SALEM - From teacher layoffs to cutting as many as 355,000 people from Medicaid, Oregon's top budget-writers painted what they hope is a heart-wrenching scenario Thursday of what would happen if the state had to operate without increased taxes or other revenues the next two years.

Sen. Richard Devlin, D-Tualatin, and Rep. Nancy Nathanson, D-Eugene detailed what they think might end up on the cutting room floor if the state tries to stretch the $20.6 billion it is projected to have in 2017-19, to continue all current programs and services. State economists have said lawmakers will be $1.8 billion short.

To build political momentum in favor of tax and other revenue increases, the pair spelled out what Oregon would likely foresee without them: university tuition hikes, kicking people off the state's Medicaid program, larger class sizes and cuts in child welfare workers.

Devlin and Nathanson described their budget scenario as "one we believe Oregonians will reject."

"We do not believe the resources allocated in this document are sufficient," Devlin said.

Oregon Ways & Means co-chair Richard Devlin, D-Tualatin, has experience as the top budget-writer in in Oregon Senate and helped craft a bare-bones budget that requires no new taxes or other revenue increases. He hopes the Legislature will reject that plan and come up with more money to preserve state programs and services.

The magnitude of their proposed cuts was not a surprise. Democratic leaders in the Legislature said earlier this month they hoped the menu of cuts in the early budget proposal would help build political will to overhaul the state's tax system.

State economists expect Oregon to have nearly $1.3 billion more in tax and Lottery revenue in 2017-19 compared with the current two-year budget. But that's not enough to cover rising costs, particularly from the state's Medicaid program and personnel costs such as raises and public pensions.

Unlike the budget proposal Gov. Kate Brown released in December, Devlin and Nathanson's budget plan assumes the state will not pass any new taxes. Brown softened the impact of the budget shortfall in her proposal, by assuming lawmakers would pass $897 million in new revenue.

Co-Chairs' Proposed Oregon Budget for 2017-19

Here are highlights from the plan for a state budget that requires no new taxes or other new sources of revenue. "Current service level" is the state's official estimate of how much it would cost to continue all current programs and services in the next two years.

K-12 Education:

$7.8 billion, or 3 % less than current service level

Oregon Health Authority, including Oregon Health Plan:

$2.3 billion, or 28 % less than current service level

Colleges and universities

$2 billion, or 1 % less than current service level

Department of Human Services

$3 billion, or 9 % less than current service level

Public Safety

$2.5 billion, or 3 percent less than current service level

source: Co-Chairs' budget framework

Nathanson and Devlin attributed the budget gap to a "structural deficit" created by ballot measures voters passed in the 1990s to reduce property taxes. Voters also passed three ballot measures in November, for veterans, Outdoor School and high school graduation, that didn't include any new funding but will cost an estimated $357 million over the next two years, according to Legislative Fiscal Officer Ken Rocco.

Devlin and Nathanson suggested the state cannot fully fund those ballot measures, because doing so would force deeper cuts to other programs. That philosophy is similar to Brown's budget proposal, which particularly upset supporters of the ballot measure to boost services for veterans.

Devlin said that although the budget would increase spending on higher education from Brown's proposal, it would not be enough to avoid tuition increases of around 10 percent.

Compared with steep cuts proposed to health and human services, Devlin and Nathanson called for significantly smaller cuts to the education budget -- 2.6 percent below the current service level for K-12 and 1.4 percent below for higher education.

In contrast, the Oregon Health Authority would face a budget of 20 to 28 percent below what would be needed to continue its current offerings under the Ways and Means co-chairs' proposal. That could result in low-income Oregonians losing Oregon Health Plan coverage for dental, mental health and addiction services. The state could also kick people off the plan altogether.

The budget co-chairs singled out health and human services for the most dramatic program cuts because those agencies' costs are projected to rise so sharply for the next two-year cycle.

Devlin and Nathanson said the state would likely have to cut services at Oregon State Hospital facilities in Salem and Junction City, although they stopped short of calling for the Junction City facility to close, as Brown did last year.

At the Department of Human Services, the co-chair's proposed budget of 9 percent below what would be needed to continue all current programs would be felt across programs for people with developmental disabilities, seniors and child welfare. Those cuts would come at a time when the agency is under pressure to reduce caseloads and increase oversight.

In a statement, Senate Republicans applauded the budget as more realistic than Brown's proposal.

Rep. Nancy Nathanson, who stepped into her new role as the top budget-writer in the Oregon House this year, helped craft a state budget plan that demonstrates how Oregon program and services might be curtailed if lawmakers don't agree on new taxes and other new revenue sources.

"We sincerely appreciate the hard-work of the Joint Ways and Means Committee co-chairs in crafting a budget based in reality," Senate Minority Leader Ted Ferrioli, R-John Day, said in a statement. "The only way Oregon will get through the current budget crunch is by setting better spending priorities and demonstrating budget discipline."

Lawmakers will set to work on a detailed budget when the legislative session begins Feb. 1. Devlin said he expects they will ultimately approve a budget that includes both cuts and new revenue, similar to Brown's proposal in December.

"There will be cuts in programs and there will be needs for additional revenue," Devlin said. But he declined to say whether he anticipates passing a larger or smaller revenue package than Brown proposed, saying "that's probably down the road."

-- Hillary Borrud

503-294-4034; @hborrud