Lt. Gov. Jay Dardenne is
no stranger to whining about how the area over which the Constitution assigns
him authority, culture, recreation, and tourism, has faces disproportionate reductions
in discretional provision of services – not as much because of revenue
reductions, as a large majority of the money this department in state
government receives comes from dedicated sources, but because of revenue
redirections permitted under law that take
away his ability to spend money as he pleases. Now he’s found more reason
to complain on this score.
This
time, it’s because state law allows for money
dedicated into a fund often used for maintenance of parks also to be used for their
continuing operations, which is what Jindal proposed and the Legislature passed
last year, and what Jindal has proposed that most of the money his
administration forecasts will go into it does again. Dardenne moaned about how
repairs need to be made to park infrastructure as a result of last year’s
Hurricane Isaac, and how the redirection was cramping his style in this regard.
He argued the state could make money off of the repaired facilities, which feeds
back into the fund which may be needed to support operational activities, as
budgeted.
Commissioner of Administration Kristy Nichols, however, pointed out that in years past during his tenure that surplus balances always had been left in the fund, available for repairs. And that is the case this year as well: just over $6 million was there at the end of fiscal year 2012. Of course, the damage didn’t occur until after the end of the fiscal year, and apparently Dardenne has committed the entire balance of the fund to other things by that time. Still, Dardenne could reshuffle priorities to delay some projects in favor of this if these were repairs were so critical.
By contrast, Treas. John Kennedy
seldom gripes about his spending discretion – his department’s funding comes
entirely from dedications and self-generated revenues – which means since
Jindal has taken office his revenues have decreased less than two percent per
year (essentially, the amount of the general fund money he used to get) while
his staffing numbers have fallen about the same. Instead, he likes to comment
about everybody else’s. So from time to time he treats the public with a
missive from up on high about how the state ought to be run, and in his latest
version he also uses Jindal Administration budget numbers as a foil.
This
time, he criticizes the budget for what he claimed were factoring in excessive
savings from moving most charity hospitals to private management, using
proceeds from refinancing the tobacco settlement bonds for continuing
operations, budgeting in property sales and at what he asserted were
unrealistic prices, and borrowing excess money from a special district’s
overstocked fund for operating expenses.
But the long-standing problem
with Kennedy is his desire to make for dramatic effect has led him to base his
recommendations on a number
of uninformed or mistaken premises. Nichols subsequently
pointed out that Kennedy used the wrong figures on both the savings
calculation and in the alleged overstatement of sale prices. Regardless,
Kennedy’s critique does point out the risk that in using settlement refinancing
money now it could (depending on market conditions) drain it for use later, and
by having essentially to borrow money for continuing operations (because
of the state’s convoluted fiscal system) this does not constitute the
wisest budgeting tactic.
Understand, however, that
this griping in public is not so much about trying to change these budgetary
maneuvers – neither Dardenne nor Kennedy offer any alternatives to the revenue
reductions that reversal of these would trigger – but to publicize their
putative candidacies for the state’s top spot in two years. By these
criticisms, they attempt to position themselves as knowledgeable and reasonable
individuals by contrasting their preferences to ones they paint as indicative
of inferior budgeting, in order to make themselves look better by contrast –
even if they omit or distort crucial data that is much less flattering to the
image they try to create.
Meanwhile, one other Republican reputed gubernatorial candidate of the
future who holds statewide office has elected so far not to join in this
strategy, but instead without a lot of fanfare has begin peppering the state
with a range of policy initiatives. Agriculture Sec. Mike
Strain by written
and spoken
means has avoided criticizing the incumbent’s budget but has concentrated on a
larger theme of economic development. Serious campaigning won’t begin for at
least a year, but it will be interesting to see which of these approaches,
should the individuals involved continue them unabated, gains the most traction
until then.
No comments:
Post a Comment