News -> Cover Story

Jindal's Fuzzy Math

Cover1

The Republican wunderkind has failed Louisiana as a fiscal steward.
By JEREMY ALFORD

When Gov. Bobby Jindal took office in January 2008, he inherited a state budget that included a $1 billion surplus. During these tough economic times, that seems like a distant memory, almost a fairy tale, yet it was only four years ago.

What did Jindal do with all that money? In the hip-hop vernacular, he made it rain. He rolled back income taxes that voters approved under the so-called Stelly Plan in 2002, plowed $245 million into lawmakers’ pet projects and created a slew of tax breaks, including one with a price tag of $360 million. Jindal called it “terrific news.”  

The good news didn’t last long.

Jindal’s first Christmas in the Governor’s Mansion brought news of a $341 million mid-year budget shortfall. The young governor, an avowed fiscal conservative, had somehow allowed the state to spend more money than it took in. Complicating matters, revenue forecasters warned of a possible $2 billion deficit for the 2009-2010 budget year.

From that point forward, Louisiana’s fiscal fortunes went into free-fall, even as the governor’s press office cranked out news releases crowing about Louisiana’s supposed good fortunes. During the summer of 2009, Jindal convinced lawmakers to establish the Streamlining Government Commission. He called for $802 million in recommended cuts. The commission made 238 recommendations toward that goal, but less than half of them were enacted.

In 2010, lawmakers faced a $580 million mid-year budget deficit amid reports of a $1.6 billion fiscal “cliff” the following year. The centerpiece of Jindal’s 2010 legislative package was a bill aimed at online sex predators. In essence, he told voters to pay no attention to that fiscal demon behind the curtain.

As the 2011 session neared, the $1.6 billion shortfall loomed large; some said it could approach $2 billion. Thanks to some clever accounting and some fiscal legerdemain that would make Enron blush, the $1.6 billion “shortfall” was covered. At least for one year — enough to get Jindal past his re-election campaign.

Or was it?

This past December, two months after his “landslide” re-election, Jindal had to make $251 million in mid-year cuts. Then, last month, the Revenue Estimating Conference announced another revenue gap exceeding $514 million — $211 million for the current fiscal year and an estimated $303 million for the year beginning July 1.

In every year since Jindal took office, the administration’s budget numbers have proved way off the mark. Jindal’s bad math has become a chronic problem for Louisiana.

How did this happen? The REC shares part of the blame — and rest assured Team Jindal will make sure that someone other than the governor gets blamed. As its name implies, the REC is charged with estimating state revenues — independently of the governor and lawmakers — and its estimates are binding. Since 2008, the REC, packed with Jindal backers, has overestimated revenues. That’s anything but a conservative approach.  

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 20 states have crafted current-year budgets without mid-year corrections. So it is possible to budget prudently, even in these difficult economic times. One of the reasons Louisiana does not rank among the prudent states is because it’s easier for Jindal to pretend there’s no real crisis — until after the annual legislative sessions. Then he can cut as he pleases without major legislative battles.

If he has a fiscal policy, it could be summed up in a question: Why deal with a budget crisis today when you can put it off ’til tomorrow?

So here we are. State government salaries are higher than ever, especially in the executive branch, while funding for health care and education has been cut significantly.

What would have happened if, back in 2008, Jindal had invested that $1 billion surplus and prodded lawmakers to temporarily suspend Stelly instead of repealing it?

The answer is speculative, but no guessing is required to conclude that Bobby Jindal has failed Louisiana as a fiscal steward.     

Jeremy Alford can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .



Comments (5)add
...
written by Greg Foreman , May 09, 2012 - 01:35 pm
The basic problem-just one of course, not all- with Jindal is he has never worked for a private company. His entire work experience from day one has been in the governmental sector. He has never had to make decisions concerning the "life and death" situations occuring in a "true" business enviornment. He has never lived in the "real" world. Bobby Jindal is the ultimate consumate politician--and then a poor one at that. As such, he is totally ignorant, totally blind to the what can and what will make an operation, successfull. In Jindal's mind, the resolution to the financial challenges facing Louisiana are simple--terminate employees, reduce services, privatize operations, provide untethered, unaccountable subsidizes to attract business to the state. In the words of Buggs Bunny, "what an 'idiotit".
...
written by Michael A. Moss , May 10, 2012 - 12:40 am
Greg, I totally agree with you. What do the Jindalista's have to save about their boy? Ya'll luv him, now what is the reason for pissing away the surplus?
...
written by Michael A. Moss , May 10, 2012 - 12:41 am
Jindalista's, that's BILLION, with a B!!
...
written by chano leal , May 10, 2012 - 04:34 pm
Greg, your verbalized clearcut observations on the failure of Government officials to manage affairs in a profitable return of investment as the private business sector, could not be any better explained. The decisive behavior of our government to diminish surpluses immediately with untettered expenditures in their first term in office by these,
" two for one inept couillions to repay campaign interests are just unimaginable.
we sit and wonder how we could be so damn gullible to vote such un-business types into office and the answer lies before our eyes, when one selects one enept candidate against another enept candidate on the basis of his rhetoric, is like eating a dish of Blue Bell vanilla ice cream or eating a dish of Borden's vanilla ice cream, the two party system offered up to the voters, past and present being democratic or republican, are just that " Vanilla. One and the same, and this is the most complete, biggest ruse, ever designed by man.
We need not wonder, why a two party system need not worry that a third party could ever win an election and lead this country, when every third party candidate ever offered up for our consideration, has been just a watered down version of plain vanilla.
...
written by Michael A. Moss , May 13, 2012 - 04:33 pm
Why aren't the Jinalista's who march lock-step with Jinal commenting? No Testa-Kallies?
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement

Read the Flipping Paper!

Click Here for the Entire Print Version of
IND Monthly
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it