One Is The Loneliest Number
by Jake3BP • February 3, 2013 • Uncategorized • 8 Comments
The failings of former-Governor Ted Strickland are well known. From January 2007 to January 2011, Ohio lost 400,000 jobs and saw it’s credit downgraded. Oh, and the bumbling, stumbling walking-recession that is Ted Strickland left the state with a huge structural budget deficit.
But don’t tell that to Ted’s defenders… Well, these days, it’s probably no longer necessary to use the plural. And it’s gotta be pretty lonely for him to keep touting numbers that contradict reality.
It’s sad, really. Statements like this really show the failings of the public school system, particularly in the math department. It boggles my mind that there’s still at least one person who doesn’t understand that Strickland used over $8 billion of one-time money to balance his budget, thus leaving a huge, gaping hole in the next budget.
So when someone claims a budget “surplus” under Strickland, it’s either dishonest, or just straight up ignorant. Such a blindly partisan statement ignores the fact that any surplus was predicated on the billions of dollars in one-time funds ol’ Teddy Boy used in his last budget.
Or, just to spell it out using some simple numbers:
It’s pretty simple, really. But basic math isn’t exactly the strong suit of those that label themselves Democrats.
Heck, even using the absolute most generous numbers available, the remaining deficit is still jaw-dropping:
Add up all the extra revenue and you get $1.6 billion to $1.8 billion. So the real deficit is actually turning out to be about $5.9 billion to $6.1 billion.
No matter how you slice it, Ted Strickland, who, in 2006, became the first Democrat to lead Ohio in 16 years, was an epic failure. It’s not wonder Ohioans don’t elect statewide Democrats very often these days. And to fix his mess, it took the only man in modern history to balance the federal budget.
That’s about the starkest contrast you can draw.
Yet, that’s the legacy of Ohio’s recession governor. It’s no wonder he didn’t want to run again in 2014.
But don’t tell that to the one remaining Strickland defender. His reality is all that’s keeping him company these days.
comical to see him constantly tweeting to journalists, chiding them for not reporting the Plunderbund version of a story.
Well, it was Kasich’s own OBM that reported the Strickland surplus, not me.
Second, if you’re going to do a fact check column, then you should ACTUALLY address the subject of the fact check. Over 50% of the money that’s been placed in the rainy day fund so far since Kasich took office came from the surplus Kasich’s OBM office reported the State had at the end of FY 2011 (i.e. the last year of the Strickland budget.)
You can try to dance around it all you want, but the basic fact is that the source of that money was what was left in the Strickland budget. You can’t ignore that, spin that, or deny that. It’s what actually happened.
BTW, both of Kasich’s budgets use (or will use) “one time money.”
And the rest of that surplus went to cover spending by Kasich. Tim Keen said there was a surplus of nearly a billion left in the last budget before Kasich’s budget. It happened. Get over it. You can cite yourselves all you want (talk about lack of credibility). It doesn’t change the fact that there was a surplus, not a deficit.
As for comical, Nick, this is coming from the guy who claimed Mitt Romney already won Ohio through the early votes and all the polling showing Obama ahead was wrong? LOL.
Dollars are fungible. In case you don’t understand that term, it means they are easily substituted.
So when Strickland used $8 billion in one-time and federal stimulus funds, as explained by LSC, not just numbers we made up,, any “surplus” less than $8 billion is not a surplus at all. It’s a deficit.
In case you don’t understand that term, it means Strickland left Ohio’s fiscal house in shambles.
You can try to force your version of the facts all you want. But they only exist in your fantasy world.
There was never an actual $8 billion deficit. Kasich’s first budget only reduced overall spending (including pass thru to the locals) by a little over $2 billion. What led to the surplus? Better than expect growth in revenues that started in 2010, according to Kasich’s OBM, his Council of Economic Advisors, and anyone who knows math.
I know dollars are fungible, but it doesn’t change the fact that Ohio ended the 2011 FY nearly a billion in the black. You can quibble about whether that money came from one-time sources or not, but precisely because money is fungible that’s not really a debate that can be settled. What cannot be denied (even though this fact check tries) is that Ohio ended the year nearly a billion in the black and a quarter of that surplus from the last Strickland budget so far makes up a majority of the money that has been placed back into the rainy day fund since Kasich took office.
As for fiscal house in shambles, the major credit rating agencies disagree. In early 2011, they improved Ohio’s credit outlooks SPECIFICALLY CITING how Ohio’s managed its fiscal discipline during the recession. That occured BEFORE Kasich’s first budget.
In other words: I’m right.
He plugged a budget with $8 billion in one time funds to avoid making the hard choice to actually create a real balanced budget where expenditures EQUAL revenue. So he was off by $1 billion. That still left a $7 billion difference.
You’re the one who needs to get over it. You’re still the one tweeting to every Ohio reporter who dares mention the truth about the huge hole Ted left.
Also, you can keep beating a dead horse and rewriting my post all you want Modern. Nowhere did I make such a claim. We’re used to your lying.
I’m sorry Nick, are you honestly saying you didn’t write a post that suggested the early voting numbers last year suggested that Romney might win “Ohio much more easily than most people expect” Not only did you write that Romney was expected to win Ohio, but you suggested the early vote suggested he could win comfortably. Your words, not mine.
http://www.thirdbasepolitics.com/has-mitt-romney-already-won-ohio/
Did Jake not write a post that said the final polls showed Romney was “poised for victory?”
http://www.thirdbasepolitics.com/final-polls-romney-poised-for-victory/
Before you call me a liar, maybe you should actually remember what you wrote first?
There’s a large difference between speculating that something might happen, and saying that it WILL happen.
That speculation was wrong, obviously.
But I didn’t present it as a fact, which is what you keep stating. So, yes…you’re lying. Like I said, we’re used to it.
You guys and your middle school crush…