Like most proposed constitutional amendments, it sounds so easy: Limit state spending in a given budget cycle to the revenue the state collected in the previous budget period.

And like most plans to bring simplistic solutions to complex problems, this idea is not just unhelpful, but dangerous.

The amendment idea was proposed by Gov. Tim Pawlenty and has been debated in a legislative committee.

Setting budgets forevermore by constitutional amendment is bad government policy. If put on the ballot and approved by voters, the amendment would further widen the gap between what existing programs need and what would be available to spend. That gap would be some $7 billion in just a few years.

Certainly, state government must and will cut the size or growth of most existing programs to deal with the budget shortfalls caused by the recession. But preventing lawmakers from making those decisions — and deciding what shortfalls must be made up with added tax revenues — would invariably harm Minnesota.

Growth in the population and new demands on government programs from an aging and changing population can’t always be met by spending only the amount of revenue collected in the previous budget cycle.

The disaster caused by constitutional mandates on the budget process can be seen in all its glory in California, where a variety of voter-initiated amendments have not just made it difficult for government to make budget decisions, but has unfairly shifted tax burdens to under-represented groups.

The governor’s own track record should show the problematic nature of the amendment. During his seven years in office, Pawlenty — a fiscal conservative and no-new-taxes proponent — has proposed budgets that would have violated what the amendment calls for.

Minnesotans elect members of the Legislature and the governor to make the tough decisions about taxes and spending. What those decisions are changes based on the political atmosphere, public support, changes in the economy and the needs of the state.

Elected officials, with input from their constituents, must be the ones to make those decisions.

— The Free Press of Mankato

Dec. 7