Opinion -- What’s Ahead in Congress This Year

By Lee H. Hamilton

 

Earlier this year, it seemed there might be some hope for Capitol Hill when Congress dealt easily with raising the debt ceiling. But don’t let that single episode fool you. As President Obama and House Republicans circle each other over the forthcoming budget cuts known as the “sequester,” it’s a reminder that Congress and the White House have a complicated legislative agenda ahead — and that none of the items on it will come easily.

 

We’ll get to the specifics in a moment, but two things need to be said up front. The first is that despite President Obama’s exhortations in his State of the Union speech, major policy changes will be difficult to make. The Democrats may have increased their margin in the Senate, but the Republicans still control the House. The ideological polarization and apparently incompatible views that marked dealings between the two bodies show no sign of abating. Significant policy initiatives are not impossible, but it’s safest to have subdued expectations.

 

Second, although rank-and-file members seem more willing than in the recent past to part with their caucuses on high-profile votes, power will continue to rest with the leadership. Over the year ahead, the dynamic to watch will involve the caucus leaders in both houses — ordinary members may have some impact on the margins, but they won’t be the center of the action.

 

The big issue, of course, will continue to be the budget and fiscal affairs. The major questions are: Can we get our fiscal house in order? Can we revive economic growth and make the investments we need in human and physical capital? And can we figure out a reasonable way to pay for the government we require — one that doesn’t need the 73,000 pages of rules and regulations that burden our current tax code?

 

However Congress and the White House proceed, it’s unlikely there will be any “grand bargain.” Instead, they are likely to make piecemeal progress on the core issues: increasing tax revenues and cutting spending on entitlements. Confrontations over these matters will make it harder to tackle other economic issues that need addressing, such as how to address the regulation of the biggest banks and how to finance the infrastructure that our economic growth desperately needs.

 

Congress will also turn to health care. As long as President Obama is in office, his signature health plan will not be repealed, but there will almost certainly be fights over its implementation and funding. The big issue — how to control health-care costs — will remain a centerpiece of the debate, but it is unclear how it will get addressed.

 

On the other hand, there is unambiguous movement on immigration reform. While Democrats have coalesced around a comprehensive approach to the issue — which would include ways of easing the stay of highly skilled workers, a guest-worker program, and a path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants in the country — Republicans have generally preferred tackling specific issues separately.

 

The two sides can find common ground, especially on high-skilled workers. Possible citizenship, on the other hand, will be much knottier to resolve. So while the gridlock may be easing, comprehensive reform of our broken immigration system is not assured.

 

You can also look for piece-by-piece initiatives on gun control. While the White House and some members of Congress are looking for wide-ranging legislation banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, others are focused on specific proposals that can gain bipartisan support. Some members with widely different views, for instance, are coalescing around an effort to expand requirements for background checks on gun sales.

 

Climate change, which gained national force last year with Hurricane Sandy, is less likely to see congressional action. Despite the certain threat of rising seas and storm surges, Congress seems unprepared to get serious about it. Instead, as he promised in the State of the Union, if Congress cannot act the President will take whatever steps he can by executive order, as he just did with cyber-security.

 

There are drawbacks to this approach, but it is a reminder that when Congress is able to act it remains a player, and when it can’t, it deals itself out of the policy picture.

 

Lee Hamilton is Director of the Center on Congress at Indiana University. He was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 34 years.

A Moment with Mike -- 2012 Session Ends

As the clock struck 6 p.m. and stacks of papers were tossed into the air, the 2012 legislative session came to a close.  It is hard to believe that is has been almost five months since we started this session, anticipating a poor economy, budget shortages and how we could make a positive difference for our state.  As I look back over the session, I believe that we accomplished some good things, including a balanced budget without increasing taxes.  Hundreds of bills were filed and many issues were debated.  There were some bills that were passed, soon to become law, that will make a difference in the lives of Missourians and I will discuss some of these in the coming weeks.  You will be receiving my end-of-session report soon that will highlight important changes in the law and where your tax dollars were spent in our $24 billion budget.
Government is at its best when it stays out of the way and refrains from imposing regulations that impair the ability of citizens and businesses to make a living.  We approved legislation last week that would require our state agencies to review the regulations they have in place on a regular basis and to remove the ones that are overly burdensome.  In essence, the bill improves legislative oversight and increases accountability of state bureaucracy.  It will require state agencies to review their regulations every five years to determine if they are outdated, duplicative or burdensome.  This legislation puts our state on a better path toward a streamlined government that cuts red tape and fosters an environment where businesses can grow and flourish.
Missouri residents who use cell phones will soon be able to benefit from the protections offered by our state’s No Call List.  The list, which is designed to prevent unwanted telemarketing calls, currently applies only to landlines.  It is a service that nearly 2 million Missourians utilize.  Unfortunately, cell phone users have not been able to benefit from this service.  Given the fact we’ve seen the use of landlines diminish as cell phones have become the primary form of communication; it only makes sense to expand the list to include cellular devices.   More importantly, we can protect all phone users, both landline and wireless, from these undesirable solicitations.  HB 1549 now awaits the governor’s signature before becoming law.
Another important piece of legislation now on its way to becoming law would protect employers who have a religious or moral objection to providing a health plan that offers coverage for abortion, contraception or sterilization.  The bill addresses a change made by the federal Affordable Care Act that currently forces religious-affiliated institutions such as hospitals or colleges to offer coverage for contraception.  The bill clearly states that neither employers nor health plan providers will be forced to cover services that contradict their religious or moral convictions.  It’s a straightforward, common sense change and one that we were forced to make in response to the overreaching hand of the federal government and the controversial health care plan it has pushed on our states.
If you have questions, you may reach me at my Capitol number 573-751-9465, at the local district number, 660-582-4014, by email at mike.thomson@house.mo.gov or by mail at Room 401B State Capitol Building, Jefferson City, MO 65101.

