There’s no question it will be a daunting task to write a state operating budget that falls more than $5 billion short of many people’s expectations. There’s also no good excuse, now that we have the March 17 revenue forecast numbers, for delaying the writing of and/or passage of a balanced budget.

State lawmakers fully understand the scope of the problem.

While the decisions ahead will be difficult, they are absolutely necessary and must be made by the scheduled end of the session on April 24, without forcing the Legislature into overtime.

No excuses.

It’s not enough for the Legislature to pass a balanced budget. We need to go further this year and adopt a responsible balanced state budget.

For too long, the Legislature has passed so-called balanced budgets that have irresponsibly gambled against the future, leading the state into deeper financial trouble.

We need to learn from those mistakes and avoid making them in the majority party’s budget plan that hopefully will emerge in the next few days.

As the 2011-2013 budget is released to both lawmakers and the public, here are some questions we should ask:

1. Is this budget sustainable?

One needs only to go back to 2007 to understand why this is so important. The state still had a budget surplus, but it was rapidly depleted because the Legislature spent it on new and expanded programs.

Not only that, even though revenues were expected to increase by 7.5 percent, the Legislature passed a 2007-09 budget that increased state spending by 15 percent, despite warnings by the governor’s own fiscal analysts that enormous deficits could be on the horizon.

In the proposed 2011-13 state budget, we need to ask not only if this budget is sustainable for the next two years, but will it allow for sustainable budgets into the future?

2. Does this budget use one-time money for ongoing programs?

If it does, it is not sustainable and should not be accepted. The 2009-11 budget relied on billions in one-time federal bailout money.

Today, programs funded with that one-time money still exist, but we don’t have the bailout money to sustain that spending.

It’s one of the reasons why, even though revenues are expected to be $3.8 billion higher over the next biennium than the previous two years, the state is still facing a shortfall just to maintain these programs.

3. Is this budget transparent or does it use gimmicks to make it balance out?

Some lawmakers have unwisely suggested the 25th month accounting gimmick. This refers to using 25 months of tax collections to pay for 24 months of spending.

Essentially, it takes a month from the next budget cycle, leaving future legislators 23 months of tax collections to pay for 24 months of spending. The last time the Legislature pulled this budget trick was in 1971.

It took 16 years to pay it off, costing taxpayers millions more in interest because the state’s bond rating was downgraded as a result of this gimmick. We need a no-gimmicks, transparent budget with plenty of time (from 24 to 72 hours) for the public and lawmakers to review before it is placed for a vote.

4. Does it utilize priorities of government and reform spending for more efficiencies?

Washington’s constitution says it is the state’s paramount duty “to make ample provision for the education of all children.” Our priorities in the budget should be funding education first, followed by public safety and programs dedicated to caring for the state’s most vulnerable population. After these needs, we must sort out the “wants” and adjust spending to economic realities.

These are the types of decisions being made by families and individuals.

The same should be expected of state government.

5. Is it a no-new-taxes budget?

Voters were clear in November. Their message in three separate ballot measures was “no new taxes.” A spending plan that also uses higher fees to replace tax increases cannot truly be called a no-new-taxes budget.

During this session, 68 House bills were introduced that would raise $325 million in fees for 2011-13.

That does not respect the voters’ wishes.

Whether you call it a tax or a fee, it still comes from the same place – taxpayers.

And quite frankly, in these economic times, citizens can’t afford higher taxes or fee increases.

6. Does the budget proposal contain a strong reserve fund?

If this budget spends the last penny without providing a reserve for a safety net, what happens if there’s a future drop of expected revenues?

We need to save enough in this budget to keep the state afloat in case of unforeseen emergencies.

These are solid principles to lay as a foundation for a responsible balanced budget.

There should be no delays, no gimmicks, no new taxes, no special session and no excuses.

The time is now to step up, for our state’s economic future, and adopt a responsible balanced budget before April 24.

Rep. Jan Angel, R-Port Orchard, serves the 26th Legislative District.