In New Hampshire, things are very different than they are in California, Illinois, or New York. Why is that?

From the article:

When Republicans William O’Brien and Peter Bragdon took over the State House and State Senate respectively, they inherited a massive deficit hole of $47 million from the previous budget. One reason Republicans swept the 2010 elections is because the Democratic leaders of the previous General Court had so badly mismanaged state funds.

Republicans almost immediately took to fixing the budget. They reduced spending by $1.2 billion, an 11% reduction in the size of the previous Democrat budget. They reduces general fund spending by $536 million, an 18% reduction.

Republican leaders also trimmed taxes and fees for businesses large and small and for individuals.

These moves provoked the usual expected howls from the Democrats. But the results are indisputable. The state now has a $17.7 million budget surplus, which is almost exclusively attributable to spending reductions (revenues are believed to be on the rise, as well, but the effects are unlikely to be felt for a couple of months.)

Here in California, it is hard to imagine a state government that isn't in chronic financial crisis.  We will stay that way, in spite of multiple positive examples like New Hampshire, until we get rid of the Democrats, which will probably be never.