It is no consolation that virtually every other state in the nation is also facing huge budget deficits, nor is it consolation that California is in worse shape than we are.
There is consolation in the fact that, unlike California, there is hope for Arizona.
Both California and Arizona are in dire budgetary straits as a result of Democrats’ wild overspending.
Hold it! I know what you’re thinking: “But the Republicans have controlled the state House for more than 40 years, so how is it the fault of the Democrats?” Well, it is true that the Republicans have held a majority for decades, but that is not the same as control. During the administration of Gov. Janet Napolitano, the Democrats were able to lure a number of squishy Republicans into their camp, creating a virtual Democrat majority.
“I like being in the majority,” said House Minority Whip Steve Gallardo, D-Phoenix, to AZcentral.com in 2008, when yet another budget pushed by the Democrats and Napolitano was enacted thanks to help from a handful of Republicans.
So here we are.
What has changed in the Arizona Legislature since the last election cycle is the nature of the Republicans. The squishy ones are pretty much gone. The Republicans are in firm control of both houses. Republicans now in the Legislature will not be seduced, cajoled or intimidated by the Democrats, The Arizona Republic or the Arizona Daily Star from cutting spending back to levels commensurate with revenues. The sweeping of funds, accounting tricks, property sales and even Gov. Jan Brewer’s sales-tax increase were not enough to close the huge deficit gap.
Be prepared for much hysteria, name-calling and condemnations from the affected parties. Every agency will claim that any cuts will result in apocalyptic future disasters because of the shortsighted cutting of “investment.”
University of Arizona President Robert Shelton is an example. In his recent State of the University address, he used phrases like, “When malevolent people talk about wanting to dismantle and destroy great universities … ,” and, “When you listen to those guys, it’s like Groundhog Day meets A Nightmare on Elm Street!—Bill Murray meets Freddie Krueger. (And please understand, I’m playing the Bill Murray character—I keep repeating myself, and they keep slashing people with knives!)”
Bear in mind that this is the language of a fancy-pants $550,000-a-year university president at an official function.
Shelton’s miffed because his state general-fund appropriation has been cut by about $100 million over the last few years. He adds, “Yet we have key legislators who have stated publicly—with straight faces, I might add—that we have been untouched and spared any significant cuts.”
I suspect that you may be wondering how the “untouched and spared any significant cuts” claim can be made. Well, we can always check the facts. The fiscal year reports from the Arizona Legislature website show the state general-fund cuts in appropriations to the University of Arizona have been as Shelton stated, but the more relevant figures are those showing total revenue: In fiscal year 2007, the UA received $1.211 billion, but $1.266 billion in 2008, $1.305 billion in 2009, and $1.333 billion in 2010.
It’s true that the state appropriations make up a smaller percentage of total revenues, but the total revenues of the University of Arizona have increased annually over the last few years. You might even say that the UA has been “untouched and spared significant cuts.”
So … if you are a legislator, and you can cut an appropriation to an agency without reducing its total revenue, might that agency be a good candidate for such cuts?
The real beauty here is that the legislators stated the facts, did the right thing and are not intimidated by deceitful university presidents or anyone else. This is what Arizona needs if we are to fix the budget, recover and prosper.
And what of California? Well, the people of the Golden State elected more of the same people who precipitated its financial crisis. The Democrats still have a lock on the Legislature, and with the election, yet again, of Gov. Jerry Brown, there appear to be no adults in authority.
So be grateful that there is hope and change in Arizona, and pray for California.
This article appears in Jan 13-19, 2011.
Regarding – “In fiscal year 2007, the UA received $1.211 billion, but $1.266 billion in 2008, $1.305 billion in 2009, and $1.333 billion in 2010.”
These total numbers include contracts and grants from federal, state and local governments, private foundation and corporations. Contracts and grants must be spent on what the grantor or contractor stipulated if it is not spent as demanded someone goes to jail. So yes the University continues to do a great job on research which explains most of the increase in “revenue”. The research revenue cannot directly help in the classroom.
To help in the classroom the University uses tuition dollars and state dollars. If the University gets fewer state dollars they will have to raise tuition to pay for the cost of education. Current cost of education is in the $20K per year range. Current in-state tuition is $8250 per year. It can easily be seen that the current trajectory of the State of Arizona is to zero out state support for the universities. If this comes to pass it will mean a more than doubling in tuition costs for in-state students.
