Government Executive - Authors - Jason Dick

With budget cake, Americans want to have it, eat it, too

Jason Dick — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 00:00:00 -0400

Americans are pretty clear: They want their state governments to balance their own budgets without help from the federal government. Just don't expect them to be clear about how.

The results of the latest Society for Human Resource Management/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll, conducted with the Pew Research Center, show a solid majority favor state governments raising state taxes or cutting state services over using federal funds to help them meet their budgets. But when presented with options on how to do so, the public doesn't like any of the above.

Fifty-eight percent of those surveyed said the better way to address the problem of states balancing their budgets is to raise taxes or cut services, while 26 percent said the feds should step in, even if it meant adding to the deficit. Sixteen percent couldn't answer the question, perhaps acknowledging the tough trade-off.

The implications of such opinions put members of Congress and other lawmakers in a pickle. If they accede to popular sentiment and don't provide federal funds to desperate states, they score one for the deficit-conscious. But what that would mean for the states is unpopular as well. When people were asked what their state governments should do to balance the budget, they offered no viable option.

"It's the American way, part of the reason we're in the situation we're in," said Scott Ellis, vice president for Taxpayers for Common Sense. "At the 10,000-foot level, everyone can agree that we need to make cuts. But when you look at the details, and the devil is always in the details, people can't come up with things to cut, and that translates very easily to lawmakers not taking action."

Take cutting funds for K-12 education. A whopping 73 percent were opposed to states cutting money for schools. How about cuts to money going to police, fire departments or other public safety officials? Nope. Seventy-one percent oppose that.

How about cutting healthcare services? Sorry, 65 percent oppose that. This one affects Capitol Hill, as state and national groups push the Senate to find a way to extend $24 billion in federal Medicaid assistance to states.

Thirty states have budgeted for the six-month increase, and without a guarantee in funding from Congress soon, state lawmakers might have to rewrite their budgets as many state fiscal years begin Thursday.

Let's move on to raising taxes. Another roadblock, with 58 percent opposed. What's left? In this survey, it was cutting funding for maintaining roads and public transportation. Half of those who responded didn't think that was a good idea, either, but 43 percent said they would favor that, the high-water mark in the poll for how to address the problem.

"In some ways, lawmakers have been doing a little of all of those already," said Todd Haggerty, policy associate at the National Conference of State Legislatures. "Most of the easy options are long gone. It's all tough choices now," he added.

Scott Pattison, executive director of the National Association of State Budget Officers, said "because this downturn in revenue has been so significant, you've done a lot already. All the low-hanging fruit is gone." He likened the situation in the states to what families face in making difficult budget choices. "If you've been unemployed for five months, then you've already sat down and made some painful choices. If you've been unemployed for two-and-a-half years, though, you're starting to tap into your kids' college funds and any other rainy day things. That's really where the states are. The actions they've taken are progressively harder. It's a zero-sum game."

The poll of 1,001 adults who were reached by landline or cell phone was conducted Thursday through Sunday. The margin of error is 4 points for the entire sample.

]]>

Protecting environment gets public support as priority

Jason Dick — Tue, 15 Jun 2010 00:00:00 -0400

President Obama is going to great lengths to show his administration's concern about the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, making multiple trips to the region and dedicating his first speech from the Oval Office to the topic.

He might find a receptive public, according to the latest Society for Human Resource Management/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll, conducted with the Pew Research Center.

Overall, 56 percent of those surveyed said "protecting the environment" should be the more important priority for U.S. energy policy over "keeping energy prices low." Thirty-seven percent said low prices should take precedence over the environment.

The margin is striking considering the economy has not fully recovered and gasoline prices usually spike during the summer travel season. But the scale of the spill might be driving opinions as oil washes up on Gulf beaches, the economic impact of the drop in tourism takes hold and the impact on the region's fisheries deepens. "What we're seeing in the Gulf is a catastrophe the likes of which we've never seen before," White House Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton said during his press gaggle on Air Force One en route to Gulfport, Miss., Monday morning.

