Josiah Bartlett Releases Budget by the Numbers

Local Aid down 4%; Government Operations cut 19.5%

The Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy compiled an apples-to-apples comparison showing the House passed budget cut of 11% includes a 4% cut to local aid but a 19% cut to government operations. The 19% cut to state government itself can be divided into a 29% cut for the bulk of state government and a 1% cut to HHS, which can also be considered 12% if you add in one-time stimulus money that went away.
 
The data is contained in two spreadsheets posted on the Center’s website. “We are committed to making the bottom line of the state budget more accessible to the New Hampshire citizen and this is the first step in that process,” Josiah Bartlett Center President Charlie Arlinghaus said. “The data in the state financial reports, because of our fund accounting system, makes some comparisons for FY2010 and FY2011 difficult. Some money that might be thought of as general fund for practical terms is categorized as federal funds but behaves as if it were general fund.”
 
“As an example, a straight comparison of general funds spent on the department of HHS shows flat funding but the stimulus money, funded by a one-time increased Medicaid matching percentage, functioned in most practical ways as if it were general fund money. Although the increased federal grant was a one-time windfall, it was used to fund ongoing programs which to be supported at the same level would require the one-time stimulus money to be replaced with general funds. Our goal is to try and tease out those differences and explain them so citizens can make their own judgments.”
 
The Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy is a independent free market think tank focused on state and local public policy issues that affect the quality of life for New Hampshire's citizens. The Center has as its core beliefs individual freedom and responsibility, limited and accountable government, and an appreciation of the role of the free enterprise system. The Center seeks to promote policy that supports these beliefs by providing information, research, and analysis.

NH Budget Components

Arlinghaus: State Budget by the Numbers

Apples to Apples Spending

NH Watchdog - NH Parole Law differs from Texas, Kansas

By Grant Bosse

(CONCORD) New Hampshire’s newly enacted mandatory parole law differs from a Texas program that supporters cited as a case study in how prison reform would reduce recidivism and control costs. Under the New Hampshire statute, passed this spring under Senate Bill 500, all inmates must be paroled within nine months of the end of their maximum sentence. But the Texas parole program that Granite State lawmakers used as a guide does not allow for automatic parole for all inmates.

SB 500 was based on the work of legislative study committee tasked with reducing recidivism and the growing budgets at the Department of Corrections. Based on research from the Council of State Governments, the Pew Center on the States, and the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation. Lead sponsor Sen. Sylvia Larsen (D-Concord) cited the CSG’s January 2010 report “Justice Reinvestment in New Hampshire” during a the Senate Judiciary Committee’s public hearing on SB 500 in February.

Marshall Clement represented CSG’s Justice Center at the hearing, testifying mandatory supervision of inmates was based on data from 12 states. He specifically cited programs instituted in 2007 in Texas and Kansas. Corrections Commissioner William Wrenn recently told the Union Leader that the New Hampshire program was based on experiences in Texas, Kansas, and Arizona. But none of those states mandates parole for all inmates, and Texas excludes the most serious sex offenders entirely.

Texas

Mark Levin is the director of the Center for Effective Justice at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, and has been the leading advocate for parole reforms in that state. In a January column in the Dallas Morning News, Levin writes that Texas officials reserve the right to withhold parole from the worst inmates.

In Texas, parole is a privilege, not a right. Inmates demonstrate their commitment to change through good behavior and completion of work, education and treatment programs. Each case is reviewed based on individualized factors and the severity of the offense.

Furthermore, the most dangerous Texas sex offenders are ineligible for parole. The most seriously violent inmates serve 87.5 percent of their sentences, with serious sex offenders serving 97.5 percent. Yet two-thirds of offenders enter prison for a nonviolent offense.

This contrasts with the New Hampshire law, which mandates release of nonviolent inmates who have served 120% of their minimum sentences, and all inmates within nine months of their maximum sentences. The only exception to the mandatory outside supervision period are sex offenders subject to pending civil commitment proceedings.

Kansas

Kansas’s parole and probation programs have been held up for years as models for other states to follow in order to reduce recidivism. Unlike New Hampshire law, Kansas does not mandate parole for all inmates. In fact, the Kansas program relies heavily on behavioral incentives.

At the recommendation of the task force, in May 2007, the Kansas Legislature approved a package of criminal justice legislation which included:

* creation of a performance-based grant program for community corrections programs to design local strategies to reduce revocations by 20 percent;
* establishment of a 60-day program credit to increase the number of people who successfully complete educational, vocational, and treatment programs prior to release; and
* restoration of earned time credits for good behavior for nonviolent offenders.

Despite recent success in cutting recidivism rates, Kansas budget writers are cutting back support for the initiative, as reported in April by the Kansas City Star.

