SHARE THIS SHOW:
RELATED CONVERSATIONS:
RECENTLY ON TOL:
TOL Our Town
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
TAGS:
Economists may tell you the recession is lifting, but you'd never be able to tell in Oregon. The latest forecast says that the state is more than a half billion dollars short for the current budget cycle. Governor Ted Kulongoski has asked all state agencies how they would cut nine percent out of their budgets. The Department of Corrections proposed closing three prisons — something the governor said he would not accept. However, the biggest cuts will be felt by schools and human services.
In the case of the Department of Human Services, some cuts are off the table, like the ones that get matching funds from the federal government. A spokewoman at DHS says the agency has been very disciplined staying within its budget and weathering a variety of cuts — along with increasing demand — over the last two years. But, she said, this mandated nine percent cut was simply too big to be able to hold many vulnerable Oregonians who depend on their services harmless.
Do your children go to public school? How will your school be affected? Do you rely on regular help from Project Independence or other program for people who are elderly or disabled? What are your biggest concerns about the proposed cuts?
GUESTS:
- May Corp: Oregon Project Independence client
- Bruce Goldberg: Director of the Oregon Department of Human Services and the Oregon Health Authority
- Peter Courtney: Senate President, co-chair of the Emergency Board
- Max Williams: Director of the Oregon Department of Corrections
- Scott Herbert: Co-owner of AquaCare + Critter Hut in Pendleton
- Greg Thede: Superintendent at the Klamath County School District
Tagged as: budget cuts · corrections · economy · education · human services
Photo credit: viZZZual.com / Creative Commons
-
(Yes, I know that as far as the Beltline issue is concerned, some people would argue that that ship has sunk. There is, however, a petition being prepared to place it on the Ballot for a popular vote.)
-
The Oregon Hunger Task Force is deeply concerned that proposed state budget cuts to human service programs will make Oregon’s hunger problem worse. Oregon ranked second in the nation (behind Mississippi and just ahead of Maine, Oklahoma, and Missouri) for a high percentage of residents who experience hunger. Households are reducing the size of meals or skipping meals entirely, sometimes going without food for whole days.
The nine percent across-the-board budget cuts may seem like a fair process but will impact Oregonians with low incomes disproportionately because the majority of Oregon’s safety net services reside within two state agencies: the Department of Human Services and Oregon Housing and Community Services. As a state, we already have a large number of people struggling with an unemployment rate over 10 percent and are among the highest states for both hunger and homelessness.
There are other options the State of Oregon could consider as it seeks to balance its budget. For example, Congress should be urged to extend stimulus funds for medical care for the poor, the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program, and support for school budgets. At the state level, the corporate tax rebate (“Kicker”) may kick-in because the projection was low--these dollars could help fill the budget hole. Oregon could also re-evaluate the tax breaks it gives away which now exceed spending in human services, education and public safety combined.
More info on hunger in Oregon: www.oregonhunger.org
-
Well, how much of the money that goes to Oregon Hunger Task Force pays for overhead? Are you taking a salary cut? Perhaps if OHTF didn't give aid to every undocumented person residing in Oregon, regardless of need, there would be more funds available for those that actually need it.
What is your definition of hunger? I can't find on your web site exactly what you consider "hunger" or "food insecurity". If the criteria is "involuntarily missed a meal in that last 30 days" that could cover 90% of the state.
What happens to your job if we do get everyone off of assistance? Don’t you have a vested interest in continuing to make people dependent upon your services? A social welfare program that is successful and actually gets people off public assistance would go out of business. Social workers must keep people in their case loads or they won’t have jobs.
Cuts to social welfare programs are not only appropriate but necessary. You don’t improve someone’s budgeting skills by giving them more money to waste. So, when can we expect to see the press release announcing the voluntary reduction in wages for you and your staff?
