Ten Reasons Why I Voted 'No' on the State Budget

Several weeks have gone by since the Legislature passed Gov. Tom Corbett’s first state budget, and while the self-congratulatory backslapping for meeting the June 30 deadline has dissipated, the long-term effects of this budget have yet to be realized for most Pennsylvanians.

I voted “no” on Corbett’s budget, and here are 10 of the most important factors that influenced my vote.

1. Property Taxes Increases

By cutting more than $1 billion in basic education funding, this budget will require school districts to raise property taxes. No school district could just “trim the fat” with cuts so large.

2. No AdultBasic

There was no attempt whatsoever to restore the successful AdultBasic program, which provided low-cost health insurance to over 40,000 working Pennsylvanians. Governor Corbett never even asked the large “non-profit” health care providers to keep the program funded, which means we all will be stuck paying higher premiums to cover the uninsured.

3. More for prisons, less for schools

While cutting education funding for our children, this budget increases funding for educating inmates in state correctional facilities. How is that justifiable?

4. College tuition increases

Massive cuts to state colleges immediately resulted in hefty tuition increases for students. How can we expect our young people to stay in Pennsylvania when this budget drives them out of state to get an affordable education?

5. Our schools are under attack

The cuts to public education are terrible not just because of the amount, but also because of their inequality. Wealthy school districts barely took a hit at all, while poorer areas got clobbered by losing thousands of dollars per classroom. Public schools have no choice but to cut programs and extra-curricular activities while increasing classroom size dramatically. Does anyone else think this might be a set-up by the Corbett administration for the upcoming

6. Corporate welfare through tax loopholes

This budget fails to close massive tax loopholes that allow huge out-of-state corporations to get away with not paying their fair share in taxes. Not only does this shift the burden to Pennsylvanians, but leaves true small business owners at a competitive disadvantage by creating an uneven playing field.

7. Welfare “reform” sham

Much was made about eliminating “fraud, waste and abuse” in the Department of Public Welfare; however, the “reform” bills passed by the Legislature earlier this year will actually cost us money, not save any. Because finding the waste was apparently too difficult, this budget gives the Secretary of Welfare the ability to simply slash $400 million from wherever he wants and then label it “fraud, waste and abuse” whether it was or not.

8. Those in need get hurt the most.

This budget will hurt women, children, seniors, veterans, the disabled and our most vulnerable citizens by cutting their Medicaid and health care programs by nearly half a billion dollars. With the state of the economy and families struggling to support loved ones with special needs, this is a harsh and unnecessary move.

9. No Government Transparency

Despite all the promises of “transparency in government,” this budget was negotiated in secret behind closed doors. Even worse, for the first time in my five years in office, negotiations were limited to just the majority party. By keeping the Democrats totally out of the room, a majority of Pennsylvania’s voters were effectively disenfranchised and denied a voice.

What happened to bipartisanship?

10. Fiscally Irresponsible

Corbett pledged not to spend any more money than we have in this budget, and I agree with the sentiment. The Pennsylvania Constitution requires a balanced budget so we avoid running a deficit like the federal government. But the state ended up with a $785 million surplus thisyear.

This surplus, which is by definition the taxpayers’ money, should have been returned to the people by restoring some of these draconian cuts; instead, the Corbett administration decided to hang on to it for us. How exactly does the state keeping and controlling the peoples’ extra tax dollars equate to the smaller, fiscally responsible government we were promised?