Paris Hilton may be able to shop without looking at price tags, but the State of Illinois doesn’t have that luxury—particularly when it already has $4.7 billion in unpaid bills. Even so, state legislators receive precious little information on how much the laws they’re approving will save or cost taxpayers.
A summer 2010 survey by the Illinois Policy Institute found that out of 545 bills pending review by the governor, only 3 percent—or 16 bills—had fiscal notes attached. Fiscal notes are like "price tags" for legislation. They are intended to estimate the costs, savings, revenue gain, or revenue loss resulting from the implementation of proposed legislation.
Many of the fiscal notes found in the Institute's survey were just a couple of sentences long. Believe it or not, we found a fiscal note that was just one word: "minimal."
The result of this lack of information? Legislators and the public are unable to conduct a proper analysis of the budgetary effects of proposed legislation, and this has real consequences for the state budget. Indeed, the Blagojevich All Kids Expansion passed in 2005 had no fiscal note, although an Auditor General report found that the program’s net cost was $70 million in fiscal year 2009. The statewide sales tax holiday held this August was passed with no fiscal note, even though it is likely to reduce expected tax collections by tens of millions of dollars. Unfortunately, these examples are the norm, not the exceptions.
If Illinois is going to balance its budget, state leaders will need better information on the cost of new programs or higher taxes. Continuing with the status quo—which permits bills to be passed without realistic cost estimates—is untenable for a state that is billions of dollars in the red.
How about enacting a stronger fiscal note statute and develop standardized guidelines that aim to increase note availability, accuracy, and transparency.
I look at price tags when I'm shopping at the grocery store. So should legislators, especially when they're spending our money.