Republican Gov. Jeff Landry wouldn’t be much of a chief executive by Louisiana’s past standards if he wasn’t using his line-item veto clout. But this year his aim seems different.
In his first two years, Landry employed this technique of vetoing line items animated by a particular purpose. In 2024, he lopped off items that he didn’t see having a statewide purpose that went to nongovernmental organizations, and from there developed criteria by which such requests would pass his muster. In 2025, he used his pen more punitively as retribution against legislators, even of his own party, who opposed some signature pieces of his legislative agenda.
For 2026, the overall theme seemed to be to get Orleans Parish affairs in order. The regular capital outlay bill for 2024 apportioned for projects exclusively in New Orleans some $341 million (keep in mind this doesn’t have to be spent in that year or could include projects from previous years not complete, and this amount includes roads, ports, and recreation money but not for state buildings, and also accounts for NGOs and subgovernments exclusively within the parish), and its 2025 counterpart laid out $514 million (the jump mainly due to a huge appropriation to the Port of New Orleans, counted although technically in St. Bernard, as well as the airport, technically in Jefferson, counted in all years). In 2024, all three Landry line item excisions hit Orleans, for almost $2 million, and in 2025 none of those three affected Orleans.
But in 2026, where it had doled to it out $584 million, Landry sliced out much more. Orleans lost $30 million to his slashing ink across several lines, the large majority in renovations to City Hall and Armstrong Park plus a so-called “integrated health care hub” proposed by Volunteers of America next to the BioDistrict. (Landry also showed skepticism of the necessity of state taxpayer ponying up for several local projects dealing with NGOs expanding housing options and so-called “resiliency” hubs.)
Reviewing the state’s general appropriations bill, which also has some items including cash for services tucked in it, the carnage increases. That knocked out a variety of projects to the tune of $6 million more.
This got local politicians fuming. In response, Landry’s office reminded them about his criteria about projects using statewide dollars addressing a statewide need and/or a pressing local government need. Perhaps the biggest point he made was about startup dollars to renovate New Orleans City Hall, striking just a pittance of the estimated cost of $200 million and explaining this as “The state has come in to help, but that must also come with fiscal restraint. My goal is to work with the city to prioritize spending on government services and to not be too hasty with new projects they may not be able to afford” (emphasis added).
Because there have been plenty of wasted dollars on poor policy decisions by New Orleans. Over the past several years the city has blown well over $100 million on “affordable” housing initiatives utterly failing to decrease homelessness, thwarted by confiscatory property taxation, a counterproductive rental registry, and “inclusionary” housing policy that decreases stock. It insists on boosting energy costs through pursuit of a vapid renewable energy portfolio standard (uniquely, city government oversees its power utility regulation). And policy mistakes like these plus others and general mismanagement forced the city last year into a needing bailout from the state of over $100 million.
Indirectly through these vetoes, Landry tells New Orleans it has to get and keep its act together before he’ll countenance spending on peripheral things; indeed, if it had its act together it could foot these requests on its own. In fact, it still carries a huge budget deficit, recently had to take out a loan, and has resorted to gimmickry to stay afloat.
Keep in mind Landry still let through almost 95 percent of city-specific requests, and he was wise to practice this version of tough love. Once city/parish elected officials and the city’s legislators learn to make better policy decisions and live within their means, then the bells and whistles can be added to the meat and potatoes they have struggled to provide to their citizenry.
No comments:
Post a Comment