OLYMPIA, April 4.—Things suddenly are looking up in the Legislature as budget negotiators report that they have settled on the shape of the table, and all that remains to be settled is the fate of a few big reform measures favored by budget hawks in the Senate.
And other signs abound that some sort of deal may be in the offing. In one of the most curious special legislative sessions on record, now entering its 24th day without a single full meeting of either chamber, both House and Senate leaders are finally calling their 147 members back to Olympia today. Members will be briefed on progress made so far in budget talks.
And House Democrats have set a news conference for this morning to announce their plans for passage of a budget and other measures. All of which points to one thing: Something may really be cooking. And there is the bare possibility that lawmakers may actually finish their work by April 10, the final day of the current 30-day special session.
According to the Associated Press, Senate Republican budget lead Joe Zarelli and House Speaker Frank Chopp emerged from a closed-door meeting in the governor’s office Tuesday and shook hands. It didn’t mean they’d reached a deal, they cautioned. But Zarelli told the AP that the remaining challenges aren’t about closing the state’s current billion-dollar budget gap, and instead concern the long-term spending reforms that are being sought by the 25-member coalition of Republicans and Democrats that took control of the Senate March 2. “We better understand each other now, which makes for an opportunity for us to get closer together,” Zarelli said.
Meanwhile, Chopp, who has been increasingly called out for criticism by Republicans during the weeks of molasses-slow negotiations, apparently was taking a personal role. Making a rare public comment, he told the AP that “real progress” was made, adding, “We want to pass a budget that is sustainable, that funds education and saves the safety net. That’s all we’re about.”
Reform Bills the Issue
The shape of the debate to come is starting to become clear as the House prepares to pass a slate of fresh bills today.
Pensions: The Senate coalition would eliminate special early retirement incentives for employees hired after July 1, 2012. Their proposal would eliminate an incentive granted to employees with more than 20 years of service in 2001, allowing them to retire early with a much smaller benefit reduction than under the actuarial calculations the state used prior to that time. It also would eliminate another incentive granted in 2007 which allows 62-year-old employees with 30 years of service to retire with no reductions in benefits. Total savings for state and local governments under the Senate’s latest proposal is figured at $2.6 billion over 25 years. The House Democrats, meanwhile, would eliminate only the 2007 incentive, saving state and local governments $900 million over the same period.
Balanced budget requirement: The Senate coalition favors a constitutional amendment that would require the Legislature to pass budgets that balance over a four-year period, meaning the current biennium and the next one. The House Democrats favor a less stringent statutory 2-year approach. Meaning basically that the law would require the Legislature to pass a balanced budget, and future Legislatures would be free to repeal it.
K-12 health care: The Senate coalition appears to be moving away from an earlier proposal that would centralize health insurance programs for school district employees under a state-managed system. Instead, the coalition is considering a plan that would allow districts to continue to make decisions locally, but would balance out costs for state and K-12 employees. State employees now are paying between $26 and $288 a month, while school employees are paying as much as $1,500 a month. The Senate proposal would set the amount the state pays for K-12 health insurance at the same amount paid for state employees, and would not allow districts to sweeten the pot with local levy money, as sometimes happens during negotiations with unions. Transparency of financial data regarding K-12 health insurance programs would be required. Meanwhile, the House Democrats favor more limited transparency, but would not address disparties in premium costs.
Your support matters.
Public service journalism is important today as ever. If you get something from our coverage, please consider making a donation to support our work. Thanks for reading our stuff.
