“Kasich seems to pick the data set that shed the best light on him,” wrote Nicole Kaeding, a budget analyst for CATO, which awarded Kasich a grade of “D” on his budget record for last year.
The dispute could dent Kasich’s often-repeated claim he has the experience as governor and member of the U.S. House to restrain federal spending and dramatically reduce the $7.2 trillion in new publicly held debt the federal government is projected to add during the next decade.
CATO, which specializes in reports on issues such as state and federal budgets, taxes and regulation, reflects libertarian and conservative thinking among Republican conservatives.
CATO was responding to Kasich’s dismissal Sunday on Fox News of CATO’s grading his budget record, saying he did not “know who these folks are.” Kasich insisted “our budget overall is growing by about two percent or three percent.”
A Kasich aide later acknowledged the governor was familiar with CATO.
Rob Nichols, a Kasich spokesman, stepped up the criticism of CATO, saying Tuesday that “given this organization’s track record for giving A grades to states in budgetary dumpster fires, we’re not confident that they have the best system for judging what’s good and what’s bad.”
“If having a budget in structural balance, $2 billion in the rainy-day fund and $5 billion in tax cuts earns us a bad grade from this group, we’re very comfortable with that.”
Nichols appeared to be alluding to CATO awarding Republican Gov. Sam Brownback of Kansas an “A,” despite intense criticism that he has championed tax reductions that have forced his state to impose deep budget reductions. CATO graded each of the nation’s governors on their budget policies.
The dispute between CATO and Kasich revolves around two completely different ways to calculate how much the state spends in its two-year budget cycles.
CATO cites what is known as the general revenue fund, which includes money Ohio collects in state taxes as well as federal dollars for such programs as Medicaid, which provides health coverage for low-income people.
The state plans to spend $71.2 billion in general revenue fund money during the 2016-2017 budget cycle. That is substantially higher than the $52.5 billion in general revenue spending for the 2011-2012 spending years, which was Kasich’s first two-year budget.
But Kasich and his aides prefer to cite what is known as the all-funds budget, a much larger pool of money which includes money the state collects through licenses and fees, and hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants for education and the environment.
By pointing to the all-funds budget, Kasich can accurately claim that overall state spending will increase by 2.1 percent between the 2016 and 2017 spending years. But even under the all-funds budget, state spending increased by 7.61 percent between 2015 and 2016.
“By using the all-funds number, Kasich is trying to use federal spending to mask the quick increase in general fund spending,” Kaeding wrote.
“Kasich has little control over federal spending, but he is using it hide how much Ohio’s state spending has grown during his tenure. Additionally, Kasich is campaigning on a promise to cut federal spending and balance the federal budget. Under those promises, federal aid to states would decrease. If this was currently the case, Kasich’s record would look worse.”
About the Author