Numbers? we don't need no stinkin' numbers!

Governor Bill Richardson says that across the board cuts of 3%, except for education, will fix the budget shortfall.

The opposition says, 4% across the board cuts, including education, are necessary to balance the budget.

And apparently, those are the only numbers that voter stakeholders will be given.

The deficit will be somewhere between 450-500 million dollars.

Unclear to me, the exact amount of the state budget,
but let's say five and half billion, after the cuts.

5.5B X .o3 = 165M

5.5B X .o4 = 220M

projected shortfall = 400-500M

We have a savings account, a rainy day fund. I'm going
to guess $8B (I don't feel like looking it up in the user unfriendly morass.)

It looks like Richardson will spend $55M more of our savings
than "the opposition".

8B - (.o4 x 8B) = $7,680,000,000 remaining

8B - (.03 x 8B) =$7,735,000,000 remaining


And, why aren't all of the figures on the table (internet)
before the decisions are made, in order that we may participate
in the debate? in order that we can participate meaningfully
in decision making that affects our interests.

What if for instance, instead of across the board cuts,
we wanted to start first with the departments and the
people who are wasting or stealing the most money?

Why don't we know already, where is the waste?

Why is the State Auditor not being given every bit of power and
resources he needs, to audit corruption and incompetence
out of existence?