Lee Hamilton Commentary -- Is This the Best We can Do?

As you know if you pay attention to national affairs, the United States faces a perfect fiscal storm at the end of this year. A confluence of deadlines and policy triggers unlike anything I can remember in a half-century of public life will produce massive budget cuts and serious tax increases amounting to a 3.5 percent hit on the nation’s Gross Domestic Product.

 

At least, it will if Congress and the White House don’t act. It would be, as Princeton economist Alan Blinder put it recently in The Wall Street Journal, “a disaster for the United States.” So surely it must be all hands on deck in Washington, right?

 

You know where I’m going with this. A rational government would be in high gear, yet what do we see? The House has worked for roughly a third of 2012 so far, and will be out of Washington campaigning or tending to constituents for half the remaining weeks of the year. The Senate, meanwhile, has been working on several bills, but the two houses are largely ignoring the coming fiscal meltdown.

 

The looming crisis is a result partly of bad timing — the tax cuts enacted under George W. Bush are due to expire and Congress faces yet another vote on raising the debt ceiling —and partly a result of earlier decisions to defer hard decisions. The temporary payroll tax cut, which members of Congress went to the mat over just a few months ago, will expire. Unemployment benefits are due to be cut back. And, of course, the failure of the congressional “supercommittee” to agree on a deficit-cutting deal has triggered $1.2 trillion in spending cuts. Those cuts are scheduled to go into effect starting at the turn of the year.

 

Most commentators in Washington agree that Congress and the President will eventually act. A few optimists hope for a “grand bargain” that would resolve Democrats’ and Republicans’ differences over taxes, spending and entitlements. But the consensus in Washington seems to be that policy-makers will dither until after the November elections. Then, in a desperate scramble — with a lame-duck Congress and either a lame-duck or a new President — they’ll find some way of postponing the hard decisions for yet a few more months.

 

There is a very real cost to this delay. It’s not a good time to be anyone dependent on the federal budget, and that includes millions of people and 28 percent of the American economy. Pentagon planners and transportation program managers have no idea what their budgets will be. Federal contractors don’t know if funds will be available to pay them. People receiving unemployment benefits have to worry they’ll run out soon. Every taxpayer faces an increase in income taxes.

 

Nobody knows if we will be able to pay our debts as a country, and everyone involved in the financial markets has to worry about what happens if Congress by its inaction allows the economy to contract sharply. The uncertainty will surely erode the confidence of markets and investors, and even worse, of business-people. As PIMCO’s Mohamed El-Erian recently wrote in The Washington Post, “[P]rolonged political inaction is likely to encourage companies to postpone building plants and purchasing equipment and to discourage them from hiring.”

 

We’ve never quite had a situation like this, where so clearly ahead lies a fiscal crisis with enormous implications, yet Congress cannot enact a comprehensive annual budget and blithely assumes that its leaders and the White House will eventually get around to acting — but meanwhile, its members will go home on recess. If the CEO of a major enterprise saw problems of this magnitude looming, it’s hard to imagine he’d call his employees together and tell them all to go on vacation.

 

Reducing the deficit is difficult, but can’t we get our political leaders to act before we go over the fiscal cliff? The only way to do it in a sluggish economy is by raising taxes and cutting spending. Both are unpopular, and our leaders can’t seem to summon the courage to confront hard choices even as we move inexorably closer to a fiscal reckoning. It all makes me wonder if the skeptics who say our government cannot work are right.

 

Lee Hamilton is Director of the Center on Congress at Indiana University. He was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 34 years.

Missouri's House Proposal reverses cuts to colleges with money from the blind.

The top budget leader in the Missouri House announced his plan to restore the proposed cut to public universities by eliminating a state program for the blind.

House Budget chairman Rep. Ryan Silvey, R-Kansas City, plans on ending a $28 million program for the blind in order to reverse the 15 percent cut to public universities called for by Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon.

"The governor's assault on higher education ends today," Silvey said.

Nixon released a written statement after Silvey's plan was announced and called the cuts to the program for the blind "just plain wrong."

"We should not, and cannot, remove the funding for this program that allows thousands of Missourians to remain in their own homes," Nixon said in his statement.

Silvey's plan would add a total of $106 million more than Nixon's proposal giving colleges the same amount of money they are getting this year.

Rep. Chris Kelly, D-Columbia, said he applauded Silvey's work to restore the cuts to colleges, but did not agree with taking money from the blind.

"I would rather go into the administration of state government for the cuts than the blind," Kelly said.

To restore Nixon's higher education cuts, Silvey took $28 million from the Supplemental Aid to the Blind program which provides care for 2,800 people, who make too much money to qualify for Medicaid. The program averages $10,000 per person in the program. Blindness is the only condition in Missouri to have this special fund, according to Silvey.

"It's about a fundamental question of fairness in the disability community," Silvey said.

