Vampires in the state budget

November 3, 2:48 PMSeattle Public Policy ExaminerJohn Barnes

Previous Next

Comment Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Seattle Public Policy Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Earlier this year, the marble halls of the state capitol echoed with dire predictions of death and doom as lawmakers cut several billion dollars from the state budget.  "People will die," Rep. Eric Pettigrew (D-Seattle) famously quipped in defending a proposed tax hike.

By the time they passed a budget lawmakers claimed they had dug deep into state spending and trimmed all the fat before cutting into vital state programs.  Apparently they didn't dig very deep.

While making cuts to health care subsidies, education, and corrections, lawmakers decided to continue spending money to promote tourism.  Perhaps Rep. Pettigrew was afraid people would die if the state didn't create a special map showing tourists where to find Twilight hot spots in the town of Forks:

That's right, because Washington is "home of the exciting Twilight saga," the state is spending our money to promote Forks as THE place to be for the show's aficionados.

Promoting tourism is a good thing (though I would argue it is not a function of government--let the businesses that will profit spend their money to promote tourism), but can lawmakers seriously expect their constituents to believe they're prioritizing spending when they continue to fund stuff like this?  When I go to a townhall meeting and my legislators look me in the eye and say "there's nothing else to cut" in the state budget, this comes to mind as a perfect example of why they should spend less time meeting with lobbyists and more time actually reading the state budget and evaluating agency functions.

By the way, if you're inclined to snipe back in the comment box with the shopworn line that funds used for stuff like this could be "dedicated funds" or "special grants" or whatever, think again.  This comes right from the state General Fund (see page 19 of this document from the state's Office of Financial Management, and spend some time digging through http://fiscal.wa.gov/).  This is a line-item appropriation that could have been cut to use the funds elsewhere.