The Kansas method of preparing inmates for re-entering society was considered the crown jewel of correctional systems worldwide. Congress in 2008 established “Second Chance” grants to help other states create the kinds of programs launched in Kansas — for drug rehabilitation, education, family reintegration and transitional housing.

Recidivism rates — the percent of ex-convicts committing new crimes — had in 2007 plunged statewide to 2.2 percent, less than half the recidivism of the early part of the decade.

The number of parolees re-convicted for felonies fell 36 percent. The total prison population and new admissions also were on the decline, enabling the Department of Corrections to project that Kansas needn’t worry about expanding its prison capacity for 10 years.

The recession and consecutive budget blowouts have thrown that momentum into reverse.

Arizona

According to the CSG’s Justice Center, Arizona has not yet implemented any prison or parole reforms based on the CSG model.

The CSG’s Justice Center tracks fourteen states, including New Hampshire, that it is working with on prison and parole reform. Eight of these states have not yet enacted laws based on the CSG findings; Arizona, Indiana, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Four states have implemented CSG recommendations, but include significant incentives for inmates in determining who received parole; Kansas, Rhode Island, Texas, and Vermont. Each of these states has also increased state spending on rehabilitation programs and parole officers.

Only New Hampshire and Connecticut mandate the release of all inmates for a period of supervision before the completion of their maximum sentences.

NH Watchdog - NH House Misled on Parole Law

NH House told parole bill would not apply to violent offenders

By Grant Bosse

(CONCORD) A controversial change in New Hampshire’s parole law that forced the early release of child sexual predators was pitched to New Hampshire lawmakers as only applying to nonviolent offenders. House records show that the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee believed Senate Bill 500 would not change the status of violent criminals.

Rep. Stephen Shurtleff (D-Concord) summarized the Committee’s recommendation in favor of SB 500 in the April 16, 2010 House Calendar.

The parole system will also undergo a number of reforms, but two very important facts will not change: violent offenders will still be subject to the jurisdiction and discretion of the parole board and New Hampshire’s truth in sentencing law will remain intact. Nonviolent offenders will be subject to release after serving 120% of their minimum sentence, including the disciplinary period required by law. (Emphasis added)

Shurtleff also writes that the bill was amended to exempt crimes related to domestic violence from the nonviolent category. Contrary to Shurtleff’s report, the new law removed the State Adult Parole Board’s discretion. It mandates the release of criminals nine months before the end of their maximum sentences in order to ensure that they were under supervision during their first months outside of prison.

In a recent Concord Monitor article, several supporters of the bill say they believed it only applied to nonviolent offenders. Senator Peter Bragdon (R-Milford) hopes to repeal part of the law when the Legislature reconvenes to consider several gubernatorial vetoes next week.

“My understanding was that it was for nonviolent offenders only. Upon a more careful reading now, I see there’s one part where it says all offenders, not just nonviolent offenders.”

Despite his earlier writing, Shurtleff now claims that the bill was always intended to apply to all prisoners nearing the end of their sentences.

“This was no surprise to anybody. As for dealing with violent offenders, that was the whole intent of the law.”

The bill has become a hot-button issue in the campaign for Governor. Republican challenger John Stephen charges Governor John Lynch with mismanagement, while Lynch counters that Stephen is trying to scare the public. When Stephen first raised his criticism in August, Lynch’s campaign accused Stephen of misleading voters, according to an August 13, 2010 article in the Union Leader.

Stephen spokesperson Greg Moore said, “Governor Lynch could have easily demanded that either all sexual offenders be made ineligible for early release or that he would veto the bill, but he didn’t. Instead, he signed a bill that made some sex offenders ineligible for early parole but left others eligible.”

“Gov. Lynch passed a law to increase prison sentences for sex offenders – and this law doesn’t change that,” Walsh said. “Sex offenders will go to prison, and they will stay there for a long time. It is clear that John Stephen would rather offer misleading attacks than realistic plans to help New Hampshire’s workers and families.”

While the new law counts on expanded supervision of newly released inmates, it does not provide any additional funds to establish those programs. Members of the Parole Board protested the new law, arguing it removes their discretion to limit parole to inmates willing to seek rehabilitation. The first wave of inmates to receive the mandatory early release on September 23, 2010 included four men convicted of sex crimes, including at least one unwilling to enroll in sex offender treatment after his release.



NH Watchdog - NH's Artificial Surplus

NH “Surplus” relies on borrowing, transfers
By Grant Bosse

(CONCORD) Governor John Lynch yesterday announced that the state ended Fiscal Year 2010 with a $70 million surplus, but that figure includes both new debt and an $80 million transfer from the current fiscal year. The unaudited “surplus statement” comes from the Department of Revenue Administration. Lynch claims that the “surplus” came about from “our strong fiscal management”, but the real reason the state balance sheet appears balanced is because lawmakers approved a number of tactics to artificially inflate FY10′s bottom line at the expense of future years.