Rep. Jeanne Kirkton, D-St. Louis County, said she was "cautious" about taking money from this program.

"These people have been cut so deeply in the past years. We have an obligation to take care of our most vulnerable," Kirkton said.

A top Democrat on the House Budget Committee said the cuts to the blind needed more discussion but the lack of state funds available makes these decisions difficult.

"Clearly there is no money," said Rep. Sara Lampe, D-Springfield.

Silvey also cut a $5 million increase to local school district funding that Nixon had proposed. Silvey said the increase would only have been worth $5 per pupil.

"I ended the governor's election year political stunt," Silvey said.

The new budget plan takes into account a $10 million boost in lottery sales beyond what Nixon projected. It also includes $40 million from a national mortgage settlement, which Nixon had requested be used to soften the blow from his initial higher education cuts.

It also makes changes to the governor's proposal for a pay raise for state employees. Nixon originally had called for the raise to take effect in January instead of July, when the state's fiscal year begins. Silvey's plan pushes the start date for the raise to July, but only for employees earning less than $70,000 a year.

The House Budget Committee will begin mark-up on the state's $23 billion budget next week.

A Moment with Mike -- Legislature Calls for Federal Balanced Budget Amendment

Session continues to gain momentum as more bills work their way out of committee and on to the House floor. Last week the Missouri House approved a resolution calling on Congress to adopt an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would require a balanced federal budget. As we have watched our federal government continue to live beyond its means, it is obvious that something must be done to protect our nation from financial disaster. The budget recently proposed by our president would put national spending at approximately $3.7 trillion while our nation’s incoming revenues are only $2.9 trillion. That budget gap of approximately $765 billion is alarming but, sadly, nothing new for Washington, D.C. The path we are on will allow the portion of the national debt held by outside investors to climb to $18.7 trillion by 2021. That figure represents 76.5 percent of the overall economy – twice the size of the debt before the recession hit in 2007. This disastrous path our government is on is jeopardizing the future of our nation and our children. It is imperative that we send a strong message to Washington, D.C. indicating that it is time that they start balancing the federal budget like we balance our budget here in Missouri and like Missouri families must also do.
Another issue that brought about a lively debate was HB 1186 & 1147. This legislation would require all driving tests in Missouri to be given only in English. Presently, our state offers driver exams in 11 languages besides English and allows people taking the test to have a translator. This bill would prohibit the director of the Department of Revenue from supplying or permitting the use of language interpreters, except sign language interpreters, in connection with the required written and driving tests. Advocates argue that while we welcome people from all parts of the world and from varying cultures, it is important to establish that the language we use here in Missouri is English. Our road and highway signs are written in English and highway patrolmen and police officers who make traffic stops are going to communicate in English as well. The bottom line is that if you are going to safely operate a motor vehicle in Missouri, you need to understand English. By requiring applicants to take the test in English, we can ensure they know the language and improve the safety of our roads as a result.
Once again the state tax commission is recommending an increase in the assessed value of Missouri’s best farmland. This change is one that would cause Missouri farmers to pay an additional 29 cents per acre on the state’s most productive land. I believe that we can all agree that this is not the time to increase the tax burden on Missourians and the legislature will not support an increase. This would be especially detrimental to our farmers here in Northwest Missouri where a majority of the land would fit that category. There is a resolution on the move that would keep the proposed increase from going into effect that will come to the floor very soon. The Missouri General Assembly must act by March 4th to keep the increase from going into effect for tax years 2013 and 2014.
If you have questions, you may reach me at my Capitol number 573-751-9465, at the local district number, 660-582-4014, by email at mike.thomson@house.mo.gov or by mail at Room 401B State Capitol Building, Jefferson City, MO 65101.

State tax revenues drop below projections

State revenue collections dropped more than two percent last month compared to December 2010 according to the General Revenue report released Thursday.

The 2.1 percent drop is unwelcome news to a General Assembly already faced with a budget shortfall of nearly $455 million from the last fiscal year. State Budget Director Linda Luebbering described the revenue report with one word -- "bad."

Overall, year-to-date General Revenue collections saw a 1.2 percent gain compared to the last fiscal year. The gain, however, is still small compared to the estimated 3.6 percent revenue growth for fiscal year 2012 projected by top budget officials a year ago.

The hardest hit revenue area in 2011 was in corporate income tax receipts, which dipped 10.5 percent for the month of December. Sales tax receipts dipped 4 percent last month despite the Christmas holiday shopping season.

The fiscal year 2013 budget was already facing a decrease of $650 million from last year due to the use of one-time federal money that has now run out. The state budget took another hit when matching federal funds for Medicaid reimbursement decreased, leaving a $90 million hole.

The 3.9 percent projected revenue growth would bring $285 million to help offset the projected shortfall. Luebbering expressed confidence in the government's ability to handle the crisis.

"I don't really talk about it in terms of a shortfall because when the governor presents his budget it will be balanced," Luebbering said.

In order to combat the budget hole, Luebbering said that Medicaid cuts would be on the table despite some restrictions imposed by the federal government.

When states accepted money to help balanced their budgets in 2009, the federal government prevented them from cutting many Medicaid benefits, including cuts in eligibility. One state--Maine--is defying the federal government by cutting eligibility, a cut Luebbering said will not happen in Missouri.

"We would not want to jeopardize our federal money we get for the Medicaid program," Luebbering said.

