Many contributors to Viewpoints glibly offer solutions to Illinois’ financial difficulties, which invariably include cutting state spending. It is a natural way of thinking because cutting spending is how one would improve his own family’s finances, e.g. fewer restaurant meals, less buying on credit, eschewing expensive family vacations, etc.
One simply thinks that if I can do it, so can the state. The problem is that comparing family and state finances is like comparing tangerines with pumpkins.
Why is this the case? Illinois currently is running a $7 billion-plus deficit in its General Fund. Nine out of every 10 dollars in the General Fund are used to pay for the state’s four core services, i.e. education, 35%; health care (Medicaid), 29%; human services (programs serving the physically and mentally handicapped), 20%; and public safety (state police, prisons, etc.), 6%. Therefore, if one wishes to make “cuts” they must be made in one or more of these core areas.
A cut in the education fund means that communities that cannot raise sufficient revenues to give their children a decent education will get less state aid to bridge the gap between their resources and their needs. The consequences of offering children an inferior education are well-known: unemployment, criminal activity, poverty, etc. A cut in Medicaid deprives the poorest of our citizens adequate health care. Substantial cuts have already been made to human services that help families deal with autism, sight- and hearing-impaired children and adults, the developmentally impaired, etc.
Cuts have also been made in the area of public safety. For example, in May of 2014 the Chicago Tribune described row upon row of brand new state police cars parked on the capitol’s fairgrounds. These vehicles had been delivered the previous year but not put into service. The reason was that the state lacked the funds to purchase and install police lights, two-way radios, and computers.
These are the consequences of “cutting,” i.e. elimination of essential services. Cutting spending would be an appropriate approach if Illinois’ spending on services was overgenerous compared to that of other states. The Center for Tax and Budget Accountability (CTBA) compared state spending on the basis of the number of employees per 1,000 residents; per capita; and as a share of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) to that of other states. CTBA found that in 2015, Illinois ranked 49th in employees per 1,000 residents, 28th per capita, and 36th as a share of GDP among the 50 states, thereby placing Illinois among the lowest-spending states.
There are solutions to the state’s financial difficulties, but “cutting” is not one them.
Al Popowits is a resident of River Forest.