From CAPITOLWIRE:
After nearly eight hours of mostly partisan-fueled debate, the House GOP budget was passed on to the Senate by a vote of 109-92.
House Bill 1485 would keep funding at $27.3 billion – the spending level proposed in Gov. Tom Corbett’s budget – but shifts money around through various cuts and restorations.
Two Republican representatives – Dennis O’Brien and John Taylor, both of Philadelphia – were the only two Republicans to vote no on the largely party-line vote.
Throughout the afternoon and evening, Democrats argued that the Legislature is sitting on a nearly $1 billion surplus, which they say should be used to offset some of the cuts in the House GOP budget bill.
As of April, Pennsylvania has recorded a $505.9 million revenue surplus. House Democrats argue that surplus can also be expected next fiscal year, so the revenue surplus available to the state when budgeting for the coming fiscal year is $1 billion.
House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, R-Allegheny, and his Republican colleagues said that the “so-called surplus” is not reliable revenue, but “revenue overestimates.” He said that money should instead be saved for pending state liabilities, such as the billions in looming state employee pension payments and repayment of borrowed federal funds for Pennsylvania’s unemployment system.
Appropriations Committee Majority Chairman Bill Adolph, R-Delaware, said the House GOP budget is “a responsible effort to set priorities and live within our means.”
He added: “There’s more state tax dollars being spent this year than last year.”
During debate, House Minority Leader Frank Dermody, D-Allegheny, said: “I assure you we are the ‘party of no’ on this budget.”
“They passed a bad budget,” he said after the vote. “They robbed Peter to pay Paul.”
House Appropriations Minority Chairman Joe Markosek, D-Allegheny, stressed that the surplus should be used to offset the cuts.
“If you wanna hurt the most people in the Commonwealth, just use House Bill 1485,” Markosek said on the floor. “…Particularly when we’re sitting on $1 billion.”
Democratic Caucus Chairman Dan Frankel, D-Allegheny, said the budget was based on a “right-wing think tank in Washington D.C.,” alluding to a no-tax pledge Gov. Tom Corbett signed with the Americans for Tax Reform.
He also said the budget was based on “rhetoric and right-wind ideology.” He added that it was “mean-spirited” for Republicans to not use the potential $1 billion surplus.
After many Democratic criticisms of the bill, Turzai challenged the Democrats to propose an alternative budget.
“It’s easy to say that it’s not a good proposal. Where’s the alternative? What tax do you want to increase? Where would you specifically put the money? …Who are you taking the money from and what are you doing responsibly?”
Minority Whip Mike Hanna, D-Clinton, said Turzai’s “clever procedural maneuvers” prevented the bill from being recommitted to the Appropriations Committee, where Democrats said they would have proposed changes.
Because of the “maneuvers,” Hanna said: “We were stopped from using the billion dollar surplus…to reduce the pain of unnecessary cuts to state programs.”
Historically, House members have offered their amendments to the budget bill – sometimes hundreds of amendments – on the House floor. Only about a dozen amendments were drafted to the bill by the end of last week, with only four of them authored by House Democrats. On Monday evening when those amendments could have been debated, Democrats made several procedural motions but did not seek to have any amendments considered.
Reps. Scott Conklin, D-Centre, and Mike Sturla, D-Lancaster, said during Tuesday’s debate that Democrats wanted to recommit the bill, but debate was cut short Monday.
One Republican legislator said the cuts in the House budget did not go far enough.
Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, R-Butler, said cuts were made with a “butter knife,” but he said he would have taken a “meat cleaver” approach to making cuts.
This set off a rare moment of reaching across the aisle during debate, when Rep. Mark Cohen, D-Philadelphia, said he would prefer the House Bill 1485 if Metcalfe’s “meat cleaver” approach was the alternative. However, Cohen did say there was no alternative to the Adolph bill, so he urged Democratic colleagues to vote no.
Rep. Tony DeLuca, D-Allegheny, said some of the budget cuts would have ramifications that will cost the state in the long run. He said the budget would continue to put the burden on the middle class.
Recognizing that the House bill was “not perfect,” Rep. Gordon Denlinger, R-Lancaster, called it “cautious,” given we are in a period of slow economic growth.
Rep. Scott Petri, R-Bucks, said it would be more effective to give supplemental appropriations than to factor $1 billion in possible surplus funding into the budget.
Regarding supplemental appropriations, Sturla said: “the damage would be done.”
Markosek concurred, saying a supplemental appropriation would be “an admission” that the money was available and Republicans would be “just covering their tracks.”
Supplemental appropriations – spending that is added back into the previous year’s budget, even though it is passed a year later as part of the next state budget – have been regularly used by governors and state lawmakers to address funding needs later in the fiscal year. During Gov. Ed Rendell’s eight years in office, supplemental appropriations averaged around $300 million.
Republicans and Democrats debated the merits of the bill’s $243 million restoration to pre-K-12 spending and $377 million to higher education. For a Capitolwire story on the House GOP’s education appropriations, CLICK HERE.
Democrats blamed Republicans for not restoring enough money to basic and higher education, while Republicans maintained that they allotted more money to basic education than has ever been done before.
Turzai said the budget allocates $300 million more to higher education and $600 million more to basic education than last year’s budget.
Regardless, Rep. Steve Samuelson, D-Northampton, said cuts to education are “unacceptable” and “too deep,” claiming that Republicans “are still voting for 83 percent” of Corbett’s cuts.
Dermody said the House Republican budget was balanced “on the backs of our children.”
Turning the lens to the Democrats, Rep. Mario Scavello, R-Monroe, said that Democrats have previously sent bills to the Senate that cut funding to higher education.
Rep. Thomas Killion, R-Delaware, cited the fact that House Bill 1485 increases commitment to basic education over what former-Gov. Rendell, whom he qualified as the “self-proclaimed education governor,” did.
Some Democrats discussed the connection between cuts to education funding and increased spending on corrections.
Finance Committee Minority Chairwoman Phyllis Mundy, D-Luzerne, said that investments in education result in savings in the corrections system. She said that increasing money for state corrections, while reducing funding to education was “the epitome of pennywise and pound foolish.”
Citing his support for spending more money on education and less on corrections, Urban Affairs Committee Minority Chairman Curtis Thomas, D-Philadelphia, said he would rather “send some young people to Yale rather than jail.”
Appropriating $10.7 billion to the Department of Public Welfare, the House bill would hike agency spending by $368 million, a one percent increase from their current budget. Corbett’s proposal allotted $470 million more.
For a story on the House GOP’s funding shifts in the Department of Welfare, CLICK HERE.
Dermody said that the cuts to welfare meant saying no to various groups and provisions, including disabled adults and children and to health care for the working poor.
Turzai said the House GOP’s plan increases public welfare spending. The Republicans are “focusing on real responsible investments in our citizens while respecting our taxpayers who are footing the bill,” he said.
Looking ahead, House Democratic leaders said they will reach out to colleagues in the Senate.
On the June 30th deadline – a goal set by Corbett and Republican leaders – Dermody said: “I don’t think it’s going to be as easy as it sounds.”
“If the Senate follows the pattern of the past, they’ll send something over here three days before it’s due and adjourn,” Markosek said. “Good, bad or indifferent. No matter how good or bad it is.”
When asked whether the June 30 deadline will end up work against the House Republicans, Dermody said, “We’ll see what happens.”
