Category: PA Budget and Policy Center

No comments

Your Activism (and C3 Dollars) at Work

  By Budget analysis, PA Budget and Policy Center, PBPC Blog posts, Pennsylvania Budget

This is the second in a series of blog posts assessing the 2016-17 budget and the budget negotiation process from PBPC and its allies. Politics takes patience. Victories take time. And that goes for small victories as well as big ones. While the 2016-17 Pennsylvania budget leaves much to be desired, it does close about half of the structural deficit this year with recurring revenues; that is, revenue that the state will receive year after year. And that revenue mostly comes from a series of good proposals that we at the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center have championed over the years. One is the provision to close the sales tax vendor loophole. Stores, including big box retailers like Wal-Mart and Home Depot, have up until now been allowed to keep a portion of the sales tax revenue they receive from customers. That provision in the tax law in Pennsylvania and… Continue reading

No comments

Victories

  By PA Budget and Policy Center, PBPC Blog posts, Pennsylvania Budget

This is the first in a series of blog posts assessing the 2016-17 budget and the budget negotiation process from PBPC and its allies. It’s hard to be a progressive in Pennsylvania. We think of ourselves as a modern, Northeastern state on a par with Massachusetts and New York, Connecticut and New Jersey. But when it comes to state politics, we find ourselves looking with envy at those states with their progressive taxes and higher (and much more equal) spending on education and human services than here at home. And it’s gotten worse in recent years as right-wing extremists have taken hold of one of our political parties. This year is no different. I’ve already complained about an appropriations bill that does not invest enough in education and human services and the environment and a tax bill that relies too much on one-shot rather than recurring revenue and makes some… Continue reading

No comments

A Budget Balanced in Name Only

  By PA Budget and Policy Center, PBPC Blog posts, Pennsylvania Budget

Finally, with the passage of a revenue bill to fund the appropriates bill passed last wee, we can say the 2016-2017 budget is done. But whether it was a success or not, is very much in doubt. The budget deficit is, technically closed. New projected revenues of $1.3 billion have been enacted. But as the following table shows, over half of the new revenue is non-recurring. That is, it is one-time revenues that will be available only this year and not in future years. That means we will start the 2017-2018 budget year already more than $700 million in deficit. New Revenue in 2016-17  (in millions of dollars) Recurring Revenue Non-recurring revenue Cigarette Tax 431 Tax amnesty 100 E-Cigarettes 13 Internet gaming 100 Smokeless Tobacco 48 Liquor licenses 149 Roll you own 3 Casino license fee-Philadelphia 50 Cap sales tax vendor discount 56 Table games license fee 25 Sales tax… Continue reading

No comments

Statement On the General Assembly Passing a Revenue Bill (HB 1198)

  By PA Budget and Policy Center, Pennsylvania Budget, Statements

Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center Director Marc Stier made the following statement on the General Assembly Passing a Revenue Bill (HB 1198): “The General Assembly finally acted today to meet its constitutional responsibility by voting to raise the $1.3 billion in revenues needed to fund the recently passed appropriations law. But while the revenue package may technically balance the budget for 2016-17, in three respects it does not solve the long term fiscal problems of Pennsylvania.   “First, too much revenue ($709 million) comes from one-time rather than recurring sources ($627 million). As a result, the state’s long term structural deficit has not been closed. Next year will bring another debate about how to fund the government over the long term. “This problem is exacerbated by a second one: the revenue package relies too heavily on dubious sources. Expected revenues from liquor privatization, internet gaming, the license fee for a… Continue reading

No comments

Bad Ideas Under Any Label

  By K-12 Education in PA, PA Budget and Policy Center, Policy briefs

We are hearing that some of the provisions in a House school code bill, HB530, are being included in a Senate-supported school code bill, HB1606. It is unclear which parts of HB530 will be included in HB1606, but we will be monitoring to determine if any of the very problematic provisions of the former bill wind up in the latter. School districts in Pennsylvania contain a mix of traditional public schools and charter schools. Some local school districts want to add charters schools. Many do not. Unfortunately, provisions included in HB530 which might be amended into HB1606 will remove much of the supervisory and decision-making authority from local school districts in every corner of the state. Since charter schools receive funding from local school districts, the creation of new seats in charter schools without school board supervision and control diminishes the ability of school districts to establish and manage their… Continue reading

