Playing loose with budget figures

NE recurring problem in budget debates at the Capitol is so many politicians have made financial claims with little relation to reality. That’s been a common issue with Democrats’ estimates regarding gross production tax increases, but similar problems were also apparent this week in debate comments by Rep. Leslie Osborn, R-Mustang.

Osborn, who is chairwoman of the House Appropriation and Budget Committee, said lawmakers “cut $650 million out of state government two years ago. We cut $1.3 billion out of government last year, and we have a $1 billion shortfall this year.”

But lawmakers didn’t cut state appropriations by $650 million two years ago, and didn’t cut state appropriations by $1.3 billion last year. Instead, Senate fiscal documents show spending was reduced by $322 million in the FY ‘16 budget and another $112.8 million in the current fiscal year budget. Overall, $435 million was cut over two years combined — 22 percent of the two-year total claimed by Osborn.

The figures she cited reflect the initial budget shortfall for the prior two years. But lawmakers covered most of those gaps by passing tax increases, passing fee increases and tapping various state funds.

Why not just say state appropriations have been reduced by $435 million, or simply note that state shortfalls have been a regular event in recent years?

Osborn is a leading advocate for tax increases at the Capitol. It doesn’t help her cause when she cites numbers that conflict with the Legislature’s own reports.

A good point

On Wednesday, as the deadline neared to get budget and revenue bills approved, Republican leaders at the Legislature included Minority Leader Scott Inman and other Democrats in budget discussions. It was the first time all session that Democrats were given a seat at the table — even though Republicans knew all along that they would need the other party’s help to get any revenue-raising bills approved. That’s because such bills require a three-fourths majority, or 76 votes in the House. Republicans hold 73 seats. This last-minute maneuvering typifies the dysfunction that’s been all too evident this session. Andy Fugate, an

IT employee who plans to run as a Democrat for Inman’s House District 94 seat next year, put it well in a Facebook post: “All of this self-inflicted crisis and drama reminds me of Charlie Brown and Lucy Van Pelt with the football. When will we ever get a chance to put points on the board for Oklahomans?”

Clueless

Most Americans spent Mother’s Day celebrating motherhood. Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, did the opposite. On her Twitter account, Richards wrote, “Nothing says ‘I love you, Mom!’ like standing up for the right of mothers everywhere to get the care they need.” In the world of Planned Parenthood, virtually all references to health “care” can be translated as “abortion.” So Richards was, in effect, saying the way to celebrate Mother’s Day was to make it easier for women to become mothers via abortion of their child. Who exactly would be in place to say, “I love you, Mom,” in that scenario isn’t clear. Richards’ tweet is the kind of gaffe that is all too common at Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider. It’s a sign of zealotry-borderingon-derangement that those involved with the organization don’t seem to recognize this fact.

Impeachment, part 2

In February, we criticized House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for openly speculating about impeaching President Trump. At that time, Pelosi bizarrely suggested “there are plenty of grounds right now” to pursue impeachment, although she conceded it was unlikely. We wrote that such talk was tailored only for the activist base of the Democratic Party, rather than an effort to win over those not already in the Democrats’ camp. Apparently, Pelosi recognized that fact, because when impeachment came up again at a recent town hall, she quickly swatted the idea down. “What are the facts that you would make a case on? What are the rules that he may have violated?” Pelosi asked. “If you don’t have that case, you are just participating in more hearsay.” Pelosi’s welcome statements are a sign of seriousness that is too rare from many leaders of the political left.

‘Professional’ development

If you’ve ever wondered whether the “professional development” days at your child’s local school are truly worthwhile, some skepticism may be justified. Education Week recently asked teachers nationwide to send in their worst experiences from such events. Here are some of the replies received. “Presenters who read their slides word for word with back to the audience and refuse to use a microphone.” “Once got PD on how to use the new soap dispensers in the bathroom.” One respondent told of a speaker who required teachers to respond to hand signals with claps “like trained animals.” Then, “even worse,” when the speaker recommended that teachers use that model in the classroom, the district administration “supported this idea.” Another recalled a motivational speaker who required everyone to stand and sing all verses of “You picked a fine time to leave me, Lucille.” As the saying goes: Your tax dollars at work.

Shameful display

At Bethune-Cookman University, hecklers made life miserable for U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos as she tried to deliver her commencement speech May 10. Another example of coddled students unwilling to hear a message they might disagree with? To some degree, yes — many students turned their backs as the speech began. But The Wall Street Journal’s Jason Riley reports that outside groups were mostly to blame. The Florida affiliate of the National Education Association — the country’s largest teachers union — started the petition opposing DeVos’s appearance, and the state chapter of the NAACP actively helped to organize protests, Riley says. “Both the teachers union and the civil rights organization oppose Mrs. Devos because she supports school choice,” he wrote. “Never mind that large majorities of black families have long sided with the secretary on this matter, according to polls.” DeVos kept her composure and completed her speech, at one point saying, “Let’s choose to hear one another out.” As much as it should, that’s not going to happen.

Goals vs. reality

When it comes to the millennial generation, it seems there’s a strong difference between their goals and what the average millennial actually does. A recent survey by Bankrate.com found that millennials, on average, believe people should be able to pay for their own housing by age 22, pay for their own car before age 21, and pay their own cellphone bills before age 19. But as Quentin Fottrell, personal finance editor at MarketWatch, writes, “other studies show what millennials think they should do and what they actually do are two different things …” When real estate listing site Trulia recently examined Census data, Fottrell notes it found the percentage of adults living with their parents had reached its highest level in 75 years with around 40 percent of millennials doing so. Even so, better to fall short of achieving a goal of financial independence than have no goal at all.