Missourians will get their first glimpse into solving the budget shortfall when the Governor presents his budget plan Jan. 17. The General Assembly then has until May 11 to pass the 2013 state operating budget.

House Budget chair blisters the governor's budget director over disaster funds

The House Budget Committee grilled State Budget Director Linda Luebbering about the $150 million being withheld by the governor for disaster relief. The governor has set aside the money in anticipation of payments to Joplin and other areas affected by natural disasters without knowing exactly how much money is needed.

Committee chairman Ryan Silvey, R-Kansas City, charged Gov. Jay Nixon's action was unconstitutional because the state's constitution does not give him power to withhold funds from the budget to use the money for other purposes.

Article 4, Section 27 of the Missouri Constitution empowers the governor to withhold funds if revenue collections are running below the estimate upon which the budget was based. Silvey charges that provision does not empower the governor to cut agency allotments to reserve funds for other purposes the governor wants to finance.

Luebbering said money is needed to cover the expected costs for disaster relief in Joplin and the flooding in southeast Missouri. State obligations could include debris removal or rebuilding schools but as of now there is no breakdown of the specific costs, she said.

"We think setting aside $150 million for all these efforts is a perfectly reasonable amount of money," Luebbering said.

Silvey and other members of the committee questioned why the governor was withholding money from the 2012 fiscal year instead of using the money available in the state's Rainy Day Fund. Created in 2000 as the Budget Reserve Fund, the Rainy Day Fund contains roughly $500 million, half of which can be used for disaster relief payments.

"The Rainy Day Fund is an option," Luebbering said. "I don't know if we will use the Rainy Day Fund."

The constitution requires a two-thirds vote by the General Assembly to use the Rainy Day Fund for emergency relief. In July, Nixon said he would include disaster relief funding as part of the legislature's special session that begins Sept. 6, but in the official call issued Aug. 22, Nixon left out the issue. A special session can take up only the specific issues included in the governor's call.

Silvey questioned why the governor decided to exclude the legislature from discussing the disaster funding in the special session.

Directly facing Nixon's top budget official, Silvey repeatedly voiced frustration about the administration's approach, saying, "The governor does not want to deal with the legislature."

Luebbering said the governor made the decision to restrict expenditures to allow for more flexibility later in the year. She said the governor's office was looking at the broader constitutionality of the issue and previous court cases that established precedence for the decision to withhold funds. She could not name the cases she was referring to.

"The executive branch has the authority to balance the budget," Luebbering said.

Silvey said he did not feel a solution was reached at the meeting but was glad the committee served its purpose in questioning the decision.

"It's clear that the governor does not like dealing with the legislature," said Silvey. "It's clear that he'd rather have flexibility than go along with the constitution."

Rep. Chris Kelly, D-Columbia, told the committee the issues with the governor's budget is due to the legislature's own action in crafting a budget that left the door open for the governor to use funds for disaster relief without clear legislative authorization. He called on the Budget Committee to close the administrative flexibility in executive spending.

"It is easy to drive a truck through that little flexibility hole without seeing the damage," Kelly said.

Silvey said these issues will likely affect bills in the next legislative session.

"Our problem isn't where's the money's going but the process that it's getting there," Silvey said. "We want to see the money going where we appropriated it."

Earlier this month, State Auditor Tom Schweich sent the governor a letter questioning the constitutionality of the governor's budget withholding actions. Schweich charged that Luebbering's budget official failed to provide any information substantiating that revenue collections were falling below the original estimates upon which the budget was based.

Missouri's auditor sues the governor.

The lawsuit by Republican Tom Schweich charges the Democratic governor has violated the state constitution by withholding appropriations to state agencies, including education, to provide funds for natural disaster relief.

At issue is a constitutional provision giving the governor power to withhold appropriations from state agencies if revenues fall below the original estimates upon which the budget was based.

Jay Nixon has based his withholding on the basis of needing the money in order to provide additional money for natural disaster relief involving damages from the Joplin tornado and flooding along the Missouri and Mississippi rivers.

On August 19, Schweich had sent the governor a letter questioning Nixon's constitutional authority to withhold funds. In the letter, Schweich charged the governor's budget director failed to provide any data demonstrating there was an actual shortage in revenue collections.

Article IV, Section 27 provides that "The governor may...reduce expenditures of the state or any of its agencies below their appropriations whenever the the actual revenues are less than the revenue estimates upon which the appropriations were based."

Earlier this summer, Nixon had announced he would include the disaster relief funding in the legislature's special session that begins Sept. 6.

But in his official call, issued after Schweich's letter, Nixon dropped the natural disaster issue from his formal call. In a written statement, Nixon was quoted as saying they did not yet have a full estimate of the costs.

Roy Blunt: 800 Days = Still No Senate Budget

U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) issued the following statement today marking the 800^th day since the Democrat-led Senate passed a federal budget:

“As the nation marks the 29^th consecutive month with unemployment over 8 percent, Senate Democrat leaders have failed the American people by refusing to pass a budget for 800 days.

“Instead of working with Republicans to rein in spending and pay down our country’s out-of-control debt, the Democrats have proposed a second so-called stimulus after the first one failed, and they are calling for tax hikes on job creators who are already struggling to make ends meet.

“In the meantime, Washington has spent $7.3 trillion over the last 800 days. Our nation has added $3.2 trillion to the debt since the Senate Democrats passed a budget. And 40 cents of every dollar that the federal government spends today is borrowed.