No comments

Statement on Gov. Wolf’s Decision to Allow the Appropriations Bill to Become Law

  By PA Budget and Policy Center, Pennsylvania Budget, Statements

Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center Director Marc Stier made the following statement on Governor Wolf’s decision to allow the appropriations bill to become law: “Governor Wolf announced that he will let the general fund appropriation bill passed last week become law without his signature if the General Assembly does not pass a revenue bill that fully funds the spending it calls for. “This is an unfortunate, yet reasonable, response to a difficult situation created by the unwillingness of extremists among House Republicans to agree to a revenue package.   “Given the ongoing difficulty of securing an agreement with the extremist faction of the Republican party to fund the government at an adequate level, it was reasonable for Governor Wolf not to risk vetoing the appropriation bill in whole or part. There is no guarantee that spending he vetoed in an already-austere budget would be passed again by the House of… Continue reading

No comments

Revenue Options, Real and Fake: a Minimum Wage Increase and Gaming

  By Budget, Minimum Wage, PA Budget and Policy Center, PBPC Blog posts, Pennsylvania

Originally posted at Third and State. Ten years ago was the last time Pennsylvania raised the minimum wage in advance of the federal government doing so. In those ten years, inflation has reduced the value of the minimum wage to a poverty wage. That’s why it’s time to raise it again, ultimately to $15 an hour, but immediately to $10.10. A raise in the minimum wage to $10.10 will help 1.2 million Pennsylvanians who work hard but make less than $10.10 an hour right now. Eighty-seven percent of those affected would be over age 20 (not teenagers).  Eighty-four percent of workers who will be affected by a minimum wage increase have a high school degree or more.  And 30% of affected workers have some college education. Raising the minimum wage won’t just help workers who receive it — every dollar in new wages will be spent generating economic activity that… Continue reading

No comments

Racial and Economic Patterns in the Consumption of Sugary Drinks

  By Memos, PA Budget and Policy Center, Sugary Drink Tax

To: Members of City Council, Editorial Boards and Opinion Writers From: Marc Stier, Director, Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center Date: June 5, 2016 Re: Racial and Economic Patterns in the Consumption of Sugary Drinks The continuing debate about Mayor Kenney’s proposal to tax sugary drinks is multi-faceted. We at the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center have expressed our support for the policy on a variety of grounds. But here we want to address only one issue – an important misconception – about who consumes sugary drinks. A common theme of those who criticize the sugary drink tax is that it is doubly regressive. Critics say it is regressive first because, like all sales taxes, it takes a higher percentage of the income of those who have low incomes than those who have high incomes. And they say it is regressive, second, because those with low incomes and from ethnic and… Continue reading

No comments

Why Philly Needs the Sugary Drink Tax

  By PA Budget and Policy Center, PBPC Blog posts, Philadelphia, Sugary Drink Tax

Originally appeared on the Third and State Blog on May 25, 2016 As we move closer to a City Council vote on the sugary drink tax proposal, I want to offer some final thoughts about the idea and correct some misapprehensions about it: 1.While the tax itself is regressive, and the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center almost always opposes regressive taxation, the program as a whole is not regressive. To begin with, the opponents of the tax are simply wrong about one aspect of it. They have been arguing that it is doubly regressive because members of low-income families consume sugary drinks at higher rates than middle- and high-income families or that African-Americans drink sugary drinks at higher rates than white people (and keep in mind that these are two groups not one). Those are myths. The research on this issue is equivocal and does not support that claim. 2.… Continue reading

No comments

Make-Believe Budgeting in Harrisburg

  By PA Budget and Policy Center, PBPC Blog posts, Pennsylvania Budget

Originally appeared on the Third and State Blog, May 24, 2016 I’ve been doing political advocacy for over ten years and have been a teacher and writer about politics for a lot longer. I don’t surprise easily. But what I saw today at the press conference at which Senator Scott Wagner and the “Taxpayer’s Caucus” presented their three billion dollars in proposed budget cuts, left me almost speechless. I walked into the room to see a list of cuts, and near the top was a $922 million cut to the Department of Human Services (DHS). I know how devastating real budget cuts of that magnitude would be to senior citizens who get long-term care through Medical Assistance, the working poor who get health care through the same program (which is called Medicaid everywhere else), and people who are intellectually disabled and mentally ill. So I was prepared for the worst.… Continue reading