News -> Walter Pierce RE:

The Imaginary Budget

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

The governor is leaning on one-time dollars, contingencies and state employees to balance the budget.

At first blush, Gov. Bobby Jindal’s $24.9 billion budget is giving even members of his own party the willies. “This thing is scaring me,” Rep. Joe Harrison Jr., R-Napoleonville, told The Times-Picayune shortly after the administration unveiled it Friday. “Did Stephen King write it?”

For the second year running Louisiana faces a billion-dollar-plus budget shortfall — $1.6 billion for the upcoming fiscal year with another $1.5 billion hole expected for the year after that. Lawmakers used a $3 billion feather bed of federal stimulus dollars the last two years on which to rest. But the stimulus money — one-time dollars used (hypocritically, considering the governor’s public opposition to the stimulus bill) for recurring expenses — has dried up.

Jindal is again turning to one-time revenue — $474 million by the Times-Pic’s estimation, including more than $85 million through the sale of state-owned prisons — to patch the stressed fiscal levee. Those prisons would be turned over to private contractors. But taxpayers would still have to fund operations. State Sen. Mike Michot of Lafayette, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, likens it to selling your house but still paying the rent.

That $474 million represents almost a third of the projected $1.6 billion shortfall the state budget faces.

Among the roughly $1 billion in cuts offered by Jindal:
• Slashing 4,000 state jobs, half of which are currently unoccupied
• Eliminating programs for at-risk youth
• Requiring rank-and-file state workers to devote a greater share of their paycheck for their retirement — up from 8 percent to 11 percent, an almost 40 percent increase
• Cutting about $109 million, or nearly 12 percent, from the state charity hospital system

In connecting those dots a theme emerges: A significant part of Jindal’s balancing act is done on the shoulders of the poor and public sector workers, easy targets in tough times.
Call it a trickle-down budget.

The interim chief executive of the 10-hospital LSU charity system says programs likely to take a hit are the prescription drug program for the homeless as well as cuts to dental, obstetric and pediatric care at rural charity hospitals.

Jindal’s budget also relies on passage by voters of a constitutional amendment that would generate about $92 million to fully fund the TOPS college scholarship program.

This has several lawmakers referring to the budget as “imaginary” — it relies on contingencies like the sale of the prisons and passage of the constitutional amendment to realize its fiscal goals.
Michot says he understands the unease. “That’s usually not the first choice of the lawmakers — for years we’ve done contingencies, but the last few years we had gotten away from them,” he says.

“So, there is a lot of concern by some members of the committee about the contingency language put in there.”

According to Eddie Ashworth, director of the non-profit Louisiana Budget Project, the state also leaves about $7.1 billion on the table in the form of tax exemptions to business. A good case — they help lure business to Louisiana by keeping us competitive with neighboring states — can be made for some of these tax exemptions. But others, according to Ashworth, give multi-national corporations like Walmart an unfair advantage over Louisiana companies — tantamount to having a mailing address in the Caribbean that lets them skirt corporate income tax levied by the state.

But in an election year, especially for Jindal who toes the party line against anything that can be construed as a tax increase, eyeing that $7.1 billion as a remedy is a non-starter.

“It will be discussed, but I don’t think it will get through the process,” Michot admits. “There are so many members in their first term, especially on the House side. And because they’re in their first term and they’re up for re-election they’re going to shy away from any type of revenue enhancement measures.”

Walter Pierce
About the author:


Comments (11)add
...
written by RCajunrunner , March 16, 2011 - 09:40 am
A Defined Benefit Plan that allows for retirement after less than A retirement system where a state worker puts in 30 years and retires at the average of one's highest 3 years salary is quite costly. If you want to drive a Mercedes, someone must pay for that Mercedes.

Take your highest 3 years of salary added together, divided by three you get the average. That average will be your pension for the rest of your life. If you start at 21 and contribute at a low salary and work your way up (as most do), you will retire before 51, receiving these payments for life.

Very few states provide for 100% replacement and our constitution says we cannot take this away, but I don't think it is at all unreasonable increase the employee contribution for ALL state workers to around 10%. The only problem I have with this part of Gov. Jindal's plan is it does this to only some state workers.
...
written by RCajunrunner , March 16, 2011 - 09:42 am
Man, I need to proof my comments early in the morning, but I think you can still catch what I'm saying in the first sentence.
...
written by JonQTaxpayer , March 16, 2011 - 11:00 am
Why won't the legislature ask the governor to eliminate the corporate loopholes such as the 1% rebate on sales tax collections? Wal-Mart gets one as does some four hundred corporations in LA... We'd have a $2 billion excess.
...
written by StateWorker , March 16, 2011 - 12:03 pm
The average pension benefit for a LASERS member is $19,000 a year. That's more analogous to a Kia Rio than it is to a Mercedes.

