Blame dysfunction on politicians' refusal to meet state's promises

What's the most disturbing aspect of the budget stalemate in Springfield? Surprisingly, it's not all the frustrating rhetorical posturing that elevates political advantage over rational problem solving. Nor is it the likelihood that, the longer a resolution is delayed, the more probable cuts to crucial services like child care and higher education become.

While concerns like those merit consideration, they don't quite rise to the top of the dung heap. That's because what's really most disturbing about Illinois' budget impasse is that it's emblematic of the utter failure of our political system to perform its core functions-as identified in the state's 1970 constitution.

According to that document, state government has the responsibility to, among other things: “provide for the health, safety and welfare of the people”; “eliminate poverty and inequality”; “assure legal, social and economic justice”; and “provide opportunity for the fullest development of the individual.”

So, if Illinois state government were functional, the debate in Springfield would focus on how best to accomplish those goals, by investing adequate resources in the four core service areas of education, health care, social services, and public safety.

Decision-makers would identify both the crucial problems to tackle — like the drivers of poverty and inequality-as well as the best practices in each of the core policy areas needed to redress those problems.

Finally, those best practices would be implemented in an accountable and transparent manner, to ensure every individual, regardless of personal circumstances, had the very real opportunity to develop to his or her “fullest potential.”

Illinois state government, however, is anything but functional. Indeed, the various policy options bandied about in the current budget debate have little to do with how best to promote the public good as delineated in the state constitution. Instead, the focus is squarely on finding policies that simply do the least harm.

For proof, consider the one area where the governor and General Assembly actually reached a budget agreement for FY2016: K-12 education. Essentially, the powers that be agreed to hold funding for public education in FY2016 constant with last year. Sure, that means a cut in real terms after inflation, but in light of Illinois' accrued General Fund deficit of nearly $6 billion, that doesn't sound so bad. That is, until one honestly evaluates FY2015 K-12 funding levels, which were anything but adequate, even by Illinois' own standards.

Consider that Illinois' base level of K-12 funding — currently $6,119 per student, is more than $2,900 less per child than what the state's legislatively created education funding advisory board has determined is needed to purchase an education of sufficient quality to get two-thirds of our non-at-risk children passing the state's standardized tests.

Under Illinois' school funding formula, that per-pupil shortfall means Illinois underfunded public education by over $4 billion last year. Holding that constant can't conceivably help kids develop to their “fullest potential.”

The kicker: compared to the other core service areas, education has it good. Human services funding — which covers the needs of our most-vulnerable people — is in particular jeopardy. Everything from caring for individuals with developmental disabilities and mental health concerns, to providing child care to low-income workers, is pretty much up in the air. Which is worrisome, since Illinois already ranks at or near the bottom nationally in funding most human services.

Perhaps most galling: it's not as if Illinois lacks the economic capacity to meet demographically driven needs. Illinois ain't Mississippi. Indeed, Illinois' annual state GDP, which exceeds $740 billion, is the fifth largest state economy in the richest nation in the world.

The truth is, our state government's long-term budget woes are the direct consequence of the intentional decision — made for generations by politicians in both parties — to avoid raising sufficient tax revenue to make those investments in core services which are needed to “eliminate poverty and inequity” and provide for the “fullest development” of each individual.

Ralph Martire, rmartire@ctbaonline.org, is executive director of the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability, a bipartisan fiscal policy think tank.