Chet Culver's 10% Solutions

Chet Culver has twice now invoked his solution for the state budget shortfall. 10% cuts across the board, no exceptions. This presumes that all budget items have equal weight. This is a fallacy.

If human services are cut 10%, this has a multiplier effect to those who are already in the most need. If this is applied to staffing child abuse or elder abuse investigators or to provide aid for mentally ill persons, these funds are already spread too thin.

Why not take a harder view on how tax dollars are being spent or not being collected? Tax abatement is an example of how government provide "welfare" to corporate entities with the promise that jobs and revenue will be created through their largess with our tax dollars. Clearly job creation is not going well, so why provide the "out" when we need the income?

Also, are all programs that are being funded with tax dollars necessary given the shortfall? If push comes to shove, are we really going to continually take dollars away from education so that more roads can be built? Clearly the 10% solution is easy to explain and appears to be fair, but in the longer run, it is a recipe for disaster.