According to state government itself, Illinois’ most recent
spending plan is yet another in an unfortunate string of unbalanced budgets.
State lawmakers have not passed a truly balanced budget since at least 2001.
In the preliminary official statement to potential bond buyers dated Aug. 16,
the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget, or GOMB, notes the fiscal year
2019 budget is out of balance by $1.2 billion. Furthermore, the report states,
“The State provides no assurances as to how, when or in what form this
structural deficit might be addressed.” The statement was released as part of
the state’s plan to sell over $920 million in new general obligation bonds.
The Illinois Policy Institute projected the General Assembly’s spending plan was
out of balance by as much as $1.5 billion shortly after the bill was made
public.
On May 30, state senators cast their votes on the 1,245-page bill less than five
hours after it was made public. The measure passed by a vote of 56-2. On May 31,
the Illinois House of Representatives approved the fiscal year 2019 spending
bill by a 97-18 margin. The spending plan received significant support from
Democrats and Republicans in both chambers.
Because the General Assembly never adopted a revenue estimate – as required by
the Illinois Constitution and state law – and because the budget is out of
balance despite a constitutional balanced budget requirement, the measure should
not really be considered a budget: It is simply a spending plan.
Lawmakers also took no action to address the two primary factors leading to the
state’s near-junk credit rating: a massive backlog of unpaid bills, which stands
at nearly $8 billion as of Aug. 20, and roughly $130 billion in unfunded pension
liabilities.
To make the budget appear balanced on paper, lawmakers relied on a number of
common but deceptive budget gimmicks, including:
-
Ignoring a potential $412 million in automatic raises for
government union workers resulting from a contract dispute between Gov.
Bruce Rauner and the state’s largest employee union, the American Federation
of State, County and Municipal Employees

-
Counting on $300 million in revenue from divesting the
James R. Thompson Center – planned for the third year in a row – despite no
concrete signs of progress in selling the building
-
Sweeping and borrowing $800 million from other state funds,
in violation of good budgeting practices
-
Using accounting methods that mask the true size of
deficits
-
Counting on around $422 million in pension savings that are
entirely speculative
[to top of second column] |

The speculative pension savings are based on a good
policy solution – pension buyouts – but are uncertain to create the
expected savings in the first year. GOMB Director Hans Zigmund
relayed this in a recorded message to investors, saying, “While
these buyout programs have yet to be implemented, it is expected to
create savings for the state in the long term.” Zigmund added,
“[T]he state can provide no assurance as to the amount of savings
actually realized from the implementation of such programs.”
A better path forward
Taxpayers don’t need to settle for a false choice between bad
budgets and no budgets at all.

Illinois lawmakers have proved time and again they cannot exercise
fiscal restraint or meet the existing balanced budget requirement on
their own. To fix this problem, Illinois should adopt a spending cap
amendment to the Illinois Constitution that ties lawmakers’ ability
to spend money to taxpayers’ ability to pay for it.
A spending cap is a commonsense solution that received bipartisan
support in the General Assembly in 2018. Proposed amendments would
cap annual increases in general funds spending to the 10-year
average growth rate in the state’s per capita GDP.
It is too late for a constitutional amendment to save this year’s
budget, and a constitutional amendment cannot be placed on the
ballot until the next general election in 2020. However, lawmakers
can always voluntarily adopt a spending cap as a budgeting principle
for next year. In the long run, a spending cap could help the state
get out of debt, build a rainy day fund to save for recessions, and
eventually cut taxes.
Click here to respond to the editor about this article

 |