Most Areas of State's Budget Cut Significantly From 2002-03 Levels
As a result of budget
decisions in the 2003 Special Session, the state’s general fund spending is
expected to be $2.509 billion smaller in 2004-05, compared to the 2004-05 base
budget. Nearly all major spending areas
will see a reduction from their base budget, and many, including Higher
Education, Local Government Aids, Agriculture, Jobs and Economic Development,
Transportation, and State Government, will actually spend less in 2004-05 — and
in 2006-07 — than in 2002-03.
The table below compares the budget
decisions made in the 2003 session for each major spending area to the base
budget.[1] Three comparisons are made:
- 2004-05 budget decisions
compared to the 2002-03 budget. This
compares the 2004-05 budget to the previous two-year budget. The 2004-05 budget is
5.8% higher than
the 2002-03 budget, although this largely reflects shifts in education funding,
rather than spending increases.
- 2004-05 budget decisions
compared to the 2004-05 base budget.[2] This shows how the 2004-05 budget decisions
are different from what the 2004-05 budget would have been if no changes to
current law were made. The 2004-05
budget is 8.1% smaller than the base budget.
- 2006-07 budget decisions
compared to the 2006-07 base budget.
This shows how the 2006-07 budget is different from what the budget
would have been if no changes to current law were made. The 2006-07 budget is 7.2% smaller than
the base budget.
General Fund Spending, $ in millions
|
Spending Category
|
Base Budget
|
2003 Budget Decisions
|
Budget Changes
|
|
2002
-03
|
2004
-05
|
2006
-07
|
2004
-05
|
2006
-07
|
2004-05 budget compared
to 2002-03 base
|
2004-05 budget compared
to 2004-05 base
|
2006-07 budget compared
to 2006-07 base
|
|
Education
|
9,978
|
12,498
|
12,585
|
11,883
|
12,091
|
19.1%
|
-4.9%
|
-3.9%
|
|
Higher Education
|
2,757
|
2,913
|
2,902
|
2,560
|
2,548
|
-7.1%
|
-12.1%
|
-12.2%
|
|
Tax Bill/Local Gov’t Aids
|
3,379
|
3,279
|
3,392
|
2,737
|
2,923
|
-19.0%
|
-16.5%
|
-13.8%
|
|
Health & Human Serv.
|
6,754
|
8,089
|
8,998
|
7,428
|
8,327
|
10.0%
|
-8.2%
|
-7.5%
|
|
Environment
|
342
|
391
|
393
|
342
|
343
|
-0.2%
|
-12.7%
|
-12.8%
|
|
Agriculture
|
105
|
123
|
106
|
91
|
80
|
-13.2%
|
-25.8%
|
-23.9%
|
|
Jobs & Econ. Dev.
|
420
|
395
|
393
|
335
|
329
|
-20.2%
|
-15.1%
|
-16.1%
|
|
Judiciary
|
1,351
|
1,527
|
1,631
|
1,434
|
1,507
|
6.1%
|
-6.1%
|
-7.6%
|
|
Transportation
|
318
|
182
|
182
|
161
|
163
|
-49.4%
|
-11.6%
|
-10.7%
|
|
State Government
|
667
|
597
|
596
|
533
|
552
|
-20.1%
|
-10.7%
|
-7.5%
|
|
Debt Service |
581
|
674
|
763
|
674
|
783
|
15.9%
|
0.0%
|
2.6%
|
|
Other
|
101
|
142
|
147
|
122
|
126
|
20.2%
|
-14.3%
|
-14.3%
|
|
TOTAL SPENDING
|
26,753
|
30,810
|
32,087
|
28,301
|
29,771
|
5.8%
|
-8.1%
|
-7.2%
|
Source: House Fiscal Analysis, Summary
of the Fiscal Actions of the 2003 Legislature.
Overall, general fund
spending is cut by $2.509 billion in 2004-05.
Another $1.959 billion in revenues are raised, primarily by eliminating
the Tobacco Endowments and transferring the balance ($1.029 billion) into the
general fund, and through various fee increases and other mechanisms. The figures in the table above only include
the spending cuts, not the $930 million in transfers, fee increases, and other
revenues that appear in the omnibus spending bills to reach budget targets.[3]
2004-05 Spending Compared to 2002-03
Comparing 2004-05 to
2002-03, overall spending increases by $1.548 billion, with the largest increase
appearing in Education. However, much of the increase reflects the impact of changes in education funding made in
the 2001 Legislative Session, rather than additional resources for education.
Under the 2001 property tax reform, the state took over a significant
portion of general education funding, which had previously been funded by local
property taxes. Approximately $1
billion of the increase in spending from 2002-03 to 2004-05 comes from the
impact of this change. This does not
represent an increase in resources for schools, but rather a shift in funding
responsibility.
Removing the impact of this
$1 billion increase leaves overall spending growth of around 2%, which is less
than the rate of inflation. And in
fact, in the majority of spending categories, including Higher Education, Local
Government Aid, and Jobs and Economic Development, spending will be less in
2004-05 than it was in 2002-03.
2004-05 Spending Compared to Base Budget
Comparing the 2004-05 budget
decisions to the 2004-05 base budget is a better way of understanding what will
be different due to decisions made in the 2003 session, because it accounts for
the distortions caused by changes in education funding. The base
budget describes what it would cost to pay for previously agreed-upon state government
commitments. The base budget
takes into account changes since the previous biennium in certain “forecasted”
programs, particularly education and health care caseloads. When the number of school children
decreases, for example, the base budget for education will be smaller than in the
previous biennium. That decrease would
not represent a reduction of school spending in the sense of cutting back on
programs, but rather only reflects demographic trends. Similarly, when the cost of providing a
health care procedure increases, the base budget will grow to reflect the
higher cost to provide the same level of service to the same number of
people. If funding is provided at a
lower level than the base budget, then programs will have to change in some
way, whether by providing fewer services, serving fewer people, or otherwise
changing how programs operate.
The 2004-05 base budget does
not include the impact of inflation. If
inflation were included, the 2004-05 base budget would be approximately $1
billion larger. That means that the 8.1% spending reduction is on top of a base budget that has already
been eroded by inflation.
2006-07 Spending Compared to Base Budget
The spending cuts made in 2004-05 are not one-time, and
their impact will be felt in the following biennium. 2006-07 spending is 7.2% less than
the base budget. It is important to recall that in addition
to this 7.2% cut, the way forecasts are made assumes that there will be no
inflationary increases over 2002-03 levels.
In other words, it assumes future legislatures will not provide
inflationary increases in program spending or to state employee salaries or
benefits above 2002-03 levels. If they
wish to do so, that will require new revenues or offsetting spending cuts.
Click on footnote number to
return to text.
[1] Base budgets
are as measured in the February 2003 forecast.
The 2002-03 base budget is adjusted for changes made through unallotment and
other changes to FY 2003 made in the 2003 session.
[2] The 2004-05
and 2006-07 base budgets do not include any inflationary growth over 2002-03
levels, but rather are only adjusted based on forecasted changes, such as
changes in school enrollment or expected health care caseloads.
[3] For a more
detailed listing of the impact of budget decisions on specific programs, see
Minnesota Council of Nonprofits/Minnesota Budget Project,
Impact of the Final FY 2004-05 Budget.
Updated August 2003
|