“Missourians and Americans deserve better than this kind of irresponsible, inexcusable lack of leadership that the Democrat-led Senate continues to demonstrate. We must change business as usual in Washington, and I hope my colleagues across the aisle will join us as we work to get nation’s our economy back on track.”

According to the Associated Press, "Hiring slowed to a near-standstill last month. Employers added the fewest jobs in nine months and the unemployment rate rose to 9.2 percent. The economy generated only 18,000 net jobs in June, the Labor Department said Friday. And the number of jobs added in May was revised down to 25,000."

Federal Budget Cuts Could Affect Area Poor

The US House approved 13% cuts in nutritional assistance, cuts to meals for low-income seniors, and cuts to food banks around the country. The vote was taken last Thursday. Congressman Sam Graves voted for the cuts. It would also cut the WIC program, which includes pregnant women and children under 5. This was part of the 2012 Ag Appropriations Bill.
Mary Jo Fletchall of Community Services in Worth County said that the extent of the cuts would depend on whether they would involve administrative cuts or actual cuts to the programs themselves. She said that there was a lot of fluff that could be cut. However, she said that the fear was that they would have to limit participation in their programs, which would really create a hardship. A lot would depend on how the various agencies would absorb the 13% cuts. In a news release, Congressional leaders maintained that such cuts could be made without affecting services and that strong programs could still be maintained with less money.
The Republican Congress has maintained that the cuts are necessary in order to achieve deficit reduction. However, the bill now goes to the Senate. The actual cuts may not be as much given that the Democrats control the Senate; this means that there would have to be some sort of compromise on the cuts and where they would be made.
There are risks that Congress is taking should the cuts target the actual programs themselves as opposed to administrative staffing. The risk is that less aid for preventative health services such as WIC, other nutritional assistance programs, cuts to food banks, and aid to low income seniors would result in more long-term health care costs, meaning that the risk is that Congress is sacrificing long-term benefits in return for short-term benefits. House Republicans have maintained that such actions are needed because the US has reached the debt ceiling, meaning that they cannot go into debt like they have in the past. However, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities maintains that the deficits are actually caused by the Bush tax cuts as well as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Senator Blunt On Budget Votes: It’s Time To Work Together To Right Our Nation’s Economy

U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) issued the following statement today in response to the four budget votes this evening, all of which failed to pass:

“While I did not agree with any of these budget proposals in their entirety, I voted to continue the debate on the plan introduced by my colleague, Senator Pat Toomey, and the House Republican budget because they both represent good starting points for this critical debate.

"Clearly, the worst option that we voted on tonight was President Obama’s budget, which every U.S. Senator – including every member of the President’s own party – voted against.

“Unfortunately, this process did not move the debate forward, and Senate Democrat leaders have failed to pass a budget in more than 750 days. Meanwhile, American families and job creators continue to face great uncertainty as the President and his party threaten to raise taxes to cover the billions of dollars in new spending contained in the President’s budget blueprint.

“It’s time to move forward and work together to right our nation’s economy. That means establishing a plan that balances the budget in the next decade, encourages private sector job creation, and provides greater certainty for small businesses struggling to make ends meet.

“None of these decisions will be easy, but everything should be on the table. We owe it to the families and job creators in Missouri and across America to rein in Washington’s spending and start paying down our debt.”

A Moment with Mike -- Retaining Small Businesses

The tradition of “throwing paper in the air” brought an end to the first session of the 96^th General Assembly at 6:00 p.m. Friday evening. It is difficult to describe that mixture of feelings that include relief, fatigue, disappointment, pride, satisfaction and patriotism as you ponder the reality of the many bills, initiatives and ideas that have either passed through the process or failed, but will have an effect on the citizens of Missouri for years to come. The cumbersome process is frustrating at times but also adds some protection from ideas and regulations that may seem progressive and necessary by some and redundant or harmful to others.

A bill only becomes law after it has gone through a number of steps in both the House and the Senate. Getting agreement throughout the process without having things added to the bill that are undesirable is difficult. These steps guarantee that anything that passes and is sent to the Governor for one more step has been vetted appropriately. That does not mean that we all agree but each Representative or Senator tries to represent the constituents in their part of the state and hopefully most things passed represent the over-all good for the state.

We started session with a pledge to live within our means, keep taxes low and balance the state budget. I believe we have accomplished these priorities and have passed measures that will positively affect Missourians in all walks of life. One top priority was to create an atmosphere to attract and retain small business and we successfully passed legislation that will reduce regulations and cut down on frivolous lawsuits for small businesses and family farms.

We continued to represent Missouri taxpayers by requiring drug tests for welfare recipients, if they are suspected of abusing drugs, so we know our tax dollars are used to provide a hand up and not a hand out. We went after the worst of the worst by toughening penalties on those who attempt to facilitate human trafficking and we took a strong stand for the unborn and defined what a viable life in Missouri actually is. We passed a reasonable fix to Prop B that will improve the safety and enforceability of animals and bad actors, but also protect our agriculture industry and we made several changes in the “right to carry” laws including the extension of these rights to 21 year olds which makes us consistent with the other states around us.

Two pieces of legislation approved by the General Assembly will appear on the November 2012 ballot for voter approval. One will be to protect and clarify the rights of Missourians to pray in public places and the other will determine the need for a photo ID to vote.

