Thanks for the Feedback on TTF
I wanted to respond to the person who posted an anonymous comment on my statement on the Transportation Trust Fund. I appreciate the input.
My primary concern is making sure we don’t hit insolvency of the fund this year so that critical projects can not proceed and federal funds are put in jeopardy. Also, we need to restore fiscal discipline to the fund (putting the “trust” back in the trust fund to use the often repeated phrase). My hope is that a permanent revenue source which assures that expenditures do not exceed recurring revenues can be put in place – and that some of the debt can be retired short of maturity. This is not a permanent solution, and I think that has to be considered by state government in the near term. The real question is whether, in a year with another $4 billion plus budget deficit, we can make the TTF fiscally sound without a refinancing. Is the only option a significant gas tax increase, which could be phased in? None of us who drive a long way to work (in my case about 55 miles each way to Trenton) want to pay this, but what are the other options?
One-time asset sales or leases could be considered, but the state only has about $19 billion in total assets and once they’re gone, they’re gone. Any suggestions are certainly welcome.
posted by Mike Panter at 3/14/2006 03:12:00 PM
4 Comments:
Regarding your defense of the borrowing plan for “restoration” of the Transportation Trust Fund, you say:
“My primary concern is making sure we don’t hit insolvency of the fund this year so that critical projects can not proceed and federal funds are put in jeopardy.”
The first half of that formulation might constitute a better defense if you were to identify what specific “critical projects” you were talking about. You don’t.
Secondly, your claim that federal funds are somehow in jeopardy for failing to renew the TTF, is simply false. Ever since the late 1990’s, with the advent of the federal “Tea-21” funding mechanism, New Jersey has been using a toll credit program as it’s “soft match” to secure the State’s federal funding.
Consequently, there is no threat to the continued flow of federal funds, and that argument has no basis to it at all.
Also, who wouldn’t agree with your general proposition that,
“we need to restore fiscal discipline to the fund (putting the “trust” back in the trust fund.”
But please explain again how borrowing obscene amounts of money, and essentially mortgaging the future is restoring “trust?”
When the new Governor took over, his transition report established four basic fiscal principles, to wit:
“The State cannot continue the past practices of spending more money than it receives in recurring revenues;
The State cannot continue to defer current expenditures into future years so as to mask budget imbalances;
The State cannot continue to use financial and budgetary gimmicks to give the appearance of “balancing” the budget;
The State cannot continue to adopt expenditure programs whose costs can be expected to escalate well beyond the revenues anticipated to pay for them.”
It occurs to me that this TTF “renewal you defend violates every single one of those principles – every one!
Please, Assemblyman, tell us again why you think the fiscal irresponsibility on the scale of the TTF “restoration” is justified?
11:28 AM
Assemblyman, you have also said:
“My hope is that a permanent revenue source which assures that expenditures do not exceed recurring revenues can be put in place – and that some of the debt can be retired short of maturity.”
In conjunction, you cited only two possibilities – a phased in “significant gas tax increase” or a “one-time assets sale.” But is there not a third possibility?
For years now, including all throughout the McGreevey/Codey Administration, huge portions of the gas tax money everyone thought they had voted to have “dedicated” to the Transportation Trust Fund (TTF), has instead been diverted to other purposes.
The State’s budget mushroomed, and the TTF was intentionally run into the ground. It is now going bankrupt, and the Administration is bonding well into the future, a cynical way that unfairly saddles the next generation with the tab.
If your child came home from school, and told you that a bully had been stealing some of his lunch money for a few years now, you wouldn’t just demand that the bully stop, would you? No, you would want him to make restitution.
The biggest part of the budget is school aid to so-called Abbott districts. The reason is because the State’s Supreme Court now requires additional funding to those districts, to equal the funding to the highest-funded districts in the State!
Why not publicly commit to school aid for Abbott districts, set at a level 10% above the state-wide average, and do it by constitutional amendment? And use the huge savings that will be realized, to repay the Transportation Trust Fund for the rip-off it has been subjected to over the years.
The Court is the least democratic of our governmental institutions. Don’t you believe the Legislature and the Executive branch should wrest back control over setting fiscal policy?
You asked for recommendations. This is a way to do it.
1:21 PM
Assemblyman, you have also said:
“My hope is that a permanent revenue source which assures that expenditures do not exceed recurring revenues can be put in place – and that some of the debt can be retired short of maturity.”
In conjunction, you cited only two possibilities – a phased in “significant gas tax increase” or a “one-time assets sale.” But is there not a third possibility?
For years now, including all throughout the McGreevey/Codey Administration, huge portions of the gas tax money everyone thought they had voted to have “dedicated” to the Transportation Trust Fund (TTF), has instead been diverted to other purposes.
The State’s budget mushroomed, and the TTF was intentionally run into the ground. It is now going bankrupt, and the Administration is bonding well into the future, a cynical way that unfairly saddles the next generation with the tab.
If your child came home from school, and told you that a bully had been stealing some of his lunch money for a few years now, you wouldn’t just demand that the bully stop, would you? No, you would want him to make restitution.
The biggest part of the budget is school aid to so-called Abbott districts. The reason is because the State’s Supreme Court now requires additional funding to those districts, to equal the funding to the highest-funded districts in the State!
Why not publicly commit to school aid for Abbott districts, set at a level 10% above the state-wide average, and do it by constitutional amendment? And use the huge savings that will be realized, to repay the Transportation Trust Fund for the rip-off it has been subjected to over the years.
The Court is the least democratic of our governmental institutions. Don’t you believe the Legislature and the Executive branch should wrest back control over setting fiscal policy?
You asked for recommendations. This is a way to do it.
9:59 AM
Assemblyman, you have also said:
“My hope is that a permanent revenue source which assures that expenditures do not exceed recurring revenues can be put in place – and that some of the debt can be retired short of maturity.”
In conjunction, you cited only two possibilities – a phased in “significant gas tax increase” or a “one-time assets sale.” But is there not a third possibility?
For years now, including all throughout the McGreevey/Codey Administration, huge portions of the gas tax money everyone thought they had voted to have “dedicated” to the Transportation Trust Fund (TTF), has instead been diverted to other purposes.
The State’s budget mushroomed, and the TTF was intentionally run into the ground. It is now going bankrupt, and the Administration is bonding well into the future, a cynical way that unfairly saddles the next generation with the tab.
If your child came home from school, and told you that a bully had been stealing some of his lunch money for a few years now, you wouldn’t just demand that the bully stop, would you? No, you would want him to make restitution.
The biggest part of the budget is school aid to so-called Abbott districts. The reason is because the State’s Supreme Court now requires additional funding to those districts, to equal the funding to the highest-funded districts in the State!
Why not publicly commit to school aid for Abbott districts, set at a level 10% above the state-wide average, and do it by constitutional amendment? And use the huge savings that will be realized, to repay the Transportation Trust Fund for the rip-off it has been subjected to over the years.
The Court is the least democratic of our governmental institutions. Don’t you believe the Legislature and the Executive branch should wrest back control over setting fiscal policy?
You asked for recommendations. This is a way to do it.
8:32 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home