August 18, 2009 07:59 PM UTC

Proposed Budget Cuts Slightly Less Than Feared, GOP Plans Attacks Anyway

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

Fresh up at the Denver Post:

Gov. Bill Ritter plans to eliminate 267 state positions to balance the budget, but it’s not clear how many people will lose their jobs because some posts are vacant.

The governor’s budget director, Todd Saliman, said today the cuts are not as deep as originally feared because the shortfall, once estimated at $384 million, turned out to be $318 million. [Pols emphasis]

The cuts announced today amount to around $320 million.

“Extremely frugal,” is how Saliman described the budget, but he was quick to point out areas the governor protected.

K-12 education was spared because of Amendment 23, a constitutional provision that requires a certain amount of spending.

Motor Vehicle Offices are safe, too because their funding no longer comes from the general fund, which finances a good chunk of the state budget.

Saliman said severance grants to communities impacted by mining are on hold until revenues pick back up. And the state will no longer issue $200 monthly checks to Coloradans who have applied for supplemental security income but aren’t yet getting SSI money from the federal government…

Among the programs that were spared or saw only minor trims: tuition assistance for the National Guard; drug and alcohol treatment programs; community-based developmentally disabled and mental health services; a juvenile diversion program; and senior services, including Meals on Wheels.

We’re monitoring Colorado Senate “News” for the expected GOP response–we’re told it will revolve around the words “not enough,” and generally be as snarly and belligerent as possible.

We’d say most Colorado voters will be happy it wasn’t worse. Not to mention the good-news difference between projection and reality can be mostly attributed to legislation passed this year that increased revenues, all of which was bitterly opposed by most Republicans. “Seniors keep Meals on Wheels in hard times” is a much more ingratiating message to the average well-adjusted person than “you didn’t cut the budget enough.”