-
Some proposed cuts seem so Draconian as to implore, let alone invite, the Legislature to step in. Telling a frail octogenarian that we'll continue to pay for a caregiver to cook her meals but from now on she has to go to the market to buy the food? That would quick likely hasten her transfer to a more expensive assisted living of skilled nursing facility — except the reduced Medicaid reimbursement rates may mean that not only would no more beds be available, some current residents are likely to be thrown out. What's next, cutting a deal with Alaska and renting ice floes?
-
Americans have been living a fantasy for the past 4 decades, an unsustainable lifestyle largely predicated on cheap made foreign made goods paid for by borrowing and flooding the globe with dollars. The nanny state ideas of LBJ and Nixon and every president and Congress elected since 1965 are finally so thoroughly ingrained in the minds of Americans that the idea of taking care of their own problems and their own families with their own resources is now anathema. No one wants to take care of grannie, not if they can get the Govt using tax revenues to do it for them.
Well, folks, now we have to pay the piper. The cash box has been emptied and those cheap made goodies from overseas have just gone up and guess what? Those same goods had a cost that no one considered until recently..that cost was to send those jobs (and payroll taxes they generated for the nanny state) to some other country.
Now the family is stuck with feeding grannie and buying her medications and they are angry, dazed and and confused and have no idea what hit them. Well, reality has set in. What the hell did Americans expect?? Trying to run the world on an empty treasury? Of course Govt at all levels are going broke! THERE ARE NO GOOD JOBS LEFT IN THIS NATION TO SUPPORT THE TAX BASE REQUIRED FOR NANNY STATE ENTITLEMENTS. The baton has been passed to Asia.
-
The state needs to cut 9%, because they have taken in less taxes, because PEOPLE ARE OUT OF WORK or not making as much as the state forecasted.
If the people of the state are struggling, why should we care if the government has to do some belt tightening?
I suppose the irony of the way the system works would be when more people need state support the state has less to work with.
-
Sorry if I keep bring up the question of our hugely popular wars (2 or 3, is it now) to keep Israel's aggressions safe from retaliation. Then there is a border our Govt (busy in the mideast) hasn't the resources or will to guard. That means the unemployed of nearly all of central America will continue flooding in taking jobs and receiving every possible benefit paid for by our taxes. Yes, I know these comments are forbidden and unPC. But while I am at it, I should mention again that the trillion bucks the wars have cost as of today would, if spent in the US, just repairing our crumbling infrastructure (with US citizens being the employed) do much to lift employment and payroll taxes. Thus passing more money to state and local Govt to misspend.
Or how about ending foreign aid?? With the growing hardship we find here at home, does continuing to misspend billions on foreign aid make any sense? Especially when its major effect is to create foreign competition for jobs we badly need here.
But, of course, these comment defy the spirit of infinite liberalism that makes America famous. Nearly as famous as our carefully balancing strategy of unending warfare helping hold down global populations.
Our country and our finances are so atrociously mismanaged, that finding local solutions to budget shortfalls against the background of Federal waste is Mission Impossible.
-
Well I may be wrong here but I think you are comparing apples to Volkswagens...
The Federal Government is allowed to run in the red (national debt) whereas Oregon, by it's own constitution and Federal Law cannot run in the negative numbers during it's bi-annual budget,
I do concur the Feds waste Lots of money and I Mean LOTS!
A good point you do raise is when people think of federal money as free money - For example during these cuts agencies were told NOT to cut anything that gets matching Federal funds. I pay federal taxes too, and would like to see the wasteful spending stop on a national and state level
-
In a Popularity Contest it is easy to be Santa Claus...it is much harder being Scrooge. We have ease in dreaming up expensive generous spending programs. But we have major dysfunction in belt tightening, taxing and revenue generation programs.
But an across the board 9% cut sounds simple, fair and efficacious it loses one thing that the whole legislative process and democratic process worked hard to achieve: PRIORITIES. This will generate some tragic and possible fatal stories. Dickens would have a field day.