It is reasonable to argue that students and their families should bear more of the cost of education than they have in the past. If you believe this argument Mr. Hoffman make it. Don’t argue that revenue has gone up at the University and thus everything is just fine. Tuition increases and an entrepreneurial faculty and staff that has raised foundation and research dollars are the cause of that. Tuition increases hit the middles class and the working class. Research dollars really just help the department or project at hand and cannot legally be used for anything other than their stated purpose.
Another anti-education rant by a republican. Cut spending for education, keep people uneducated and they will be more likely to fall for inflammatory, incorrect rhetoric and vote republican…vote republican against their own best interests. No wonder republican AZ is bankrupt, in more ways than one.
“Shut Up” Johnny boy.
“Bear in mind that this is the language of a fancy-pants $550,000-a-year university president at an official function.”
Wasn’t that a superb performance by our University of Arizona President Robert Shelton at the Memorial Service that up-lifted our city, county, state and country?
Fancy-pants weren’t needed. No partisan politics was necessary. He showed he was worth every cent of a salary about half that paid to the U of A football and basketball coaches, too.
It is my understanding that tax credits and tax cuts given by Arizona legislators since 1980 amount to 10-11 billion dollars. Many legislators have taken Grover Norquist’s pledge to not raise taxes. Some of these legislators went so far as to ask Norquist if supporting Brewer’s temporary sales tax hike at the polls would nullify their pledge.
The Morrison Institute indicates we have a structural problem regarding income. We are one of 10 states that rely heavily on sales taxes for our state revenue. “The Arizona Department of Revenue (DOR) estimates that the state could be collecting at least an additional $9.5 billion annually in sales taxes if all exemptions were removed and some items now receiving a preferential rate were taxed at the standard 5% rate.
Since the legislature is filled with so many ant-tax ideologues, I doubt this will happen, but the people of AZ need to have discussions about what services and institutions we consider important and necessary and how to restore funding to support them.
http://morrisoninstitute.asu.edu/publicati…
All our problems are due to the minority Democrats and a few squishy Republicans? Really? After only a couple of years? Who is this guy?
For those who have already died because the state cut organ transplants from what is covered by AHCCCS, I imagine that their families tears are not ‘hysterical’ visions of an “apocalyptic future disaster’. I work with people who have received organ transplants and go on to live normal greatly extended lives. They matter. And as far as education cuts–at the public school level I don’t know what else can be cut–its already cut to the bone. (Thanks, Tom Horne–Your leadership has left Arizona 50th in education. That and your racism seems to have won you a promotion.)
Arizona is the laughingstock of the nation, both for its bizarrely unconstitutional laws that serve no purpose except to spit in the eye of its enemy, the United States, and [not so funny] success in turning the majority of the state into a primitive autocracy, with the burden of sustaining it for the rich being increasingly loaded onto the working poor.
The very notion of rejecting a 3/4-federally funded organ transplant program while putting a new roof on a stadium that has proven to be an albatross around Arizona’s neck, at the expense primarily of people who cannot afford to go there, would be ludicrous if it didn’t involve watching students and teachers and parents of young children and people’s loved ones die unnecessarily for the amusement of Arizona’s rich in its publicly supported Colosseum.
Or turning over state prisons to friends of the governor, to be converted into businesses making profit by increasing the cost of incarceration to the people of the state — and, it now appears, possibly skimming off a good deal more of our tax money in graft on its way to the pockets of the owner-wardens, while doing a demonstrably poor job that has already resulted in deaths of innocent persons.
When I meet people outside the state, I am loathe to mention I am from Arizona. The mere fact tends to occupy the rest of the conversation with ridicule on the one hand, and demands for justification [which, obviously, I cannot provide] for this state’s behavior, on the other.
Thank gawd we can finally stop all that wasted spending on education and social programs like health care! Thank gawd for the Republicans! Let’s see Arizona grab that coveted #50 spot on the education spending lists! Who-hooooo! Yay.
What an ignorant person Mr. Hoffman is in this article! Love the political rhetoric which has not basis in facts, but very much what is wrong with our country; hate and apathetic mongering. This propaganda contributed to the attempted assassination of Congresswoman Gabriel Giffords, injury of countless and the death of five decent people, by no cause of their own.
Mr. Hoffman is more interested in pointing fingers, rather than being a true American, which respect civility and the need of consensus that serves every citizen of Arizona, than the few rich elite. The actions taken during the last election, shows that words either said or written can be a catalyst for our own home grown terrorist. The concept of say anything to win, by scaring people to attain their vote, generates these type of incidents historically in the world (Hitler did the same, as have many dictators).
