another 5%. So, screw them.

I sit on a local education board. At next month's meeting, I will be cheering the anticipated cuts in our own funding of 15%-25% from the state, which is over half our entire budget. You ought to see how they spend it! A pack of pocket-picking liberals who never met a tax they didn't like but all claim to be conservative. The only discipline they'll understand is when the money spigot gets turned off and they're forced to look at what they actually deliver that is of any value whatsoever.

Bring on the cuts. They're way overdue.

I think the rest of the states are just as bad, many of them even worse.

Federal loan guarantees to states that implement fiscal discipline in spending.

What? Nuts to this. They'll take the money and squander it and come back for more or just leave their federal loan problem to their successors. No, this pain cannot be stalled. And it is a distinctly bad idea to teach the states to run to Sugar Daddy all the time.

Furthermore, with the federal government anticipating large deficits, this would allow various truly irresponsible states to socialize the costs of their wild spending. States like California and New York need to be slapped hard and understand that the business cycle has not been repealed.


For conservatives, the present crisis in state spending can only be a good thing. People will finally have to look at what all that money goes for. And a lot of it is worthless. More than that, it actually weakens the overall economy to have so many jobs dependent on worthless and unnecessary services. It masks the real efficiency of economic performance.

[George W. Bush]

bump to your remarks.

And how about all these unnecessary city and state projects for unnecessary stadiums and convention centers? How about the armies of education consultants? I think we ought to just send the grief counselors we hired to console the legislators and tell them to get on with life.

These damned state governors are the last people Bush should listen to. They ignored every call to rein in spending and bragging to us about every dollar they wasted helping us so, since they've made their bed, let's just let them lie in it. It's way overdue.

[Contra]

Yeah, the federal government is obligated to bail the states out for their fiscal irresponsibility. This is about a mayor, not a governor, but it shows the arrogance. Mayor Martin O'Malley of Baltimore, MD claims he has spent $11 million dollars on Homeland Security and "only" been reimbursed by the feds for $1 million. Him and his former police chief have been heavily criticizing President Bush every chance they get for not giving them more money and not making the homeland safe enough, etc. He even did the Democratic radio response one Saturday that was a total hit piece against the President. You know, the typical liberal democratic line of BS. Now if I'm President Bush I don't give O'Malley anything after this, in fact, I look for ways to screw him over. I hope President Bush uses reward and punishment the same way Clinton did and screws the Democrats good. My guess is he plays that game very well.

[RnMomof7]

The cuts have to be all around I am sick of the waste and political payoffs....

[backhoe]

they've made their bed, let's just let them lie in it

I absolutely agree- we are in the process of recalling Brunswick's Mayor and 4 of the 5 city commissioners, in part because they spent like a bunch of drunk sailors, increased the city payroll from 320 to 420 employees ( this in a town of 16,000 which is losing population almost daily... ) and acted like arrogant pr!cks while it was happening.

They need to learn how to cut spending, just like any family or business would have to do during lean times- not stick a hand in the pocket of another group of taxpayers...

[WaterDragon]

The only way to teach states economic responsibility is by forcing them to live with the consequences of irresponsibility.

The same as for individuals.

[Willie Green]

Have state Governors forgotten how to govern without the assistance of Big Federal Daddy?

Governors = spineless piglets sucking at the federal teat.

[FITZ]

"Telling an elderly woman that she's going to have to cut her blood pressure medication in half - that hurts her. I'm not willing to hurt her."

Then don't make the cut there. Cut the waste in schools, or cut the costs of providing care to all the unmarried women having many babies who could work if they wanted. Or cut salaries of the state employees. It's up to the governors and states to find where their cuts need to be.