-
The problem is every program of Govt expenditure can be justified and always is. Every cent spent has a recipient and powerful proponants. In a nation that has grown used to passing all major expenses to Govt and with all budgeted programs now necessary finding ways of cutting these out or back is politically very tough.
In a word, we have been spoiled by about 50 years of unprecedented affluence. But now the real world is being encountered for the first time by generations who have come to look upon good times as their natural due. Fiscal retreat to sustainable budget levels is the most serious challenge facing a Govt that has forgotten the art of prioritizing and defending hard choices.
-
What I find annoying about the proposed budget cuts is that there is no apparent corresponding push to increase revenues so as to minimize these cuts.
In principle, I believe that any budget shortfall should be addressed with a balance of cuts & tax increases, so as to spread the burden fairly across all income groups.
It is grossly unfair to balance the budget on the backs of the most vulnerable citizens in the state. If there is a shortfall, all of us from the wealthiest on down should feel the pinch. Those at the bottom should be the last to be harmed instead of the first.
-
Tax increases will not raise revenue, this is flawed thinking.
Raising taxes will drive more business out of Oregon, cause more people to find loopholes in tax code, in short a 10% increase in taxes will not net a 10% increase in revenue.... It's too dynamic.
I agree spread the burden fairly, and stop hitting the successful so hard with high taxes.
-
Any really competent managment consultant specializing in organization and efficiency could probably find that about a third of all state and local expenditures have no utility whatever except for providing jobs to their administrartors. The biggest waste will be found in all the nanny type responsibilities the govt has assumed for people too selfish and/or lazy to handle themselves.
Not only have these tasks pushed up taxes, they have allowed Govt to poke its long nose into every aspect of our lives and has had as another even more pernicious effect, the destruction of the very fundament of any healthy society, functioning, cooperating familes.
-
One of the line items in the budget cuts for Seniors and People with Disabilities includes the draining the $12M from the Staley Settlement Fund. Up to this point, this fund has only paid out it's earned interest to the benefit of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. How does the state justify taking this money - hard won through the courts for an underserved population - and using it for the general fund - rather than allowing it to remain earmarked to benefit the people for whom the settlement addressed?
For those who do not know, the Staley settlement is the result of a class action suit brought by Karen Staley on behalf of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities to reduce the waiting list for services for adults. Oregon has chosen to provide more people with service -though not always enough to build a quality life - and reduce the waiting list to one of the shortest in the US. This will no longer be the case.
Joan
-
I'm still trying to figure out when care of our elderly parents and grandparents were shifted to the Almighty State? Isn't that one of the principle purposes of FAMILY?? To care for one another???
Okay, it is inconvenient. Some one has to stay home and help with that tiresome and often disagreeable chore. So, maybe less time in sports bars, or "hanging out" might be in order. Or (God Forbid) the spoiled brats take a a hand at caring for the aged members of the family. They can shoot a few less hoops and like dad spend less time hanging out.
-
I'm amazed that Oregonians have been so brainwashed that no one seems ever to challenge the TAX CREDITS that have been handed out to mostly the heavy hitters and connected rich people in this state. I've read that the TOTAL of these credits are greater than K-9, Higher Ed and The State Police! What a crock that is to assume we can support this largesse!
-
Here we go,
with the rich people aren't paying their fair share... Before you spout off What percent of the state population pays 50% of tax revenue?? Single digits - look it up.
My Salary of 410,000 is taxed to the state at 11% that's 45,119 I paid Oregon last year.
The median 2008 Household income was 50,800 - they pay 7% which is 3500 to the state.
So, I pay what 12.8 average households pay to the state, And I only make 8 time what the average household makes.
Tax Credits given to my Company (not me) are the only thing that keep me in Oregon, Cut the tax credit, and I move to Arizona, or Washington and the State loses all of the Jobs and all of the taxes the company, myself and it's employees pay.
Look big picture, the middle class is not carrying the bag alone.