Timothy McVey the Oklahoma bomber is a prime example of what these shock talk show and political pundits create; then when an incident occurs, they coward from their responsibility and the actions they took in deny-ability. It is a sad statement to proclaim yourself an American and not feel any responsibility for your actions or contributions to the problems. Democrat or Republicans, we are all Americans first and are responsible for each other in this democracy, either if we agree or not with someones views.
God bless everyone!
Yes the republickers are very good with fuzzy math. It just shows you what education can do for you. Micky Smythe, an exiled AZ expat, in Cortez CO.
“Every time you stop a school, you will have to build a jail. What you gain at one end you lose at the other. It’s like feeding a dog on his own tail. It won’t fatten the dog.”
– Speech 11/23/1900 – Mark Twain
Thomas Jefferson quotes:
When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself as public property.
Thank you TM for your comment. It is true that research grant funds are restricted, it is also true that the university skims a percentage off the top of those grants for overhead. The last time I spoke with a UofA researcher it was twenty percent – it may be different now. I’m not suggesting that everything is O.K. The issue of how much students should pay for their education as a matter of policy, as opposed to a short term fix, is an argument for another day. My point is that we should not expect professionals within the state government to co-operate with the legislature in solving the immediate fiscal problem. In fact, as I believe the president Shelton example shows, they will misrepresent the facts and attempt to demonize the legislature. They do this because it works for them. How sad.
I’m so sick of both parties blaming one another, shut-up! If Republicans in our senate are so weak minded that Janet Napolitano was able to sway them so easily, maybe Arizonans should vote for individuals with spines. They had majority power last year, and instead of balancing the budget, senators passed bills requesting Obama’s birth certificate and calling for a statue of the 10 comandments to be built in our state capitol. They are unable to pass constitutional bills, perhaps because the bills are written by corporations rather than public servants. There should be compromise between both parties because it’s best for our state. The budget should not be balanced on the backs of the poor and middle class.
Budget cuts to DES have severely impacted individuals with disabilities and the poor. Who represents them in this state? How far can the senate cut into housing, therapies, health insurance, and job opportunities for individuals whose lives rely on the government? This rhetoric makes me sick!
“squishy Republicans” eh? And Hoffman doesn’t blame the republicans for being squishy, he blames the democrats. Interesting logic here.
Shouldn’t this commentary be on the back page near the comic section?
Yes, the University charges 1/3 of some grants, value varies based on the contract and grant language, for what are called indirect costs. These indirect costs include the staff needed to properly and legally execute those grants, to make sure accounting rules are followed. And yes they support the cleaning and maintenance of buildings. Other Universities, mostly private ones, charge significantly higher indirect cost rates and are justified in doing so. Most studies of the indirect costs of research (building costs, building maintenance, accounting, energy costs, physical plant etc) suggest that University IDC rates are too low, if anything. And those IDC costs cannot just be spent on anything they must be spent in a way that supports research.
Your reply to my earlier comment and the content of your original opinion piece suggest you have little actual detailed knowledge of how Universities are financed and pay for the research, teaching and service components of their mission. Please do some research before you write things that can have real impacts on the lives of your fellow citizens.
As for your comment that we can discuss at some later date how much students should be paying for their education, when? If this is not the time to figure out how to partition financial responsibility for higher education when will be the right time. This attitude is exactly what you pick on earlier governor’s and legislatures for, kicking the can down the road. The current legislature and governor must not just kick the can down the road. They should have the full and open debate about how we as a society will pay long term for the fundamental financial responsibilities of the state. As John Tester of Montana has put it, this mission is largely to medicate, incarcerate and educate. On all three right now the State of Arizona is underfunded and struggling to meet the mission of a brighter tomorrow for its citizens.
What solutions do you offer Mr. Hoffman? As of yet I have heard nothing of substance.
Now that the “squishy” Republicans are gone from Arizona politics, I wonder who conservatives will blame next for Arizona’s increased deficits, taxes, and tuition and the reductions in services that we are already experiencing?
Perhaps it’s time to rename the conservatives the “Pirate Party,” since their motto seems to be “Take what you can, give nothing back.”
If the weekly wants to provide alternate viewpoints they would do better with giving access to non-extremists. Unless the point is just to point out the absurdity of the “non squishy” republican viewpoint.
Really now Jonathan thinks that all university received grants are cut from the same source, have the same use and reporting requirements, are not done in conjunction with other organizations or institutions and/or is the lead on every single grant which actually ‘allows’ 20% skimming for overhead? This guy doesn’t know what he is talking about I am so appalled I can’t even address this post to him directly.