Senator Edd Houck on the GOP Budget Priorities

Somebody had to say it:

"It takes a lot of guts to start kicking around -- politically -- poor, 4-year-old children. Man, that's leadership," Houck said sarcastically.

Comments

That is a very stupid statement.

They are not looking to fix the budget, only to get some sound bites.

When you don't have the money to pay your current bills you do not add additional programs.

It is that spend, spend, mentality that got us here and both parties were on board in the last budget.

Now they have to make some tough decisions and all your hear is idiotic statements like this?

Man thats leadership...

Senator Houck has always been of the legislature's most vociferous advocates for education and at-risk children.

He understands investing in them earlier saves us not only money but human costs as well.

These types of remarks may make compromise with the House DOA.

[Social Conservative]

What a joke...the fact that you make this a headline is pathetic.

Grow up.

"These types of remarks may make compromise with the House DOA."

Houck was not talking about the House. Besides, the last time the words "House" and "compromise" were in the same sentence it resulted in abusive driver fees.

[Dem Legislator in Search of Clue]

Fascinating given that "real leadership" could also sarcastically describe Governor Kaine's budget priorities.

What does Kaine want to do with a budget shortfall? Cut current education and pay for new programs.

Try this:

"It takes a lot of guts to start kicking around teachers who deserve a raise."

Or this:

"It takes a lot of guts to be a demogoguing Senator every day of my life."

[Brian Kirwin]

The embarrassing part was Sen. Colgan getting all worked up that Republicans actually had the unmitigated gall to vote differently from Democrats.

Imagine!

[Jester]

It takes a lot of guts to bankrupt the state in the middle of a recession.

[Dem Legislator in Search of Clue]

Did you all see the Democratic leadership wants a new General Assembly Building to the tune of $16 mil?

http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/news/politics/general_assembly.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2008-02-19-0125.html

How's that for leadership? Sure the old GAB is well old, but there's nothing wrong with it.

Putting aside for a minute whether or not Pre-K really improves outcomes or not (the data is far from conclusive that head start and Pre-K make any sort of difference when it comes to academic success), the issue becomes, for better or for worse, why right now?

The reality, given the current budget situation, is that to make it happen you either have to rob Peter to pay Paul in the budget, or you have to draw down the rainy day fund. You either have to cut someplace else or go to the savings account.

The fact is, that if you were not getting a raise next year, you would probably not take on additional spending commitments unless it was an emergency. You would also not use your savings (or worse, run a deficit a la DC) to pay for new spending commitments in order to reserve it for the possible time in the future that it may be needed to cover your pre-existing commitments.

And this is where Pre-K falls. Is doing this program this year an emergency imperative? No, it is not. The Commonwealth has survived and prospered for centuries without this and it will be able to make it without the Pre-K expansion until such time as state finances can afford it. If the state were truly flailing because of Pre-K not being in place, one would think we would have heard something from Senator Houck years ago on this. That alone demonstrates that this program is a nicety rather than a necessity.

So given that the Commonwealth will not devolve into anarchy and chaos without Pre-K, should the rainy day fund be used for it? Of course not. The fund exists to backfill shortfalls in existing programs during tough economic times, not as a slush fund to buy more stuff when you cannot afford the stuff you are currently paying for.

Again, putting aside the questionable merits of Pre-K, is this such an urgent priority that during a rough economic spell we should damn the torpedos? It has not been up until this point and it can probably wait until the time comes when there is more money available for new proposals. Hopefully, when that time comes, the legislature will take a long and hard look at whether Pre-K makes any sort of meaningful improvements in outcomes, before they start throwing money at a program just because it sounds good.

Finally, what ever happened to prioritizing? When did legislating stop being about making tough choices and start being about having one's cake and eating it too? For example, I do not see in Senator Houck's proposed budget amendments even 1 penny in cuts in order to pay for the new program he touts. Perhaps Senator Houck should consider giving up the $70.5 million in additional spending he proposed in his budget amendments for 2009 alone--none of which is for Pre-K, by the way--if he feels Pre-K is more of a priority than, say, his $2 million request for Civil War Historic Site Preservation. If Pre-K is that important, then Senator Houck should have the courage to point to those portions of the budget that he feels are less important, and that can be cut to free up money for the new program. Is Pre-K more important than, say the $10 million in General Fund dollars that budget allocates for the VA Museum of Fine Art? Is Pre-K more important than a new $185 million General Assembly Building or a new $85 million Department of Taxation building? Why is securing funding for those projects this year any more important than Pre-K? Why can't people like Senator Houck set priorities and make choices rather than feed at the proverbial trough like a glutton? If Senator Houck wants Pre-K, that is fine. But he ought to show real leadership--a word he cavalierly tosses around when someone does not happen to agree with him--by making the hard choices and paying for his Pre-K program with money taken from other projects.

Does hypocrisy know no bounds?

The Gov. cuts 200 mil from education, then sends his lapdogs out to bark and bite at anyone who does not go along with his proposal to spend money on a new program. I suppose if he got the new program he would then want to replace the 200 mil., and paint anyone who disagreed as being against education.

The media bites on all of this and the ignorant among us follow along like the rats to the piper.

MY NEIGHBOR HATES HIS CHILDREN.

His son just achieved the legal driving age passed all the tests and the hateful SOB will not buy his son a new car.

He is using some lousy excuse that they are forclosing on his house, his mother's nursing home fee's are rising and he is trying to save for college.

What a bum.

Ben and Joey are advocates for children -- they are advocates for putting their pictures on the Internet for their molester friends. That takes leadership!

[Sam]

1:31 - this thread had some decent debate and discussion going until you have to take it a step too far... Pitiful and disgusting.

Sam,

It must be the toxic effect of crocodile tears (caused by global warming, of course)!

[BigDog]

If 'ol Ed really cared so much for the children then why did HE vote for a budget that borrows $200 million to build a fancy new office building for the members of the General Assembly???

[Not Frank Hargrove]

Sen. Houck is one of the best folks down at the legislature. I liked him a lot when I worked down there. He is succinct and to the point, and he is quite the partisan. Since he has a somewhat GOP district, I admire him even more for not being get along to go along with the GOP idiots. Go get 'em Senator. Too bad you aren't the governor.