Study offers more proof SOS would be a disaster

Take a billion dollars in state aid to schools and governments.

Now cut it by two-thirds.

It doesn't take much to imagine the impact that would have on schools and essential local governmental services. Then again, it might be unimaginable, as would the local property tax bill that would result as entities struggle to provide assistance and resources required by law.

That's the scenario proponents of the SOS petition are asking us to buy into.

According to a study, conducted by the Legislature's Fiscal Office at the request of Sen. DiAnna Schimek of Lincoln, had the proposed spending lid on state government been in place for the past 10 years, Nebraska's state budget would have been $643 million less this year, which could have resulted in a cut of more than 60 percent in state aid to schools and local governments.

"The loss of the state aid could be made up at the local level ... through higher property taxes, elimination of local services or authorization of other revenue resources," the study said.

What other resources? Money that will be spent over the next 30 years to pay off our McCook's new water treatment plant, new elementary school or proposed city/county jail and dispatch center?

Or money that would go to pay teachers -- can you say, "thirty kids to a classroom"?

Stop Over Spending Nebraska cites state spending that will go up 7.8 percent and 7 percent, respectively, over the next two years. Mike Groene of North Platte, who sponsored the petition along with Americans for Limited Government of Glenview , Ill., noted that the state budget will have increased 282 percent from 1984 through 2007, when the cost of living during that period increased only 83 percent.

The proposed amendment would tie state spending to cost-of-living and population changes, with other spending only if approved by the voters.

But they don't take into account the shifting of federal mandates to state tax bases, nor other legal requirements for much of the spending.

"It could, if passed, provide a lot of income for a lot of attorneys over the years," Schimek said.

Nebraskans should reject the amendment, and use their votes instead to send responsible, fiscally conservative leaders to Lincoln and Washington.