Mission Accomplished? I thought we learned from that phrase!

In 2003, President George W. Bush claimed that the mission in Iraq had been accomplished. We had won! Mission Accomplished! Oh how wrong he was. We are still in Iraq, still fighting insurgents and terrorists and it also created stability problems in Afghanistan and we have yet to capture Osama Bin Laden. Needless to say, it is viewed now as one of the bigger blunders.

The question is, is Governor Dennis Daugaard making the same mistake? Once the new budget was passed, he claimed that the mission was accomplished because he had balanced the budget without raising taxes. Unfortunately, two things are true:

1. He did not solve the structural deficit, just this years. Which means that next year we're going to face even more cuts - unless sales taxes shoot through the moon (wishfull thinking).

2. It is causing multiple other problems - cutting education and funding for medicaid creates problems. Those problems I feel are addressed pretty well by the SDDP's most recent press release they sent out (which I will add to this post at the end).

Hopefully people are going to realize what a mistake it is to cut an investment into education and cutting services for the people of South Dakota. Hopefully the legislators and Governor Daugaard also realize this and will actually work to truly fix the budget next year without hurting programs.

(press release from the SDDP)
Daugaard’s Defense of Extremist Budget Dishonest, Misleading
SIOUX FALLS (March 30, 2011) — Governor Daugaard’s dishonesty about the budget crisis and misleading comments about the impact his extremist budget will have on our children, schools, and local communities puts into question whether South Dakotans can trust his decisions, said Ben Nesselhuf, Chairman of the South Dakota Democratic Party.
In a written response to a constituent concerned by Daugaard’s extremist budget, Daugaard’s statements offer deliberately misleading information about the impact of cuts to education and Medicaid and stand in stark contrast to candidate Daugaard.
Daugaard’s claims that education funding will only decrease 3.6% hide the true sustaining effect of the Governor’s extremist budget, Nesselhuf further noted.

“Claiming that the education cuts are only 3.6% when school districts across the state have already announced plans to increase class sizes, lay off teachers, rob maintenance funds, and raise local property taxes, seems totally out of touch with reality,” Nesselhuf contended.

Senate Bill 152, which freezes local property taxes despite lower state aid to education, cuts education funding by 8.6%. Since additional tax revenues – which in any other year would be included in the state aid education funding formula – are considered by the governor as “one-time funds,” 8.6% cuts will be the new norm school boards must use to create their budgets. Republicans in Pierre already froze state aid for education last year, and limited schools to 3% growth or less in preceding years.
Nesselhuf concluded, “Either Governor Daugaard doesn’t understand how his extremist budget will affect our children, schools, and local communities, or he prefers to ignore it. In either case, our children lose and our local communities bear the burden of the Governor’s budget cuts,”
Nesselhuf continued to point out that the candidate many South Dakotans voted for was not the governor they got. During the campaign, Lieutenant Governor Dennis Daugaard denied the existence of a budget crisis in South Dakota. Then, when asked whether he would cut funds for Medicaid, he flatly said cuts to Medicaid were “off the table” because of Federal matching dollars.
Once in office, however, Governor Daugaard said the budget crisis in South Dakota places a “gun at our head,” and immediately proposed to cut $30 million from Medicaid and forgo an additional $45 million in matching federal dollars for nursing homes and families in need.
“Daugaard misled South Dakotans about the dire fiscal straits he and Governor Rounds had forced South Dakota into through rapid overspending and policies that did not support economic growth,” stated Nesselhuf. “This letter shows that his denial of the budget crisis now extends to a blatant denial of the impact his cuts will have on our children, schools, and local communities.”
Background:
· 8.6% Education Cut: “According to Daugaard, the rule changes regarding local property tax levies for school districts and the $12.5 million in one-time funding lowered the 8.6 percent state-aid cut down to 6.6 percent…Schaefer disagreed with reports that the cut in state aid to education was actually lower than 8.6 percent. ‘A political spin was put on the numbers to make it look a lot less than the 8.6 (percent),’ Schaefer told the school board members. Schaefer said that school districts had to spend federal special-education money on special-education programs. K-12 capital-outlay money -- even with some recent loosening of restrictions -- is intended for repairs and improvements to buildings and grounds. Federal funding for school lunch programs has an earmark, requiring its use for student food service.” [Chuck Clement, Madison Daily Leader,

· Area Schools Now Walk a Money Tightrope: “Deep cuts in state aid forcing many schools to make painful choices.” Randy Dockendorf, Press & Dakotan, 3.19.2011 · Budget Crisis: “Given those polling numbers, it’s not surprising that the Democratic nominee is already on TV attacking – over seven months before the general election. But Scott Heidepriem has a problem – there is NO ‘budget crisis’ in South Dakota.” [Fundraising letter, 4.14.2010]

· Cuts to Medicaid: “Cuts to Medicaid would certainly be off the table. A cut of one dollar in state taxes for Medicaid purposes would lose two dollars roughly in federal funds, so that’s off the table.”[South Dakota Focus, May 20th, 2010, video: ]

· Governor’s Budget Recommendations: “The gun is at our head,” he said. “I’m tired of looking at death from a thousand paper cuts.” [Bob Mercer, Capitol Journal, 1.20.2011 ]

· Cuts to Judicial System: “The judicial system will reduce 5 percent, or about $1.75 million, from its budget by moving some of its general spending to a separate technology budget.” [Keloland.com, 2.2.2011, ]