Fitzsimon File

The Senate gave tentative approval to its budget Wednesday afternoon that spends less on education, children’s health care, and other human service programs than the House spending plan, as Senators chose tax cuts over making larger investments in the state’s future.

With one notable exception, the floor debate was more backslapping and self-congratulations than meaningful policy discussion. All but two Republicans joined with the Senate’s 31 Democrats in supporting the budget and listening to the debate made you wonder if the chamber would break out in a verse of Kumbaya before the day was over.

Democrats and Republicans even voted together to remove the most progressive proposal in the budget, a plan by Senator Martin Nesbitt to allow three needle exchange pilot programs to reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS.

Nesbitt pointed out that the National Institutes of Health issued a consensus opinion that needle exchange programs not only reduce the HIV infection rate, they also increase the number of people in drug treatment because addicts establish relationships with the professionals in the exchange programs. The HIV/AIDS infection rate in North Carolina is increasing 20 percent a year and many of the new infections can be traced back to IV drug use.

No matter. Senate Majority Leader Tony Rand rose to endorse an amendment by Senator Steve Goss to remove the needle exchange programs from the budget and then Senator Jim Forrester, a doctor who should know better, told his colleagues that the programs “send the wrong message” and encourage risky behavior.  Better to just tell drug addicts to stop using drugs than help them protect themselves and their unknowing sexual partners.

The needle exchange provision was taken out of the budget on a 39-10 vote with Republican Stan Bingham and Democratic Senators Atwater, Cowell, Dannelly, Foriest, Graham, Jones, Kinnaird, and McKissick showing the political courage to join Nesbitt in putting people’s lives ahead of political considerations.

The Senate budget does make some important investments in education, economic development and the state’s infrastructure. It provides a 5 percent raise for teachers, a 4 percent pay hike for state employees. Need based financial aid at UNC campuses gets a big boost, as does the Clean Water Management Trust Fund.

But when you compare the Senate budget to the House plan in how they treat people who are struggling in the state, the Senate comes up short almost every time. The House expands children’s health care, the Senate authorizes a study.

The Senate finds $10 million for the Disadvantaged School Supplemental Fund, the House budget has $20 million. The Senate spends $2.1 million for 42 school nurses, the House has $4 million for 80 new nurses. The Senate allocates $14 million next year for the Housing Trust Fund, the House $15.5 million.

The Senate spends $8 million less on mental health services than the House. (Tuesday’s Fitzsimon File mistakenly said the Senate budget increased mental health funding more than the House.)

That was the theme of the day, Senators hailing the progress for the state made by a budget that invests less than the House plan in almost every important area. All so Senators could cut taxes and produce what Republican Senator and 2008 gubernatorial candidate Fred Smith said was the best budget he has seen since he came to the General Assembly.

Smith hailed the tax cuts in particular and said they made the state more competitive and improved the business climate, a view shared by Senate Democratic leaders. The Senate’s choice of tax cuts over children’s health care comes on the heels of a poll of 300 manufacturing companies by the North Carolina Chamber that found 73 percent of them thought the cost of doing business in North Carolina was either the same or better than in other states.

But what do business leaders know about the cost of doing business? Facts are sometimes not part of legislative budget debates and in one case Wednesday, neither was reality.

Budget Co-Chair Kay Hagan responded to criticisms that the Senate budget process was closed and secret, shutting out most Senators, much less the media and the public. Hagan said the corner room in which a handful of Senate leaders wrote the budget was “open morning, noon and night and on weekends and we didn’t see a lot of people.”

Hagan must think that a meeting doesn’t have to be announced or listed on any calendar to be considered open. You just have to find it. Imagine the money that can be saved as we eliminate all legislative calendars, emails, websites, and other schedules of meetings.  

Maybe the savings can help fill some of the holes in the Senate budget, and pay for some of the services not provided to children, families, and the mentally ill.

 

 Email This Post  Print This Post

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 30th, 2007 at 5:37 pm and is filed under Fitzsimon File. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.