Hang in there, friend. Just a few more days and the mud-slinging will end, the votes will be counted – and Coloradans can again rue the fact that we’ve gone through another expensive and exhausting election without addressing the real issues facing our state.
We have been bombarded with photos of Angie Paccione doctored to show her with really bad hair and similar nonsense on the airwaves. But we’ve heard very little about the issue DU environmental law professor Jay Tutchton raised in Friday’s Denver Post: “The Census Bureau projects another 1.5 million Coloradans by 2030.”
Inevitably, most of those new Coloradans will crowd into the Front Range metroplex that already houses 85 percent of us. They will strain our water resources and further burden our crumbling highways. But have you seen any political ads talking about water or transportation?
Anyone? Anyone?
One man who has been hard at work on these issues for years is Henry Sobanet, director of the Office of State Budget and Planning.
For his pains, Sobanet was pummeled Thursday by Denver Post columnist David Harsanyi, who claimed the money chief “miraculously always seems to brandish numbers that bolster whatever position [Gov. Bill Owens] happens to be taking at the time.”
It’s a hard poke, and uncalled for. I’ve covered the state budget for 34 years and have never seen Sobanet or any other state fiscal steward deliberately fudge budget figures. What they do – and quite properly so – is try to err on the side of caution while working with numbers that are inevitably ambiguous.
The state Legislative Council is now estimating that the five-year “time-out” from the TABOR law approved by Colorado voters last year will raise $4.7 billion in extra revenue by the time it expires in 2010, not the $3.7 billion the council estimated in its 2005 “blue book.” Bitter-end anti-Referendum C forces are whining because Sobanet is still sticking with a lower forecast, $3.9 billion.
The fact is, nobody can foretell the future. It’s also important to remember that the state takes a small percentage of our total economic output through sales and income taxes. The gross state product of Colorado last year was $216 billion. Assuming a 5 percent growth rate, that means the state economy will generate $1.53 trillion over the five years in question. A 6 percent growth would generate $1.58 trillion – a $50 billion difference. Thus, the $1 billion difference between Sobanet’s revenue estimate and the council’s guess amounts to 0.000006329 percent of the state’s economic output over that period.
Dear reader, anyone who tells you he can accurately predict our future economy to 9 decimal points will lie to you about other things as well.
Like all responsible budgeters, Sobanet makes conservative estimates so the state doesn’t have to abandon projects in midstream if revenues fall short. But remember, these are just forecasts, not actual results. The state doesn’t spend your money on your needs until it’s actually in the till. Projections aside, all we really know about Referendum C is that it staved off disastrous budget cuts last year and allowed the state to put $500 million into badly needed highway and transit projects. The Colorado Department of Transportation is hoping for another $500 million in extra cash next year.
The state will be well-served if these funds are available. A billion dollars over two years sounds like a lot. But state Rep. Bernie Buescher, D-Grand Junction, chairman of the Joint Budget Committee, reminded me Friday, “The state already has a $40 billion backlog in highway construction projects, and the inflation on that is growing faster than the additional money we’re getting in on Referendum C. That means the future cost is bigger now than [before the Ref. C vote.] It’s frustrating.”
Buescher was western Colorado’s sole representative on the JBC for almost two years until Rep. Al White, R-Winter Park, joined him in August. While White applauds the extra highway and transit funds, he also wants to see some future revenues set aside in a larger rainy-day fund.
Buescher also wants stronger reserves against the next inevitable downturn in the state economy. Last year, he shepherded a bill through the House to gradually increase the state’s reserve from its current – and woefully inadequate – 4 percent of the general fund to 9 percent. The measure died in the Senate, but Buescher plans to introduce it again if he’s re-elected.
I hope we do get an extra billion in revenue, though $10 billion would be better. The money doesn’t come from higher taxes but from an economy that is booming in large part because passage of Referendum C restored the confidence of consumers and the business community in Colorado’s future.
Bob Ewegen (bewegen@denverpost.com) is deputy editorial page editor of The Denver Post.
