No slowdown yet
State revenue continues to come in well ahead of last year and forecast, according to September numbers from the state DFA which were stronger than the preceding month.
Gross collections for the first quarter were $1.27 billion, or $90 million and 7.6 percent above last year and $39.5 million above forecast.
In September, gross collections were 10.1 percent above last year and 5.5 percent, or $24.8 million above forecast. Add that to the surplus.



Comments
Where are these surplus millions invested, and does it pay interest?
How about sitting on the principal and spending the interest on good works for the benefit of the public.
Forget rebating the interest to every adult in the state. By the time they cut the checks and paid the postage, I think it would amount to about $4 for each of us.
Posted by: Spirit
|
October 3, 2006 10:21 AM
No doubt Ricahard Weiss, the eternal liberal pessimist, will have something negative to offer.
Posted by: Rocky Patel
|
October 3, 2006 11:03 AM
Still don't want to get rid of the grocery tax libs ?
Posted by: The Citizens Journal
|
October 3, 2006 11:06 AM
Either get rid of the tax on food humans eat or put it on food livestock eat. It's that simple.
Posted by: Rasputin
|
October 3, 2006 11:21 AM
Still don't want to get rid of the grocery tax libs ?
Posted by: The Citizens Journal
I think most liberals would love to stop taxing people's daily bread IF the revenue loss doesn't cause a shortfall in funds needed to run the state.
This seems to be a notion foreign to neo-conservatives, this idea of not cutting taxes if we have to borrow the money to make up the revenue loss.
I cannot stand neocons. They are bad for our state, bad for our country, bad for our world. Bad bad bad.
Posted by: Spirit
|
October 3, 2006 11:28 AM
Why are some wanting to borrow 250 million and pay as much in interest when we could just fund it right now?
Any college officials or students care to explain how that makes any sense?
Posted by: The Bold and The Blue
|
October 3, 2006 11:30 AM
How much of this surplus is coming from new sources of revenue that were created by eliminating 15 sales tax exemptions in the last legislative session? That still leaves about 110 exemptions on the books, ripe for review & repeal come January...more than enough to repeal the grocery tax plus the tax on utilities for manufacturers in Arkansas!
Posted by: MysteryShopper
|
October 3, 2006 12:01 PM
Was there any polling done on the college bond issue? There has been virtually no discussion of it in the mainstream press. Kind of suprising given the fact that about 200 million dollars could be spent on interest or saved.
Posted by: ArkansasPolitics.com
|
October 3, 2006 12:08 PM
Shhhhh...Stephens Inc. doesn't want to hear this kind of talk! Plus the U of A has banned free speech. Float those new bonds, the upkeep on Witt and Jackson's graves are costing a fortune these days! Bond daddies need our help!
Posted by: Deathbyinches
|
October 3, 2006 12:29 PM
I gues no one read this morning's DemGaz talking abut the $250 million dollar price tag on the first round of K-12 buildings needed for the supreme court's "spend till we're broke" ruling? That was a quick use of the surplus. It also mentioned that DHHS over $300 million increase for its services. And, you know prisons are coming in with their request(s). While I personally wish that Higher Ed got to be first in line for the surplus, we all know they won't be thus the bonds and it needs to be passed now. That surplus is already spent before higher ed even gets to the table. I've heard polls show bonds passing and now the TV spots seem to be on.
Posted by: Inside
|
October 3, 2006 02:10 PM
The proponents of the bond issue haven't made a good case. Until they do, I will vote NO. We have the money. The surplus may be one-time money, but the bonds would be for a one-time expense. I say we should use the surplus taxes to fund the construction that the bonds would fund. The only losers will be the bond daddies.
Posted by: Pavel
|
October 3, 2006 02:16 PM
It seems to have been lost that there was a record 350 million dollar tax increased voted in during the 2003 session. You wonder why we have such a surplus? It is not the only reason but a factor.
Posted by: Dome Rat
|
October 3, 2006 10:09 PM
I don't know who got it started but the surplus is not "one-time money." While it's possible revenue could decrease during a recession, it's also possible it could continue to rise. If one of the Walton's died that would be "one-time money."
There is more than enough money to fund the college construction needs even after paying for k-12 building needs.
Why should we pay $500 million for $250 million in projects. That's just plain ignorant. Anyone with a college education that thinks that is a good idea should have their degree revoked.
If this passes, taxes will be cut. BUT we will spend $250 million extra on interest after we pay off the intitial cost. This will of course result in just lower funding for higher education.
Posted by: The Bold and The Blue
|
October 4, 2006 01:37 AM
Matter of fact, if this passes, the ledge should cut higher ed funding by $500 million. Let the colleges (i.e. students) pay for the $200 million in interest.
Posted by: The Bold and The Blue
|
October 4, 2006 01:42 AM