I was pleased that we were able to extend the MO Rx program that benefits over 200,000 senior citizens and we funded the Area Agencies on Aging to enable them to continue the “Meals on Wheels” program that provides a service to those who cannot provide well for themselves.

One of the more difficult initiatives that took a lot of time and consideration was the passing of a redistricting map that would establish the boundaries for the 8 congressional districts in our state. This was completed with a historical override of the Governor’s veto and this will be in law for at least the next ten years.

These are a few of the initiatives that were passed this session and I will give a more detailed overview of some of these in the coming weeks. Right now I am looking forward to staying in the district and seeing all of you at the parades, carnivals, dinners and other events throughout the area.

If you have questions, you may reach me at my Capitol number 573-751-9465, at the local district number, 660-582-4014, by email at mike.thomson@house.mo.gov or by mail at Room 401B State Capitol Building, Jefferson City, MO 65101

Opinion: Sarah Steelman Refusing to Take Position on GOP Plan to End Medicare

By the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee

edicare in Missouri is in trouble and Sarah Steelman has refused to stand up for seniors and middle class families, refusing to answer questions about her position. It has been nearly two weeks since Republicans in Washington voted to end Medicare, Sarah Steelman's silence sends a disturbing message to all Missourians about the kinds of priorities she would represent.

“Sarah Steelman’s refusal to take a position on the Republican plan to destroy Medicare proves she has the wrong priorities when it comes to Missouri’s seniors and middle class families. The Republican plan to kill Medicare and hand out tax breaks for oil companies and billionaires could not be more misguided and dangerous. Missouri families need someone who has the courage to stand up and protect Medicare, not a politician who is reluctant to even take a position,” said Matt Canter, spokesman for Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. “Sarah Steelman is quietly telling Missourians who she will stand up for in Washington, and it’s most definitely not Missouri seniors or the middle class.”

Background:

· Wall Street Journal: GOP Plan Would “End Medicare.” According to the Wall Street Journal, “The plan would essentially end Medicare, which now pays most of the health-care bills for 48 million elderly and disabled Americans, as a program that directly pays those bills.” [Wall Street Journal, 4/04/11]

· The GOP Budget Would Cut $1.4 Trillion In Benefits For Seniors, Families And Those In Nursing Homes, While Shifting Huge Burdens To State Governments. [Democrats.Senate.Gov, 4/07/11]

· CBO: Beneficiaries Would Pay More Under Ryan’s Plan Than Under Traditional Medicare. “Under the proposal, most beneficiaries who receive premium support payments would pay more for their health care than if they participated in traditional Medicare under either of CBO’s long-term scenarios.” [CBO, 4/05/11]

· Seniors Would Pay Twice as Much Than Under Current Medicare Coverage. According to analysis by the Center for American Progress, under the Ryan budget seniors would pay twice as much out of pocket as they would under the current Medicare plan. The analysis found “In 2022 65-year-olds would be forced to pay twice as much for care than they would under Medicare: $12,500 compared to $6,150.” [americanprogress.org, 4/12/11]

· Budget Office: GOP Medicare Plan Could Lead To Rationing. According to an NPR report, the CBO report on the GOP budget proposal warns that the plan could lead to rationing of care. [NPR, 4/06/11]

· Plan's Author: Budget Will Not End Subsidies. When challenged by Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace about whether his budget will include reductions in oil and gas subsidies like the President’s Fiscal Commission did, Ryan responded that “we don't have a tax problem." [Fox News Sunday, 4/3/11]

Sarah Steelman has remained silent on the Republican plan to end Medicare. [Crickets, 4/26/11]

Brad Lager's Capitol Report -- Finalizing the Budget

Harry Truman was one of our nations most famous Presidents. Not because he was from the great state of Missouri, but because he was a man who was willing to make tough and often unpopular decisions during time of great challenge. He always followed through on his promises and he was a responsible leader that lived by his famous words "the Buck Stops Here."

Last week, the General Assembly met its constitutional deadline and sent to the Governor the fiscal year 2012 budget. This plan protects education funding, lives within our financial means and begins to reduce our reliance of using one time moneys to fund on-going programs. As I have discussed before, it has been a very challenging budget year as we have worked to fix the structural problems facing our state, make government more efficient, and prioritize our spending. By ensuring a strong fiscal foundation, we are securing an important cornerstone for future economic growth and job creation.

Since the FY12 budget has been built on more optimistic estimates than I would have preferred, I believe that the General Assembly must exercise extraordinary restraint as we finalize legislation this week. During the last week of session, bills and amendments start moving at a rapid pace and unfortunately, many of these initiatives, although well intended, have the ability to put serious strain on the state’s finances by dramatically increasing our costs. It is imperative that the legislature advances with caution in these final days so that we can ensure fiscal restraint and responsible stewardship of your hard earned money.

The tax and spend philosophy that is plaguing federal, state and local governments across this nation must come to and end. I am proud that we have forced Missouri’s state government to live within its fiscal means and not take more from Missouri’s hard working families. Through responsible management of the taxpayer’s money and a commitment to not raising taxes on hard working Missourians, we are one step closer to creating an economic environment that facilitates job creation and fuels economic growth.

As always, please feel free to call, email, or write with your ideas or concerns. The Capitol number is (573) 751-1415, my email is brad.lager@senate.mo.gov and my mailing address is Room 422, State Capitol Building, Jefferson City, MO 65101.

