After months of discussion about the exact size of the historic deficit we face next year, the news is filled suddenly with reports of a surplus. Did something change or are we just in the middle of election season? The short answer is things haven’t changed but the easiest distraction from bad news is to ignore it completely. The deficit is still huge. It will dominate the state’s financial future. And, paradoxically, we have a mid-budget surplus for the same reason we face a huge deficit.

This is the latest version of our spreadsheet comparing state spending in 2008-09 to 2010-11. Because $248 million of general fund spending was moved offline, apples to apples comparisons are not obvious from official documents. Using official state data, we compare the same spending from 2008-09 with the same spending in 2010-11 despite label changes […]

Charles M. Arlinghaus  October 6, 2010 Originally published in the New Hampshire Union Leader After months of discussion about the exact size of the historic deficit we face next year, the news is filled suddenly with reports of a surplus. Did something change or are we just in the middle of election season? The short […]

The slides from Charlie Arlinghaus’s seminar for policymakers on the basics of the state budget, how its organized, where to find information and how to become your own state budget expert.

[slideshow_deploy id=’3316′]

  Just click the Quarter to get started! A public database isn’t just a tool for those of us strange enough to want to pore over budget data. It is the sunshine that disinfects the public square. Knowing that every detail is available, accessible, and searchable means there is no chance that any action, any […]

Not too long ago we believed in balanced budgets. But that’s all changed. Other states made the tough decisions. We did not. Today the State of New Hampshire is just another failed enterprise hoping the federal government will cut them a check before the debt capsizes that ship.

Borrowing, transfers, and wishful thinking draw the actual spending cuts and tax increases included in a $295 million budget deal unveiled Tuesday, June 8 at the State House.

House and Senate budget writers have crafted a package that includes nearly $72 million in spending cuts, which doesn’t include an $18.5 million increase in HHS spending. It also contains $4.99 million in tax increases, $51.21 in lapses and transfer among state agencies, $65 million in borrowing, and $112.87 million in speculative revenues that may never be realized.

Summary: Using a historical projection model, state revenues can be projected to fall $84.8 million short of the amount budgeted to balance spending in the first year of the two-year budget. Revenues in the second year of the budget are built off the first year’s projection plus 2.2% growth over that base. At that rate of growth, revenues would be an additional $86 million out of balance in the second of the two budget years. The combined revenue shortfall of $171 million is the largest component of a budget deficit greater than $250 million that legislators must resolve to balance the state’s finances.