Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, argues against a proposal by Gov. Jan Brewer for higher sales taxes at a press conference Wednesday at the state Capitol, backed by an inflatable ATM which, in this case, stands for "Already Taxed to the Max" (Capitol Media Services photo by Howard Fischer).

On the same day that Gov. Jan Brewer stood outside the state Supreme Court demanding to be sent budget bills she wants to veto, Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, ushered some elements of her budget agenda through a legislative committee. It just so happens these matters can’t possibly help erase the current $4 billion deficit. But they just might prevent — or at least mitigate — some future state budget crisis.

Pearce was a key architect of the legislative budget plan that Brewer hates, and he held a news conference just this morning to reiterate his fierce objection to her desire for a statewide vote on a temporary 1-cent sales tax increase.

But Pearce has long advocated for other policies that are part Brewer’s overall budget agenda. His committee, Senate Appropriations, worked late Tuesday night to keep moving two bills that would further restrict the state’s ability to spend money and restore some of the Legislature’s authority to actually write a balanced budget.

SCR1006 has been referred to as “TABOR-lite.” It would lower the maximum limit on spending in the state General Fund to 6.4 percent of the total personal income of all Arizonans. The state has never has reached the current constitutional limit of 7.4 percent of all personal income, a fact that enabled former Gov. Janet Napolitano to expand General Fund spending from about $6 billion to about $11 billion between 2003 and 2008. (The current budget is pegged at 6.1 percent, Capitol Media Services reported). Taxpayer watchdog groups have argued with that, with a lower limit, Arizona would have withstood the economic downturn much better and the deficit would be far less than the projected $4 billion. Certainly, the Legislature would have less total spending to cut.

The best part of SCR1006 is if the state takes in tax revenue above the proposed 6.4 percent limit, the extra would have to be refunded to individual taxpayers. That would conflict with calls from some lawmakers (include conservatives) that the state should save more money in the good times (instead of growing government) to better weather the bad times. But I’d rather just get my money back, thank you very much!

The other bill, SCR1009, would allow the Legislature to temporarily suspend voter-mandated spending during times of deficits to shift funds to more critical government functions. This bill would allow lawmakers to stop funding for, say, early childhood education and daycare, in order to avoid budget cuts to the agency that investigates child abuse cases. This is the dreaded “Prop. 105″  problem, a 1998 initiative that essentially blocked the Legislature from making any changes to spending for programs approved in statewide elections. If you benefit from a program with such protection, you love this limit on legislative authority. But if you want the Legislature to balance budgets during recessions without raising taxes and user fees, well, good luck with that pipe dream.

Both measures are proposed constitutional amendments, which means they would have to be approved by voters in November 2010 and wouldn’t really matter until the budget that starts July 1, 2011. In other words, they are great ideas but could wait until next year for the Legislature to deal with.

Meanwhile, details are starting to filter out about what a government shutdown on July 1 of this year would mean. Forget child abuse investigations.  Also, no disease vaccinations, the state parks would all close, no new driver’s licenses and construction along Loop 202 would halt immediately.

Democrats aren’t any happier with Brewer’s proposals than the Republican budget plan the minority party voted against two weeks ago. But referring to the alternative as a ’stark view,’ Democrats are now calling for the governor to receive the budget package so the process can move into the next stage, instead of playing a game of chicken with the paychecks of thousands of state employees at stake.

“It absolutely cannot come to this. Each day the infighting continues, the people of Arizona are put more at risk,” said Senate Democrat floor leader Jorge Garcia, D-Tucson.