$10 billion 'binge' budget a burden to Montana

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.

— P.J. O'Rourke

The dust hasn't totally settled on the legislative session ... we don't yet have the final fiscal results of Gov. Steve Bullock's vetoes. But the picture's beginning to take shape, and for those who believe in limited government and slower bureaucracy growth, that picture isn't pretty. Starting with almost half a billion surplus, a coalition of Democrats and swing-vote, squishy Republicans blew through that surplus plus another $9.5 billion in Montana tax dollars and Federal funny money. The $10 billion total budget works out to be $115 million for every single day the Legislature was in session. That old adage needs revamping: "Another day … another 100 million dollars."

Joe Balyeat

Here's a clearer picture: With only 1 million people in Montana, the biannual $10.042 billion budget spends almost exactly $40,000 per every average family of four in the entire state! This doesn't include direct federal spending nor city/county government spending — $40,000 state government spending in a state where the average private sector worker makes only about $35,000 per year. The burden of government on the backs of Montana's private sector workers is heavy indeed.

Like O'Rourke's drunken teens, Montana's big spending politicians need to pull to the curb long enough to burp and ask themselves the crucial question: Over the long term, can a small, private-sector economy like Montana's — $35,000 per year per worker — support this much government? The $10 billion budget is a 13.35 percent increase from the last budget, while inflation has only been about 2 percent per year. Can state government continue to grow at this unsustainable pace without seriously damaging Montana's economic prospects for our children? Answer: No. National economic studies, such as "Government Spending and Economic Growth — a 50 State Analysis," prove conclusively that state government overspending results in slower economies and stagnant wage growth. But Helena's big-spending binge continues with little thought given to the economic hangover which will be inflicted on Montana's private sector.

A minority of conservative legislators attempted to act responsibly ... like teen friends trying to take away the car keys after the kegger. They blocked the multi-billion dollar, irresponsible Medicaid expansion; and on the final day made one last ditch effort to stop the governor's demand for millions more in spending. But Democrat leaders and Bullock were indignant that anyone would challenge their spending sobriety, so squishy swing votes handed them back the spending car keys and the last bottle of "Jim Beam" by voting through every last "Bullock binge" dollar before hastily adjourning.

And the reward to those who tried to act responsibly was excoriation in the media and scorn from their big-spending colleagues. The squishy, swing vote big spenders were labeled "responsible," while those who maintained spending sobriety were labeled "irresponsible." This makes as much sense as starting an organization called "Mothers Against Sober Drivers."

The most glaring example of this topsy-turvy "responsibility" mislabeling is the Medicaid debate. Those who blocked Medicaid expansion were armed with research showing the program is a wasteful boondoggle — that Medicaid recipients have even worse medical outcomes than patients with no insurance whatsoever. Yet, daily we see news editorials excoriating conservatives for "irresponsible" rejection of Medicaid expansion… even while the latest Medicaid medical studies prove the conservative point conclusively.

May 1, researchers released results of an enormous, multi-year Oregon scientific study of more than 10,000 random patients. Conclusion: Medicaid enrollment "generated no significant improvement in measured physical health outcomes." There was no significant health outcome difference between the 5,000-plus patients in Medicaid vs. the 5,000-plus non-insured patients. In fact, the only significant difference between the two huge samples is that the Medicaid enrollees were happier because taxpayers were footing the bill for their substantially increased use of medical facilities. Fact: We'd be better off just handing folks money to spend as they wish ... that'd make them even "happier" than enrollment in an inferior health program.

Yet conservative Montana legislators who blocked this boondoggle spending program are called "irresponsible," while those who joined with Democrats to take the car and the "Jim Beam" on a $10 billion binge are "responsible Republicans."

I think I need a drink.

(Former state Sen. Joe Balyeat, R-Bozeman, CPA, previously served as chairman of the Senate Business, Labor, and Economic Affairs Committee. He is now state director of Americans For Prosperity.)