New Hampshire Governor John Lynch’s Budget Shortfall

 Cross-posted at Grizzly Groundswell
This article from the New Hampshire Union Leader paints a grim picture of the budget that our liberal tax and spend Governor John Lynch passed earlier this year. The budget, which included a 17.5% increase in spending from the last budget, and also included raising many different taxes and fees, was based on income projections from the aforementioned increased tax revenues. The problem with raising taxes is that there comes a point when the taxes are raised so high that people either stop buying the product that is taxed, or they go elsewhere to buy it. That is what is happening now, revenue is down because people have, hopefully, had enough. This shortfall, however, needs to be made up somewhere, and that will mean raising other taxes further, because we know liberal Governor John Lynch will not cut spending.

It’s only three months into the new state budget and already legislative Democrats’ wishful thinking has caught up with them.

Revenue numbers released last week show state revenues $21.5 million below projections just three months into the fiscal year. Josiah Bartlett Center President Charles Arlinghaus pointed out in his New Hampshire Union Leader column last Wednesday that at the current rate the biennial state budget will be $121 million short after just one year.

And if that wasn’t enough to make the average taxpayer in New Hampshire grimace, don’t forget about the monster hiding under the bed:

Remember, the amount of state spending in this budget is actually much lower than will be soon needed. The Legislature did not plan for the cost of providing an adequate education as defined by the committee appointed to come up with that definition.

For those of you not from this area, when the above article talks about funding the definition of an adequate education I will give you a very brief recap. The state supreme court ruled that the governor had to come up with a definition of an adequate education and basically provide state funding. Currently the schools are funded locally. If they did not come up with a definition and a plan to pay for it, the court would impose one. Instead of writing a constitutional amendment to remove the court from this blatant abuse of power and overstepping of it’s bounds, the Gov. did come up with a definition. The state will pay half the cost of education.

They didn’t bother to research how much this would cost. And this price-tag is not included in Gov. Lynch’s budget with that 17.5 % spending increase.

So while New Hampshire is already behind the eight-ball with decreased revenue because of increased spending coupled with burdensome tax increases, we have yet to see the devastating effects of the soon to be state government take over of education funding.

Then and only then will the voters of New Hampshire wake up and realize what a disaster the John Lynch administration has become.

At least I hope they will.