Letters to the Editor

Your views in 250 words or less

DEBT: Architects oppose Debt Reduction Act

Letter by Stan L. Bowman, Olympia on April 22, 2011 at 4:56 pm | 2 Comments »
April 25, 2011 9:52 am

Re: “Debt Reduction Act will stabilize state’s finances” (Viewpoint, 4-20), which supported SSJR 8215.

The change in the debt limit calculation from three years to 10 years of state revenues is positive. However, lowering the debt limit from 9 percent to 7 percent of state general fund revenues would have negative consequences.

SSJR 8215 would not save the state money. It would only shift spending from critical infrastructure to programs that produce lower economic returns.

A new study conducted by Hebert Research for the American Institute of Architects found that the state gets more economic bang for its buck from construction spending. Every $1 billion spent on construction creates 13,820 jobs and $723 million in wages. That is 1,000 more jobs and $55 million more in wages than if those monies were spent in the general government budget. View the study at www.aiawa.org/CapitalBudget2011.

SSJR 8215 could actually increase spending. Bonds are the most economical way to finance new buildings. Without bonds, the state would have to use more expensive options such as leasing space or 63-20 financing, which is like lease-to-own.

Proponents state that money should be spent on schools, social services and criminal justice. Yet we cannot have lower class sizes without classrooms. We cannot heal the sick without hospitals and clinics. We cannot keep criminals off the street without police stations, jails and prisons.

(Bowman is executive director of the American Institute of Architects Washington Council.)

Tags:
*
The News Tribune now uses Facebook commenting on selected blogs. See editor's column for more details. Commenters are expected to abide by terms of service for Facebook as well as commenting rules for thenewstribune.com. Report violators to webmaster@thenewstribune.com.