A Moment with Mike: Legislature Compromises on Budget

Last Friday was the deadline for the budget to be completed and it went down to the wire as the last budget bills were approved on Thursday afternoon. Negotiations between the House and Senate to decide how the key differences in priorities would be settled were intense but the end results are a budget that does the best we can with the limited resources available.

In the final version of the $23.2 billion budget, the House and Senate agreed to increases in key funding areas such as higher education, school transportation and prescription drug coverage for seniors. The bills approved will provide an additional $12 million in funding to our colleges and universities, which reduces the proposed cut by the Governor of 7 percent down to a cut of 5.45 percent. The final budget also appropriates an additional $10 million over the original budget plan to busing assistance for our state’s K-12 public schools.

Another area of the budget that received an intense amount of scrutiny during budget negotiations is the Missouri Rx program. The program helps thousands of seniors and disabled Missourians pay for the costs of the prescription medicines they need. This highly successful program, set to end later this year, was extended in the House proposal but removed in the Senate version of the budget. The final budget contains full funding for the program for another year and also reverses cuts to the state’s reimbursement rates to in-home care providers for low-income disabled residents covered by the state’s Medicaid program. Both changes are good news for some of our most vulnerable citizens who need and deserve our assistance.

The final budget bills also contain budget cuts for many of our government officials. Statewide elected officials will take a cut of 2.5 percent to their budgets and the Governor’s travel budget was reduced to $200,000. The budget we passed this year reflects a commitment to the core needs of the people of our state and spends the tax dollars of Missourians in the most responsible way possible.

Throughout the session I have kept you updated on the efforts to draw boundaries for Missouri’s new congressional districts. While the process had its twists and turns, this week it was resolved in historic fashion. In another report I mentioned how the House and Senate finally came to an agreement on a map and sent it to the governor’s desk. I also discussed the possibility of the Governor vetoing the bill containing the map, which he did shortly after receiving it. Last weeks vote to override the Governor’s veto was successful in both the House and the Senate and the bill becomes law. The override marks the first time since 2003 that a governor’s veto has been undone by the Missouri General Assembly and one of a very few successful attempts (less than ten) since 1820.

If you have questions, you may reach me at my Capitol number 573-751-9465, at the local district number, 660-582-4014, by email at mike.thomson@house.mo.gov or by mail at Room 401B State Capitol Building, Jefferson City, MO 65101

A Moment with Mike -- Light at the End of the Tunnel

I recently noticed a cartoon that stated, “Due to budget shortages, the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off.” That is not true at the Capitol where we have two weeks left in this legislative session. Several big issues that have been a concern are close to completion and there is a mad scramble to pass legislation that individuals feel is important to their districts.

The budget, which is the biggest responsibility of the General Assembly is now in conference and will probably be finalized this week. The redistricting map, which has been very controversial as it bounced back and forth between the Senate and the House has been agreed on and sent to the Governor. The compromise on Proposition B, which has been debated all session, has been signed by the Governor and several initiatives that were set forth at the beginning to help make Missouri more business friendly have been passed.

One of those bills signed into law last week will phase out a tax that applies to more than 3,000 businesses currently operating in Missouri. SB 19 will gradually eliminate Missouri’s franchise tax on company assets such as buildings and inventory. The franchise tax has been in existence since 1917. While the legislature has reduced the tax over the years, leading business organizations have proposed doing away with the tax entirely as part of the “Fix the Six” legislative package. The bill we approved will reduce the tax each year until it is phased out entirely in 2016. Missouri is one of only a few states that have both a corporate income tax and a corporate franchise tax. By eliminating what is, in effect, double taxation, we fan put Missouri on a level playing field with other states that are competing to attract new businesses and jobs.

Another bill on its way to the governor’s desk for approval is one I mentioned in a report early on in the legislative session. Last week the Senate finally sent back to us a slightly revised version of the “Big Government Get Off My Back Act” that was passed by the House in January.

If signed into law by the governor, the act will limit federal mandates on small business owners in the Show Me State. In addition, the bill would increase the size definition of small businesses and require that any federal mandates on these businesses be approved by the General Assembly. With both of these provisions, we hope to allow businesses to operate without fear of new regulations or mandates that will negatively impact how they do business. We think it’s a key component to our efforts to revitalize our economy.

Another portion of the bill further helps small businesses by providing tax deductions to small employers who create new full-time jobs with annual salaries that meet the county average wage. Under the bill, a small business would be able to deduct ten thousand dollars for each full-time job created or twenty thousand dollars per new job if the employer offers health insurance for the new employees and pays at least half of the premiums for such insurance.

Two weeks left and the light at the end of the tunnel is coming into view.

If you have questions, you may reach me at my Capitol number 573-751-9465, at the local district number, 660-582-4014, by email at mike.thomson@house.mo.gov or by mail at Room 401B State Capitol Building, Jefferson City, MO 65101

Opinion: America's March of Folly

By Dr. Marvin Folkertsma

The budget deficits from the first two years of the Obama administration are of sufficient magnitude to spring Dr. “Billions and Billions” Carl Sagan from his grave. Sagan could sue for copyright infringement for misuse of astronomical numbers.

On second thought, the figures now being bandied about are in the trillions, which no doubt would send the venerable atheist skulking back, perhaps muttering something about the “unsustainability” of it all.