The administration cast a bipartisan net Monday, as Obama toured Mississippi and Alabama while meeting with three Republican governors, Haley Barbour of Mississippi, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Bob Riley of Alabama, along with members of Congress from both parties: Reps. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., and Jo Bonner, R-Ala., and Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss.

"Folks around the table here have been working 24/7. The governors, they've been on a constant state of full alert and have been putting in a lot of time and a lot of energy working with Thad Allen to make sure that in dealing with this disaster, we are minimizing the short-term impacts, and we're making sure that we've got the resources to fully recover," Obama said in Gulfport.

Later on, he toured the Theodore Staging Facility in Theodore, Ala., telling oil boom repair workers there that "it's going to take a while" to clean up the oil spill. "We haven't seen anything like this before."

In his Oval Office speech, Obama "is going to talk directly with the American people about some of the steps that we've taken to stop the flow of oil into the Gulf, some of the things we've done to mitigate the damage that's caused by the oil that's spilled out already and what we're going to do moving forward here," according to Burton.

Along party lines, Democrats and independents are solidly behind the environment as a priority over keeping energy prices low. Sixty-eight percent of Democrats felt protecting the environment should be the top priority, and 59 percent of independents felt that way.

Among Republicans, 41 percent said protecting the environment should take precedence, while 52 percent said keeping prices low should be more important.

There is a gender gap here, too. Sixty percent of females rated the environment as more important, compared to 34 percent who said low prices were. Fifty-two percent of males surveyed said the environment should take precedence, compared to 39 percent who favor keeping prices low.

Still, by and large, the public is split on their attitudes about offshore drilling. When asked what should be U.S. policy toward offshore oil and gas drilling, 35 percent said the government should continue existing offshore drilling but ban new drilling, and 31 percent said the government should expand drilling, within the poll's 4-point error margin. Twenty-two percent said the government should ban all offshore drilling.

The poll of 1,010 adults who were reached by landline or cell phone was conducted Thursday through Sunday. The margin of error is 4 points for the entire sample, with larger error margins for subgroups.

]]>

Bush nominates former counterintelligence official as State IG

Jason Dick — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0400

President Bush has nominated Thomas Betro, director of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, to be State Department inspector general, a position roiled by controversy and turnover over the last year.

If confirmed, Betro would fill the slot of Howard Krongard, who resigned under fire in December, and take over for acting State IG Harold Geisel.

Betro, who was nominated Friday by Bush, has headed NCIS since 2006.

He first joined the agency -- popularized by the hit CBS crime drama starring Mark Harmon -- in 1982 and has been a "special agent afloat" on the USS John F. Kennedy and USS Enterprise, as well as assistant director of counterintelligence and deputy director of operations.

He also served a stint as deputy to the national counterintelligence executive and as acting national counterintelligence executive, according to his NCIS biography.

He has even had some fun with his NCIS position, making a cameo performance in an episode of "NCIS" last year, "Identity Crisis."

Betro takes over at a time of flux for the State IG's office. Before resigning last year, Krongard was hammered by Democrats for allegedly blocking investigations into State activities in Iraq and Afghanistan, including gun-running by security contractor Blackwater Worldwide. Blackwater is a major State Department contractor, having provided security details and other logistics. Krongard resigned after it was revealed that he had incorrectly stated that his brother, Alvin, was not affiliated with Blackwater.

Alvin Krongard had actually served on Blackwater's advisory board. A GAO report last fall said the IG's office had hired too many former State officials and that the office's budget was not keeping pace with demands. When Geisel stepped in as acting IG earlier this month, there was speculation the administration might keep him in place through the end of Bush's term in January. He replaced a Krongard deputy, William Todd, who left to become ambassador to Brunei. Geisel previously had served as acting State IG in 1994, deputy inspector general, and worked under former State Department IG Sherman Funk.

]]>