 

Building Aid

The FY10 Budget continued the recent practice of borrowing money to meet the state’s payments to local school districts under the Building Aid Program. By taking $45 million out of the General Fund, and paying for it out of the Capital Budget, the Governor and Legislature have created the illusion of a spending cut, while actually increasing the cost of the program.

University System of New Hampshire Loan

The budget fix proposed by Governor Lynch this spring, and approved by the Legislature in June, included a $25 million cash transfer from the University System of New Hampshire in lieu of the budget cuts that hit every other state agency. In exchange for the quick cash, the University System received $25 million in additional bond revenue from the Capital Budget. Neither this new debt, nor the $45 million in Building Aid debt, is included as spending under the “surplus statement” issued yesterday. These two provisions alone would wipe out the “surplus” claimed by Governor Lynch.

$80 million transfer

The budget fix also included an $80 million transfer in the Education Trust Fund from FY11 to FY10. An extra $80 million was inserted into the FY10 account, which then automatically transferred to the state’s General Fund, where it was counted towards the “surplus” generated by DAS. But that $80 million now needs to be moved back into the Education Trust Fund for FY11. Since the Education Trust Fund and General Fund operate on a two-year budget cycle, the transfer written into the budget in June has no legal or financial significance. But it does create an artificial surplus in FY10 and a matching deficit for FY11. Since the “surplus statement” ends with the close of FY10 on June 30th, it includes $80 million that is no longer there.

Prospective Deficit

The “surplus statement” does not address the prospective budget deficit that faces the next Legislature in January. Assuming all current spending continues, and one-time revenues and spending cuts do not reoccur, the state starts the FY12-13 budget cycle with a budget hole between $600 million and $900 million.



Gardner predicts near record GOP turnout

Bill Gardner predicts near record Republican turnout on Tuesday

(CONCORD) New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner is expecting 152,000 New Hampshire voters to pick up a Republican ballot in next Tuesday’s primary, while 70,000 will choose Democratic nominees. Gardner is projecting 24% turnout based on the state’s 919,000 currently registered voters, but expects 4,000 to 5,000 new voters to register for the first time at the polls.

Gardner says absentee ballot requests are running pretty close to 2002, when highly contested races for Governor and the U.S. Senate drove a record 155,000 Republican voters to the polls. In the 2008 September primary, just under 72,000 voters showed up for the GOP primary.

Gardner says he expects around 80% of the state’s undeclared voters to turn to the Republican ticket on Tuesday, simply because there is so much more going on in the Republican primaries. A hotly contested U.S. Senate race has flooded New Hampshire airwaves, phones, and mailboxes, along with wide open fields for Governor and in both Congressional Districts. By contrast, Democrat Paul Hodes in uncontested for his party’s Senate nomination, Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter had no competition in her primary, and Governor John Lynch faces two underfunded opponents.

“Republicans tend to vote more in primaries because Republicans have generally had more primary contests,” Gardner explains.

Gardner expects Democratic turnout to be slightly higher in the Second Congressional District, where Katrina Swett is battling Ann McLane Kuster. Gardner expects Republican turnout to peak in the First District, where four candidates have had the resources to air television commercials.

Democrats currently hold a narrow edge in party registration over Republicans, with both major parties at just under 29%, but 42% of voters are undeclared. Under state law, these voters can sign up with either party on Tuesday, and either stay on the party rolls after the vote or switch back to undeclared. Gardner says between a quarter and a third of undeclared voters stay with the party they join after the election. Since he predicts most undeclared voters will choose to vote in the Republican primary, he expects the GOP to retake the registration advantage next week.

New Hampshire Primary Turnout 2000-2010 (projected)

But Gardner says that September turnout doesn’t predict November’s General Election results.

“You have to remember that Democrats have never outvoted Republicans in a September primary,” Gardner says, based on his review of election returns going back to 1910.

Even in the Democratic landslides in 2006 and 2008, Republican turnout was higher in the primary. He says Democrats have outvoted Republicans in two Presidential Primaries, 1984 and 2004. Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush faced no major opposition to drive voters to the polls, while Democratic had contested primaries, with each campaign turning out voters.

Prior to the record turnout in 2002, the most voters who ever cast Republican ballots was in 1992, when the GOP had close races for Governor, Senate, and both Congressional seats. That year also set the record for Democratic turnout, with Arnie Arnesen getting the Democratic nod for Governor over Norm D’Amours and Ned Helms, with 91,000 Democratic votes cast.

Gardner bases his turnout projections in part on absentee ballot requests, and he’s compared this year’s requests to past years in several dozen towns. He says total requests are edging very close to 2002, but that heightened interest from Tea Party activists could boost total turnout even higher than he predicts.