For the FY ‘08 State General Fund (SGF) Budget, that limit is $5.9 Billion, or a 4.5% increase in spending from last year. Please note the amount includes both the school finance allocation of $149 million, as well as $60 million for the Homestead Property Tax and the Food Sales Tax refunds. (For those “accountants” out there, the latter were previously “off-budget” items which are now on-budget. The $5.9B includes education and refunds. The 4.5% does not include the previously off-budget items.)

Why is a fiscal stance of this nature necessary?
Kansas Government spending continues to greatly outpace itself year after year. As fiscally-responsible Republicans, we can change course. Since 1970, the SGF has increased more than 1500%. To help put this growth into perspective, in 1970, per capita Kansas income was $3,818. If Kansas per capita income had grown as fast as the SGF, every Kansan would be making more than $60,000 per year. In reality, however, per capita income in Kansas is about $36,000 per year. In just the last three budget cycles, the SGF has increased 8.6%, 9.6% and 9.7% respectively. This increase in spending was done with virtually flat population growth and wages rising only about 3.5% a year. Kansas, once a low-debt state as recently as the 1990’s, has racked up more than $4 billion in state debt. This acceleration puts Kansas second, only behind Wyoming, in growth of state debt since 1992. Republicans must commit to “ cut up the credit card” and begin reducing debt in earnest.

Slowing spending growth is not cutting
A 4.5% increase in spending still allows for growth in the state budget, yet limits that growth to a more responsible level when compared to previous years. Since 1970, the state budget has increased 34 of the last 37 years. Eleven times since 1970, the SGF has increased double-digits year-over-year.

This more-responsible spending limit of $5.9 billion still increases the SGF more than $200 million over last year (or approximately 4.5%).

Setting a fiscal limit is not making value judgments on where the money should be spent or what programs are worthy of increased funding. It is simply advancing the principle that Kansas Republicans, just like the average Kansas family, will spend up to a certain amount of money and then live within those means by prioritizing spending needs.

Why limit just SGF growth?
Certainly, true fiscal responsibility requires review of all aspects of the Kansas’ state budget. However, the SGF represents the most discretionary aspect of state spending. There are several aspects to the All Funds budget, such as tuition or motor fuels tax revenue, that go directly to state agencies. Therefore starting with the area where the legislature has the most discretion represents a logical step in the right direction for bringing some measure of spending responsibility to Kansas.