With lots of money, parties took advantage

Aug. 1 The Advocate (La.)

For the good-government watchdogs at the Public Affairs Research Council, there’s a five-letter word that describes much of the Legislature’s new budget: waste.

While some good things were done in this year’s legislative session, PAR reported, “lawmakers wasted tens of millions on favored projects for their districts that don’t represent state priorities. They continued unnecessary giveaways through tax break programs with uncertainty about their long-term impact on the state treasury.”

PAR also pointed to reckless decisions on spending during the chaotic end of the session in June, when lawmakers facing a constitutional deadline adopted a budget full of last-minute conference committee revisions that few had had time to read.

In theory, this year’s session was supposed to focus on the budget and other fiscal matters, but as PAR observed, “public safety concerns, culture war clashes and other political issues ahead of the fall election cycle drew significant attention that often eclipsed fiscal matters until the final days.”

And then amid chaos of the final days, the pork barrel was rolled out for most legislators.

Those left out, including by line-item vetoes that removed specific projects from the budget, were the most conservative members of the House, who objected to the original spending plans by the leadership and the governor.

Did those vetoes, or eleventh-hour cuts by Schexnayder’s leadership team, curb waste? Yes, to some extent. But as PAR and many other close watchers of the budget often observe, a specific project might not be of itself wasteful.

A state check for a water line or a recreation center might not be a terrible thing for the community involved, but it does not represent — as Edwards in particular noted — anything like a state priority.

And if the governor, as well as legislative leaders, used their cuts to punish legislators who objected to their agendas, the bigger picture is that the Legislature spent freely.

“The overall magnitude of the bill as finally passed is far beyond the state’s capacity to fund it in any reasonable way or amount of time,” Edwards wrote of the state construction budget. “The intent of the capital outlay bill is to provide for a five-year capital outlay budget. However, the general obligation bond portion of the enrolled House Bill 2 is well over a 10-year plan.”

The next governor, who will take office in January from the term-limited incumbent, will have to decide with legislative leaders which projects included in the bloated list will actually go forward.

When it comes to the Legislature, we agree that much of this spending deserves PAR’s five-letter word, waste. What it doesn’t deserve is a four-letter word, plan.

There was no plan. Just lots and lots of political checks written.