What is 9(C)?
Section 9(C) of Chapter 29 of the General Laws requires the Governor to reduce spending whenever his administration determines that there will not be enough revenue to pay for the spending authorized in the budget.
How Does 9(C) Work?
When does the Administration decide whether to make 9(C) cuts?
Technically the administration can announce 9(C) cuts at any time that they determine that revenue is likely to be insufficient to pay for all authorized spending. But there are also specific times when the administration is required to update its revenue estimates. The next such time is October 15th. If that new estimate projects a significant decline in revenues below the level assumed when the budget was adopted, then the 9(C) process would likely begin.
What can be cut and what can’t be cut?
The Governor can only use 9(C) powers to cut funding in parts of the government that are under his control – the executive branch agencies that run and fund most of state government. This power can not, however, be used to cut local aid, the courts, the legislature, or other constitutional offices. The Governor filed legislation seeking expanded powers to spread cuts to these areas of Government as well, but that legislation has not been enacted.
Are there any options other than cuts?
Yes. The Governor can also request that the legislature appropriate money from the stabilization fund or raise additional revenue.
Is it likely that there will be 9(C) cuts this year?
The administration has made some preliminary estimates that suggest revenue may be less than the amount needed to fund the spending authorized in the budget. If those estimates are accurate, 9(C) cuts are likely. In the first two months of the fiscal year tax revenues did not fail to meet the benchmarks. But there are some indications that the September numbers will be significantly weaker. If they are, it is likely that 9(C) cuts would be announced in October.
it’s not 9(C), it’s 9C, as in G.L. c. 29, s. 9C:
<
p>
Veddy Interesting Alternatives indeed.
<
p>
<
p>
first and see what they can save that way. Collective bargaining contracts will not be honored and pay raises will be eliminated which will save some dough.
<
p>I think 9C cuts are coming, but I don’t think it will be “too” bad. Personally, I think dipping into the stab fund is a bad idea. But I suppose that’s what it is there for.
Certainly noone is actualy consdiering such a thing.
Just like at the federal level, the only things actualy being considered are :
<
p>a:) assuming more debt if they could figure out a way to sell it.
b:) if not then, roll out the emergency “temporary tax increase
c:) and finaly celebrate with another round of patronage and nepotism
<
p>This is like a broken record.
homeless families. No patronage or nepotism there unless you count the religious women running the shelters Sisters.
What percentage of state spending is dedicated to homeless shelters or any such programs? Those were the first programs to be slashed back in the 80s in the time when every state shelter and hospital was closed tight and all their clients were tossed onto the streets. You dont have to sing that song, I know it by heart and have seen it from both sides.
The point is, even while slashing every such program, the gov. has still felt the need to triple overall spending. There are your cuts, find them, and quit holding out the tear stained card about programs for which there isnt anything left to slash. Those programs are barely a memory now.
Is the bill for all the shenanigans on Beacon Hill going to fall into Deval’s lap?
<
p>Deval is up to the task, but Billy Bulger and other legislative leaders knew that the bill would come due. One can’t run a tab forever!
<
p>
We have to have a balanced budget even if we take money from a rainy day fund to balance it.
but you can use all sorts of methods to balance budgets, not all of which are sound. Some examples include renegotiating debt, carrying over balances to the new fiscal year, or even applying balances in a current fiscal year to a previous one (if you had a balance the previous year).
<
p>But it does stink…feds can deficit spend up to wazoo but state’s are stuck having to pass balanced budgets filled with unfunded mandates.
…and then look at projects that can be put off without cutting mandatory or core services [y’know, sorry, but the Gazebos, Merry go rounds, and MBTA executive raises can wait, for example – but the bridges, mental health beds, and indigent defense cannot be put off].
Get by for a few more months, then on November 5th raise some new revenue. (Call me cynical, but sane!) We can’t afford very more cuts and it’s beyond apparent that Celluci’s vision in Massachusetts has been a massive failure.
<
p>The worst of this should be blamed on Celluci and the cynical nature certain people in this state propogate. We can’t get by with this level of services at this tax rate. It’s as simple as that. So, the question becomes cut or raise revenue. What do we cut? Our health care bill – the one that enjoys overwhelming popularity? Spending to cities and towns? Education? These are the only areas where we can come up with hundreds of millions in one fell swoop.
<
p>Of course, I’d like to see a renewed effort on progressive taxation. Many people indeed can’t afford the current rate, many at the top of the scale could afford to contribute more. The fact that we don’t have progressive income tax in Massachusetts has always confounded me.