Leadership

Nevada's budget picture is ugly. On top of an accepted $900 million shortfall in the budget, there's some question how much more will need to be cut out. And it appears that a high ranking Democrat in the legislature is dealing with this question by planning on just sticking to the sunnier projection (presumably, so votes on even more drastic cuts can be avoided).

This might be illustrated in the legislative handbook with an ostritch in its classical pose of defense. You don't deal with frightening projections by hoping they just go away.

"CARSON CITY, Nev.—No Nevada law requires lawmakers to accept a panel's finding that the state faces a nearly $1.2 billion revenue shortfall—and a key Democratic legislator said Monday that's a good thing because the finding appears questionable. "

The proper plan is surprisingly obvious - plan for both contingencies. Approve a conditional budget that says "if $X needs to be cut, do A, B, C. If $Y needs to be cut, also do D, E, F." If dealing with uncertain forecasts, acknowledge your uncertainty and make conditional plans so you aren't caught with your pants down in a few months.

If you don't need to cut the extra money, great! If you do, at least you prepared for it in advance.