I think that Vermont is the only state in the USA whose constitution does not require a balanced budget. Is this true? If is is not, what other state constitution does not require a balanced budget?
How many or our states are currently operating with deficits?
Google doesn’t tell me exactly what I want to know but I’m probably not phrasing the question properly. If anyone can point me to the numbers I’m looking for, I will be eternally grateful.
Thanks in advance.
Does this page help? It looks at state budget shortfalls:
Since every state but Vermont requires a balanced budget, those shortfalls have to be made up, either through tax increases, budget cuts, or a combination of both.
Yes, thank you very much.
No. Some states only have statutory requirements. And whether or not Vermont is the only state that doesn’t require a balanced budget depends on your definitions for “require,” “balanced,” and “budget.” Different researchers have come to different conclusions (PDF) about how many states really require one.
Or borrowing or delaying paying.
The Republican-controlled Minnesota Legislature has just ‘balanced’ Minnesota’s budget by borrowing against future income from a lawsuit settlement, and by delaying payment to school districts of 40% of their money.
(That will put most of those school districts into a severe cash crunch, and they will have to borrow money to pay their bills until next year, when the state will pay them the past-due money. Unless it then decides to defer payment of some of it for another year. Which is what it has done all through the Pawlenty years. Somehow the school districts are supposed to believe that someday the state will actually catch up on their payments.)
Thanks for your response. It will take me a while to wade through your link and I’m sure I will become very confused over the definitions of “require,” “balanced” and “budget;” If different researchers have come to different conclusions re definitions, I doubt I will come up with any definitive answers to my question. But I appreciate your input, all the same.
No matter if or if not, a state constitution requires a balanced budget, it appears to me that each and every of our states is operating in the red; I understand that some states have “promised” to make good on various shortfalls, the means of doing so are ambiguous at best and somewhat insane at worst. I also understand (I think) that several states have used stimulus money to reduce their shortfalls.
Basically, I believe that the current Republican demand for a constitutional amendment requiring a “balanced budget” is simply a red herring and that, as Obama says, a constitutional amendment is not needed. My opinion is that it would make no difference in the way the federal government operates; money will continue to be borrowed as needed. If the individual states can’t operate within the bounds of a balanced budget, why should the federal government be any different?
I’m looking for figures that will help me bitch slap my rabidly republican sister along with most of her rabidly republican friends.
If you read the link provided you will see that it would depend on how stringent the requirements of this “balanced budget amendment” were in order to determine if it would have any effect or simply be worked around with ease.