• About Us
  • Activity
  • Advertising
  • Books
  • Business
  • Contact
  • Entertainment
  • feedback
  • Government
  • Home
  • Interviews
  • Members
  • National
  • Nevada
  • Nevada News and Views
  • Newsmax
  • NN&V Ads
  • Opinion
  • Politics
  • Polls
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe
  • Subscription Confirmation
  • Survey
  • Survey
  • Terms of Service
  • Today’s Top 10
  • Travel
  • Travel
  • Travel
  • Welcome!
  • Yop Poll Archive
Nevada News and Views
  • Home
  • Muth’s Truths
  • Politics
  • Government
  • Entertainment
  • More
    • Nevada
    • Opinion
    • Business
    • Travel
    • News
    • Sports
  • Facebook

  • Twitter

  • Pinterest

  • RSS

Government

Clinger admits budget deficit contains a huge spending increase

Clinger admits budget deficit contains a huge spending increase
N&V Staff
October 6, 2010

(Victor Joecks/NPRI) – Finally, finally, finally. After six months of distortions and factual inaccuracies, Nevada’s budget director Andrew Clinger has finally been clear, honest and upfront about Nevada’s budget situation. (Of course, if you watched 90 for 90 or read “The $3 billion deficit myth” you’d already know the truth).

In an interview on “Face to Face” yesterday (props to Ralston for citing NPRI and asking Clinger directly about the budget number), Clinger said this: “What you’re talking about and what NPRI is talking about is the current two-year budget when we look at general fund appropriations … So when you look at just the general fund appropriations we’re going from [$]6.4 [billion] to [$]8.2 [billion]. So we’re increasing appropriations $1.8 billion.”

What’s ironic about this exchange is that NPRI has never disagreed with Clinger’s numbers — in fact, Clinger is the source of our numbers!

What Clinger had not been making clear, and what we had objected to, was that the “$3 billion deficit” he talks so much about assumed a $1.8 billion increase in general fund appropriations, a.k.a. a $1. 8 billion spending increase.

I’m grateful that he clarified this and I hope that every reporter, politician and citizen in the state begins to fully understand and accurately frame this debate.

Win, lose or draw, this is a fair debate: Should Nevada increase spending by $1.8 billion (28 percent!), should we reduce spending by $1.5 billion as even liberal Sen. Majority Leader Steven Horsford has suggested, or should we do some combination of both?

If you or Sen. Horsford is looking for ideas on how to reduce spending, there are plenty available.

Prev postNext post

Related Items
Government
October 6, 2010
N&V Staff

Related Items

More in Government

India Battling Sugar Subsidy Addiction

N&V StaffJanuary 25, 2021
Read More

Sisolak’s Proposed Budget a Slap Across Nevada’s Face

N&V StaffJanuary 21, 2021
Read More

Katie Williams Predicts Return to Clark County Classrooms in February

N&V StaffJanuary 21, 2021
Read More

U.S. Supreme Court Restores In-Person Requirement for Chemical Abortions

N&V StaffJanuary 14, 2021
Read More

Trump, Biden and U.S. Sugar Policy

N&V StaffJanuary 11, 2021
Read More

The Governor’s Arrogant Climate Plan

N&V StaffJanuary 4, 2021
Read More
Scroll for more
Tap

Subscribe Free By Email

Looking for the best in breaking news and conservative views? Let Chuck do all the work for you! Subscribe to his FREE "Muth's Truths" e-newsletter.

* indicates required
Nevada News and Views
Nevada News & Views is an educational project of Citizen Outreach Foundation, a non-partisan IRS-approved 501(c)(3) organization. It is not associated or affiliated with any political party or group. Nevada News & Views is accessible by the public at no cost. It funds its operations through tax-deductible contributions from donors and supporters and does not accept government money or grants.

TAGS

Featured Article Nevada Politics Muth's Truths business government Government Opinion Obama News Donald Trump GOP Republicans Ron Knecht Adam Laxalt

Copyright © 2021 Citizen Outreach | Maintained by VirtualAlly

“Bring on higher taxes”????
State Treasurer Race Heats Up Over $50 Million Loss