-
I work in a small rural school district- we have one elementary, one middle, and one high school. My position was cut, along with six other teachers at the elementary school, and a few at the high school. This was before the 9% cuts. Our union just decided to cut 12 days from next year's calendar, and that still leaves a gap of around $150,000. We don't have reserves to cover it. The scariest part about this is that many, if not most, of the families that live in this area are currently in crisis. The individual attention these students were recieving will be drastically reduced. Children are extremely resillient, but I can't help but think that this only reinforces the vicious cycle of poverty that we are working so hard to end.
-Kerry
-
Cuts to in-home care are incredibly shortsighted and irrational. Where do people dependent on in-home care end up when that care ends? Emergency rooms and hospitals. The cost of maintaining someone in his or her home is a fraction of what it costs to maintain that person in a hospital bed. The state might save a little money this year only to find itself in a much deeper hole next year.
-
Where are the families?? Since when did the elderly and dependent become wards of the Govt? I don't understand when and why Americans surrendered their personal responsibilities for their family members to the Govt to care for with tax money coerced from the general public? When did this become acceptable AND expected? No wonder taxes are so high and shortfalls so huge.
-
Both my husband and myself are disabled, and you would not believe how much useless mail we get, separately but identically, from DHS. The average content of the mail is a three to four page, usually purposeless as far as we are concerned, and the same from month to month. Why not send mail when there is a change, rather than repeating status quo statements? Three of the letters we receive tell us, month after month, that we "owe 0.00". How much money could be painlessly snipped from the budget?
-
An across the board cut is just too egregious an action even with the set asides for public safety to consdier at this time. What options do we have?
Can we count on the federal government to rescue us?
-
No, I don't think so. Last time I looked the guvmint were too busy trying to rule the world to have much time for one particular nation's problems....this one, I mean. At best all they will do is print up a few more boxcar's full of devalued dollars and ship those West. Meanwhile they keep borrowing from China to finance the Israel First wars.
-
The personal side of the reason I'm posting all sorts of quesitons about the budget issues for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
My son, 21 years old, who experiences many labels (autism, Down syndrome, nonverbal, celiac disease) is attending his last day of a "Free and Appropriate Education" today. This education has been compromised not only by a district whose systems are 15 years behind the current best practices for students similar to my son, but has been battling budget cuts since the day he entered Early intervention services 21 years ago.
As he enters adult hood, he is fortunate to already be served by a Medicaid Waiver to assist with his supports through the brokerage system (fiscal intermediary for Medicaid Waivers). However, any of his classmates who have not completed this process will leave school with NO additional supports.
The burden placed on families is high. I've not been able to work as a "traditional employee" due to the needs of my son and the need to advocate and support his schooling. Therefore, I earn approximately 50% of my potential - if that. Families whose children do not have supports will not be able to work at all.
Yes, we have some tough decisions to make.
Barbara Robers was right when we passed Measure 5 - an abysmal mistake - that this would lead to the destruction of the human services system.
-
Measure 5 was a mistake that could have been avoided if anyone had looked over the border to California and Prop 13. We now need to figure out how to fix it so we don't go bankrupt like California.
Funneling the “kicker” back to the schools may help our future. The children going through school now are the future and if we do not change it we will always be feeding the prison system.
-
Why isn't the state talking about cuts to the agriculture grant system? Oh, because that doesn't scare the taxpayers into agreeing to increases. The state could lift the property tax exemption for food packing facilities.
The point here is all we ever hear about is cuts to services for the disadvanataged or vulnerable populations. We never hear about all of the other programs the state funds that aren't as heart tugging. There is plenty of excess in the state budget that could be pared down and allow these human service programs to continue to serve the deserving.
