ShareThis Page
Governor won, lost |

Governor won, lost

| Wednesday, July 11, 2007 12:00 a.m

HARRISBURG – Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell took the equivalent of a four-year agenda, tossed it against a wall and hoped some of it would stick in the Legislature’s chambers.

Most of it didn’t.

In his February budget address, Rendell – at the peak of his power following a November election victory with 61 percent of the vote – presented one of the most ambitious annual agendas proposed by a Pennsylvania governor in recent history.

Under a deal struck Monday night by Rendell, the Republican-controlled Senate and Democrat-controlled House, none of the seven tax hikes he proposed will be enacted. Nor will his plan to lease the Pennsylvania Turnpike to a private company. Rendell wanted higher taxes to pay for health care, higher spending, alternative energy projects, highways and mass transit.

Lawmakers said no to Rendell’s proposed $850 million alternative energy fund, which required one of the seven tax hikes – a surcharge on electricity consumers. Instead, lawmakers this fall will consider a $60 million-a-year version without a tax increase.

The deal came on the ninth day of a bitter budget impasse, after Rendell furloughed nearly 25,000 state workers for one day.

Lawmakers agreed to a $27.4 billion budget, a slightly higher level of spending than Rendell proposed, and gave the governor many of his budget priorities, from increased pre-kindergarten funding to making laptops readily available in high school classrooms.

“It’s negotiating 101,” said Christopher Borick, a political science professor at Muhlenberg College in Allentown. “Anyone who’s bought a house or a car knows you throw out your dream offer first. When it’s scaled back, you find something you can live with.”

More than $900 million a year, on average, will be delivered to improve highways and bridges and to pay for mass transit, through higher tolls on the turnpike and new tolls on Interstate 80. The transportation bill pending in the Senate includes a proposed 10 percent tax on poured alcoholic drinks in Allegheny County to provide a local share for transit funding. The tax requires approval by County Council.

“Transportation, without a question, is the big winner” in the budget deal, said Jerry Shuster, professor of political communication at the University of Pittsburgh.

Matthew Brouillette, president of the Commonwealth Foundation, a conservative think tank, contends the public loses with the huge transportation bill because it “perpetuates the operational inefficiencies of the Port Authority and (Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority) by giving them more money without reform.”

“We’re going to do it by expanding one of the most corrupt agencies in the history of Pennsylvania – the Turnpike Commission,” he said. The turnpike would borrow $9.5 billion to fund transportation throughout the state and oversee the I-80 tolling.

Senate Republicans can claim victory for blocking all of the tax increases, said Borick. To some, the higher tolls don’t count, he said. “User fees are not as egregious to some Republicans as a tax increase.”

The Republicans’ message to defeat higher taxes and to limit spending drowned out substantive policy debate on health care and energy, said Sharon Ward, executive director of the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center. She believes the budget deal was “a mixed bag” for Rendell.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.