ShareThis Page

Lowman Henry: Pa. budget follies set to resume

| Saturday, Jan. 13, 2018, 8:45 p.m.
The Pennsylvania State Capitol in Harrisburg.
Jasmine Goldband | Tribune-Review
The Pennsylvania State Capitol in Harrisburg.

The last time a Pennsylvania governor signed a full, complete state budget into law was July 10, 2014. Gov. Tom Corbett signed off on that state fiscal plan just days after it was approved by the Legislature, completing a four-year run of on-time state budgets.

Nearing the end of his four-year term, Gov. Tom Wolf has yet to experience such an official signing of a state budget. Instead, budget battles have consumed state government.

Governors have three options after legislation is passed by the General Assembly. The governor can veto the bill, killing it unless his veto is overridden by a two-thirds majority in both chambers; sign the bill into law; or take no action, allowing the bill to become law after 10 days.

The latter is how Wolf has chosen to respond to all three budgets passed during his tenure. Wolf has crafted a national reputation for advocating massive increases in taxes and spending. Signing the more prudent budgets offered by the Republican-controlled Legislature does not feed that image.

Divided government is at the root of Pennsylvania's ongoing budget drama. In 2014, Democrat Wolf accomplished a historic first by defeating an incumbent governor seeking re-election. But while voters were busy dispensing with Republican Corbett, they also elected near-record Republican majorities to both the state Senate and House. Republicans added significantly to those numbers in 2016.

Wolf moved to the far left to outmaneuver his opponents, then proceeded to attempt to govern in that fashion. Meanwhile, the Republican caucuses in the General Assembly have grown significantly more conservative.

All of this set the stage for the budget impasses to come. Wolf played a major role in creating gridlock by proposing that his very first budget increase taxes by an amount greater than the combined total of proposed tax hikes in all 49 other states combined. Republicans recoiled at that prospect, and thus ensued the longest budget stalemate in state history.

In 2016, Republicans caved in to many of the governor's spending demands, but not enough to merit his gold star of approval. The budget wars resumed again last year; a spending plan was passed in July, but no revenue plan was adopted to complete the budget until October.

And now it is time to start all over again. Against the backdrop of a gubernatorial election year, with Republicans gunning to make Wolf the second one-term governor in a row, the budget process is now underway.

There are, of course, political implications. The governor will again push for the Holy Grail of a severance tax on natural gas drillers sought by Democrats and apostate Republicans. But legislative Republicans, who saw their numbers increase when they stood firm against the governor's tax-and-spend agenda, will want to appeal to their base by again keeping the governor in check.

The first clue as to how pitched the battle might be will come next month, when Wolf delivers his budget address to the General Assembly. Which Wolf will show up? The Wolf of 2015 who demanded record increases in taxes and spending, the lecturing Wolf of 2016 who scolded the Legislature for not giving him his way, or the more subdued Wolf of 2017 — still determined but not as aggressive?

The 2018 gubernatorial race will put the state budget in the spotlight. It will be interesting to see if Wolf gets to experience the thrill of signing a budget, or whether he goes down in state history as the first governor never to sign one.

Lowman Henry is chairman and CEO of the Lincoln Institute.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.