How to Have a Fiscal Crisis: Lessons from Philadelphia
以费城1990年财政危机为例，分析城市如何因累积赤字和短期借贷需求被市场拒绝而陷入危机，对研究地方政府债务和财政管理的学者有参考价值。
In September 1990, the city of Philadelphia went to the municipal-bond market to borrow $375 million dollars for one year, a not unusual event for a large city needing cash to cover weekly expenditures until the quarterly or annual tax revenues are collected. What was unusual for Philadelphia was the size of the loan request; the 1990 proposed borrowing was $187 million larger than the previous year's request of $188 million. Investors rightly suspected that Philadelphia needed money for more than just the typical cover of a few month's cash shortfall. A closer look at the city's books revealed over $73.8 million in accumulated deficits from the previous six budgets. The extra $187 million of short-term borrowing was necessary to help cover the $73.8 accumulated debt and fiscal year (FY) 1991's expected deficit of $132.6 million. Investors rejected Philadelphia's request for the additional borrowing, and the city fell into a three-year fiscal crisis. The city emerged from the crisis with city residents and shoppers paying an additional 1-percent sales tax, city workers facing a two-year wage freeze and a reduction in employee benefits, and residents living with reduced public services. The long-run effects on city employment and property values are sure to be damaging. How does a city get into such a fiscal mess? This paper seeks to provide one answer to this question using the recent (FY 1963-1990) fiscal history of Philadelphia as a case study. I. Accounting for a Fiscal Crisis