State employer contributions to LASERS account for only 2.2 percent of the budget for Fiscal Year 2010-2011. The trust fund has three sources: employee contributions, employer contributions and investment earnings. The greatest source of benefits is employee contributions and investment earnings.

LASERS members do not participate in Social Security, so the $19,000 I mentioned above is all these retirees will have to live on, unless we accept the fact that nobody can ever retire. Of course, if nobody leaves the workforce because they can't afford to, it makes the employment picture for young people even worse, doesn't it? Who considers that a desirable outcome?

Ninety-one percent of LASERS retirees live in Louisiana. Their pensions contribute about $860 million a year to the state economy. Impoverishing these people should not be considered an acceptable option.

Public employee pensions ARE NOT the cause of Louisiana's current fiscal crisis. Condemning public employees to poverty in retirement, while emotionally satisfying to some, will not solve the problem.


...
written by Lafayette Native , March 16, 2011 - 01:46 pm
The question raised is why won't the legislature ask the governor to eliminate the corporate tax loopholes? That's a very good question. Louisiana as did many other states in the early 2000's joined the competitive process of asking major corporations to locate in state. The idea was do whatever it takes to get jobs in LA. Good plan. However what we as tax payers have come to realize is that we are paying for those jobs.

Is competing against other states and effectively paying for jobs a good plan? The process shrewdly pits states against states. The end result of this competitive process is almost always good for the corporation but bad for the state. In LA we have so much to offer that major corporations want. Some examples are as follows. Comparatively low cost real estate and low cost of living. Low income and property tax. Extremely high quality of life for LA citizens. Great higher education system. Endless economic opportunity. The list goes on.

As a state we need to start looking closely at how much we are willing to pay for jobs. LA has so much to offer and I submit that the state sells itself. The question was why doesn't the legislature ask the governor to close corporate loopholes? Good question.
...
written by ragin_cajun , March 16, 2011 - 03:52 pm
The State of Louisiana pisses away more money in a week than any of us even realize. ALOT of it right here in Lafayette, too.

I personally don't care WHAT they cut so long as they cut spending. There's not a place in the budget of any government in this country that isn't bloated--military, police, regulators, transportation, education, benefits, public works, parks, welfare, all of it.

Cut it all.

Tax increase is completely unacceptable.
...
written by James Melancon , March 16, 2011 - 05:12 pm
by Lafayette Native "eliminate the corporate tax loopholes?"
---------------------

Give an example?
...
written by James Melancon , March 16, 2011 - 05:16 pm
by StateWorker The average pension benefit for a LASERS member is $19,000 a year. That's more a Kia Rio than a Mercedes.
-----------------

That maybe true but it amounts to a lot of Kias. Nevertheless, it is similar to social security in amount. The problem is how do you pay for it?


...
written by JonQTaxpayer , March 17, 2011 - 12:37 pm
When you spend money your purchases are taxed both at the state and local levels. When the taxes are collected by the merchant they are sent to the state coffers. Several companies receive a 1% tax rebate from Baton Rouge for "job creation" and other intangible benefits allegedly offered by large corportations setting up shop in LA. The amount of money returned to a large company like Walmart runs in the millions... If several hundred companies (I think it's around 400) receive this "tax rebate" then we must be giving back over a billion dollars to large corporations... Jindal has said he won't eliminate this because he considers it to be a "new tax"... But it's not a new tax! The tax rate isn't changing- the rebate is just being eliminated.
...
written by politicallypooped , March 19, 2011 - 12:09 am
Did anyone mention that Louisiana regular civil service employees fund HALF their own retirement pensions? Guess I'll be driving half a Kia. Louisiana has been drawing interest off my contributions for nearly 30 years. Jindal has p----ed away millions of federal matching dollars. He could have instituted furloughs or across the board pay decreases, but that would have meant taking $$ away from his pocket pals. He was a screw up when he was appointed to the Foster cabinet and he's screwing all of us now. The biggest toll on the State payroll budget is Jindal's appointees. Yes, he is selling off State owned properties and services. Supposedly citizens still have access to the same services...provided by private entities rather than civil servants. SO what we are actually doing is paying private corporations MORE to provide the same public services that your family and neighbors used to provide as civil servants. And guess what these corporations pay THEIR employees???? A fraction of what civil service professionals were paid..therefore, the money is going into the corporations pocket and your professional workers are headed out of state or transferring to other public jobs. Those who go home will be on the unemployment rolls.
...
written by ragin_cajun , March 21, 2011 - 01:57 pm
"Did anyone mention that Louisiana regular civil service employees fund HALF their own retirement pensions? "

Yeah, well I pay ALL of MY retirement benefits. Welcome to the real world.

"Those who go home will be on the unemployment rolls" Yeah, well that's how it works in the private sector, too. If my employer lays me off tomorrow, I am unemployed. Except, I don't go around applying for "unemployment benefits". I'd rather dig ditch first. In fact, I have.
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 
Advertisement

Read the Flipping Paper!

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