-
Spot on. I work in human services (not a state employee but rather an employee of an agency that contracts with the state - and produces better cheaper services than the state could ever manage I might add) and I get really tired of our services being prioritized in announced budget cut lists again and again simply because they appeal to people's emotions. My complaint here isn't that we face cuts (though that's of course not appealing) but that the campaigns for higher taxes manipulatively throw services like ours into the spotlight every time. It's disgusting and dishonest how the state promulgates the idea that every penny cut is food being stolen from the mouth of an eldery person, child, or person with a disability. Even more disgusting is that the folks in power will in fact take cut dollars to vulnerable populations before cutting the fat from their own bloated bureacracies.
By the way, I think maybe people might start talking about house bill 2009 passed without much public input last year. Guess what it does in the midst of a recession: create a giant new state agency. Wonder how much that's gonna cost?
-
When considering the 9% across the board cuts, why is no one up in arms and rejecting K-12 school cuts like they are rejecting the prison cuts? We are facing a graduation problem and this problem could be solved by throwing money at it not cutting from it. If you cut everything beyond reading, writing and math, students lose interest in school and tend to drop out. Oregon already has one of the shortest school years in the country and school districts are trying to cut more days. My child is in public school and her school is possibly on the chopping block.
-
These are difficult times - there is no way to get around that. When faced with a budget deficit of half a billion dollars we must remember the priorities of government - taking care of vulnerable populations and investing in the future for our communities.
Human services programs are about people - seniors, children, hard-working families. These programs (Employment Related Day Care is a great example) help keep families in the workforce so they can provide for their families and also provide living wage jobs to thousands of Oregonians in the public and private sector (home health care workers, health care providers etc). When we cut these programs, then, there is a ripple effect throughout the entire community.
Human services programs are also counter cyclical - when the economy is bad, caseloads rise. This is precisely how the programs are supposed to work so that we can provide for people in their times of crisis.
There is no easy solution but investing in the public structures that help everyday Oregonians must remain a top priority. Calling our federal delegation and supporting the FMAP, education and TANF extensions is the first step in helping our state. We must also take a broader look at the tax and revenue structure of our state and support a system that adequately provides for our citizens.
-
The above comment from Stephanie Tama-Sweet is right on the mark. I hope we can pull together as a nation and as state to take care of our critical needs. With about 93% of the General Fund budget in Oregon going to education, public safety, and human services, we are funding the basics. If we measure up to the challenge, we will do the right things.
-
Interesting that this discussion only includes one small buisness owner and everyone else cashes their paycheck from the State of Oregon.
-
Actually, it also included one older lady who is a client of one of the social programs under threat of reduction, but your point is otherwise spot-on and EXCELLENT!
-
There are two things that need to be considered. First we do not collect a large amount of money because of tax credits which are called expenditures. Those tax credits will continue because they are not addressed as part of the budget. All tax credits need to be prioritized so they are as valuable as the services that we want our citizens to have.
Second to the health benefits not costing state employees. Only if you are in Portland on the Providence Choice plan do you not have co pays that start to eat into the lower level employee's budget after taxes. Because the state choose to have a "manager" they have forced Portland area into their plan and consider the other statewide folks into what would otherwise be considered almost out of plan.
This is not management of health care benefits when different copays are charged to employees. The largest percentage of employees work in Salem though many commute from the Portland area.
Check it out on the Providence Health Plan website. There is Providence State Wide and there is Providence Choice. The only other choice is Kaiser which in Salem requires trips to Portland for many services.
But first of all, bring up the tax credits. Do people really need to have a refund for buying an energy saving refrigerator when they need a new one? They are common on the market. It is no longer a needed incentive.
And do diesel engines need to be subsidized when the Federal government is requiring higher standards in place I believe this year.
Tax expenditures over the years have grown so much that they match and I imagine this year will cost more than the general fund.
-
The oregon state legislator has held education hostage and extorted money from oregonians for decades. wasnt it nessassary to pass 66 and 67 to avoid this?
The state legislatur has constantly raised taxes for this or that and then used the money for whatever they like, with no accountabillity.
Eoyees should take a 9% cut with everyone else.
