Though the Massachusetts House Ways and Means Committee released its budget proposal for fiscal year 2004 last Wednesday, there is still a long road of debate and revision ahead.
The proposal will be debated by the full House starting Wednesday, and after that it must also be passed by the Senate.
The budget reflects the poor state of Massachusetts’s current economy and calls for many cuts. However, a downfall in the plan is that it does not recommend borrowing money or increasing taxes to help ease the budget deficit, according to Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers’ Association.
Overall, the House plan cuts spending by $350 million more than Gov. Mitt Romney’s budget recommendation, released earlier this year. According to the Associated Press, the budget calls for about $2.3 billion in cuts and $730 million in new revenues.
The proposal includes plans to eliminate a prescription drug plan that provides coverage for 80,000 people who are disabled or elderly in Massachusetts. It also reduces services to formerly homeless people who suffer form mental illness.
The budget cuts would also slash about $90 million from the University of Massachusetts; however, unlike Romney’s proposal, this plan preserves the office of UMass president William Bulger.
The House Ways and Means proposal cuts about $175 million altogether from higher education, and it also cuts state aid to local by approximately 4.6 percent.
In addition, Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) tutoring would be reduced by 80 percent.
Widmer criticized many cuts.
‘The consequences in terms of education will be serious,’ he said.
The Romney administration said the proposal is moving in the right direction, however. Karen Grant, a Romney press representative, called it ‘a good first step.’
Grant said Romney is generally pleased with the plan, but would have preferred that more of his reform ideas were in the new proposal.
‘There is a long road of reform ahead of us,’ Grant said. ‘We have to address the need for reform and restructuring in state government without raising taxes.’
Widmer questioned the lack of tax increase included in the budget proposal; he recommended that the issue be discussed.
‘The larger question is: what level of taxes will citizens pay for what level of service?’ he said. ‘The public may be slow to realize the impact [of the cuts], but new taxes may become an issue in the future.’
