Turnaround Ted's Billion Dollar Budget Bust

Bottom Line: Ted Strickland used billions of dollars in one-time federal bailout money to balance Ohio's budget - creating an unprecedented deficit in two years and setting the stage for a massive tax increase.

Strickland's budget created a nearly $8 billion deficit:

State Auditor Mary Taylor spent weeks crunching state budget numbers and came up with a hypothetical and scary number: $7.97 billion in red ink by June 2013. (Dayton Daily News, 4/16/09)

Strickland's used unprecedented amounts of one-time federal bailout money to balance the budget:

At no point in history, even when state leaders have raised taxes, has general-revenue-fund growth matched the roughly $7 billion in one-time money contained in this budget. (Columbus Dispatch, 2/23/09)

Strickland refused to say how he would address the unprecedented deficit his budget creates in two years:

"What do we do in two years? I'll cross that bridge when I come to it," said Strickland. (The Plain Dealer, 04/29/09)

Strickland's budget will require "a whopping tax increase":

"For every $10 in Gov. Ted Strickland's proposed state budget, almost $1 would be one-time money. That's a recipe for a whopping tax increase in two years - after Strickland is safely re-elected or a Republican replaces him." (Editorial, Cleveland Plain Dealer, 2/8/09)

Strickland's budget would raise taxes by 24 to 31 percent, depending on the tax:

"Making up that much money in the next two-year budget would require a 31 percent sales-tax increase or a 24 percent income-tax increase, according to a report conducted by the Legislative Service Commission at the request of House Republicans." (Columbus Dispatch, 4/23/09)

Strickland's claim that his budget won't result in a tax increase called "baloney":

“Strickland aides say that because of an eventual rebound in the U.S. economy, which would pump income taxes and sales taxes into the state treasury, spending so much one-time money to balance the 2009-11 budget won't force Ohio to raise taxes in the future. However you slice it, that's baloney.” [Editorial, The Plain Dealer, 2/8/09)

Strickland's budget used "word games" to create confusion:

"Gov. Ted Strickland's proposed 2009-10 budget and its school-funding plan are like the 'new math' of the 1960s, which made concepts more important than right answers. In fact, because of Strickland administration word games, you really can't use a calculator to crunch these budget numbers. You need a dictionary." (Editorial, The Plain Dealer, 2/20/09)

Strickland's budget was constructed with "fudged numbers":

"To make his case for stimulus funds, Strickland fudged some numbers." (Column, Joe Hallett, Columbus Dispatch, 2/22/08)

Strickland refused to provide clear information on his budget:

"[A]s to Ohio's budget, Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland's administration seems to say, 'Facts are whatever we say they are - and we don't take questions.'" (Editorial, The Plain Dealer, 3/2/09)

Strickland's budget created "more questions than answers":

"More questions than answers arise when Gov. Ted Strickland's $54.7 billion, two-year budget comes under scrutiny, because atypical methods were used to calculate some of its numbers." (Editorial, Columbus Dispatch, 3/7/09)

Strickland's budget staff refused to provide long-term financial projections:

"Strickland's top budget officials have refused to offer detailed projections for 2012-13. That has raised eyebrows because two years ago, the administration took great pride in coming up with a four-year forecast." (The Plain Dealer, 4/17/09)