I would say anyone who has been in the oregon legislature for more than 4 years should been thrown out. they have completely miss handle the state and its assets. Even if someone was against some thing and didn't vote for it they should have stood up and said something and made it clear what was happening and brought us to this point.
-
First we need to address the non collection of taxes owed because of our healthy tax credit system. We give away almost as much money in tax credits as we collect for the general fund through the income tax. These credits are not officially part of the budget. We should ask the legislature if they come into special session to suspend all but the most needed for the common good.
Next, regarding the comment about the health benefits not requiring co-pays the person needs to look at both the Providence Choice and the Providence Statewide Plan.
The Providence Choice is for those people residing in the Portland area. Providence has its system in place and those on the Choice Plan are forced into the Providence system.
For the Providence Statewide there are substanial co-pays that will become problematic for those employees on the lower end of the pay scale.
The only other choice is the Kaiser Plan which doesn't work outside of Portland without having to go to Portland for many services.
The PEEB board made the choice to have a medical manager but I don't think they realized that just because employees are in Salem and live in Salem they would have to pay more for the same services out of pocket than those in Portland because in fact Providence just added those Portland folk to their plan and their panel of doctors.
Don't take it out on the employees who are already on wage freeze.
Really look at the number and variety of tax credits that have eaten up money not for the common good but to subsidize buying refrigerators, building wind farms and replacing diesel engines which would have had to be replaced anyway because of Federal clean air regulations.
Keep the good tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit which helps struggling families.
-
I moved up from Southern Oregon (Grants Pass) in August of 2007 due to a serious lack of employment and deteriorating schools. I wanted my children to have the best possible education and also for better economic opportunities for my whole family. Long story short here. The country soon followed the way of Grants Pass regarding employment and foreclosures ( I'm still trying to sell our house) I obtained work last January 2009 with the state, but lost my job due to budget cuts and no seniority (I was just 3 days shy of my 6 month probation!) My wife found work as a special ed assit with McMinnville schools this last fall (where we now live), but her paycheck does not even cover our rent!
I have been looking for almost a year now for full time employment. It is not right that working people suffer when the state cuts jobs. When I lost my job it was made known to myself and other staff people where I worked that the governor exempted himself, his staff, and the legislature from any pay cuts! My former boss ( who has worked for the state for almost 25 years) took a 20% pay cut as a result of a pay freeze and furlough days!
I also get very angry that people who can afford to get along perfectly well without the "kicker" refund are the loudest to scream when the talks turns to eliminating this sacred cow. I also get mad at the rich when they squak about taxes! It's very fair and downright logical; if you have a high income then you should pay more in taxes! Spare me the arguments of "leaving Oregon and taking your jobs with you" Pay your fair share or leave Oregon! Grants Pass was infamous for having the California retirees come to this state with their suitcases full of money and then vote against every tax, or levy that was proposed to save or fund basic services for everyone i.e. schools, libraries, parks, roads, police and fire, etc. My family and I had to deal with that attitude for eighteen years!
The Oregon legislature also needs to wake up and stop letting the rich, corporate types exploit the lenient tax systems that are in place and attempt to repeal the recent measures (67& 68) that sought reform and equity in the system.
-John
-
I do pay more taxes,
Enjoy your unemployment and other welfare benefits -
Courtesy of guys like me. Whiners like you will remain on the bottom rung for a reason.
Cheers
-
Comments are now closed.
If the State budget is being subjected to a 9% cut -- supposedly across the board -- will that affect the salary of our lame-brain (oops...lame duck) governor and the other elected officials, or will it just apply to career people working for the state...police, fire, teachers, etc.?
It seems to me that if he is going to impose across the board cuts, he should feel the pain of the rest of the state workers and take a cut, too.
(And how will this 9% cut affect his pet projects, such as the back-room deal that slapped Randy Pape's name on Beltline, despite the fact that NOBODY in Lane county -- save for his family -- wanted the name change!)