Sagan would not be alone. Multi-trillion dollar deficits that generate debt obligations in the hundreds of trillions of dollars cannot continue even in the short run, at least not without that Fifth Horseman of Apocalypse—picture Darth Vader toting a wheel barrow filled with worthless script—showing up to hiss questions about the insanity of those who led America on its “March of Folly.”

Barbara Tuchman wondered the same thing in a book published with that name, in which she probed the mentalities and policies of political leaders who led their countries to destruction—and here’s the kicker—fully aware of what they were doing but not willing to stop themselves from doing it. More specifically, averred Tuchman, to qualify as “folly” a policy: 1) “must have been perceived as counter-productive in its own time, not merely by hindsight;” 2) “a feasible alternative course of action must have been available,” and; 3) that alternative must have been in existence beyond the life of a single individual and recommended over time by significant political opposition.

By these criteria, the Renaissance popes, British government during the American Revolution, American presidents during the Vietnam War era, and several others as well, all get skewered, and rightly so. Their failures can all be explained by their “perverse persistence in a policy demonstrably unworkable or counterproductive.” To put the matter more colorfully, the leaders that Tuchman covered were lamentably immersed in “wooden-headedness, the source of self-deception.”

Echoes of wooden-headedness resound throughout history, from Trojans taking the wooden horse within their walls to current administration officials who continue to insist that the stimulus worked, the country is on the road to economic recovery, and Americans will learn to love a 2,300-page piece of legislation that few read and nobody understands. Lest Republicans feel too smug about Democrats’ current discomfort, they should be reminded that one of their own, George W. Bush, put his signature to a law roughly half that size—the 2003 Medicare Drug Benefit—and even that most iconic of Republican leaders, Ronald Reagan, still failed to produce a balanced budget, even during times of prosperity.

Which means that wooden-headedness transcends time, place, and partisanship, and further that if “eating crow” means being forced to acknowledge one’s own errors, then that repulsive bird should replace bean soup on the Senate’s famed menu, at least until members of both parties in each chamber acknowledge that they have often marched on the road of folly holding each others’ hands, and that we’re all in this together.

Indeed, all Americans have to be, if one is to take recent CBO estimates seriously, which mean that unless America stops its march of folly, federal government spending will go beyond that region where even the expression “out of control” still makes any sense. The CBO March 2011 report indicated that for the 40 years prior to Obama’s election, federal deficits averaged around 35 percent of the country’s annual GDP; that number rose to 62 percent by the end of 2011, the highest level since the end of World War II. Absent significant policy changes, that percentage will climb to 87 percent over the course of the next decade, reflecting an additional $9.5 trillion in debt.

Certainly the attention devoted to this subject over the past few years has been huge, but as Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth S. Rogoff point out in their excellent treatment, This Time It’s Different, these numbers reflect conditions that kill countries. Indeed, instead of treating the greatest country on earth like a pampered and suicidal adolescent, American leaders must grasp that nations crumble under such debt; nations and empires and entire civilizations. Further, viable alternatives have been offered as well, including those advocated by a bipartisan Senate group as well as those from the president’s own debt commission, and most recently, by Congressman Paul Ryan.

So, what is the solution? Honesty and courage. Honesty on the part of our political leaders to explain America’s perilous situation and courage to do something about it, regardless of consequences to their own political careers, or even to their lives. Both traits were illustrated in a marvelous vignette recounted by Joseph Ellis in his Founding Brothers. After signing the document that pitted the newly proclaimed country against the most formidable world power the world had ever known, Benjamin Harrison quipped to Elbridge Gerry that his size and weight gave him a greater advantage over his smaller colleague, in that when they were all hung for treason, the corpulent Mr. Harrison “would die in a few minutes,” whereas the lighter Mr. Gerry would “dance in the air an hour or two before [he is] dead.”

These men were honest about the stakes involved, which they faced with resolution and courage and, if necessary, their lives. Today’s circumstances require no less.

— Dr. Marvin Folkertsma is a professor of political science and Fellow for American Studies with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. The author of several books, his latest release is a high-energy novel titled "The Thirteenth Commandment."

Roy Blunt Accuses Senate Democrats of Refusing to Come to the Table

U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) issued the following statement today regarding the ongoing budget battle in Washington and the U.S. House of Representatives’ short-term proposal to avoid a government shut-down this week:

“A government shutdown is not the answer. Senate Democrats’ unwillingness to come to the table to make real budget cuts is not a responsible solution.

“Make no mistake - we’re in this predicament because Senate Democrats abdicated their duties and failed to pass a budget last year.

“Congressman Ryan's plan puts solutions above politics and takes on the crippling debt that threatens America’s jobs creation and future prosperity.”

A Moment with Mike for April 6th, 2011

After a week off and the chance to spend some time in our districts, the House wasted no time getting back to the business at hand. The 13 bills that make up the state’s operating budget for the next fiscal year were debated and passed with strong bipartisan approval in record time.

Included in that $23.2 billion budget is more than $5.26 billion in funding for elementary and secondary education. That figure represents an increase of more than $113 million from what the governor recommended in his original budget proposal. That is in large part because of the work of House members to restore a recommended cut to the Foundation Formula that provides funding to Missouri’s public schools. The budget approved by the House sustains the same level of funding – over $3 billion – for the Foundation Formula as it has for the current fiscal year. In a year when cuts were necessary in so many other areas of state government, I am proud to say we were able to protect our system of elementary and secondary education from severe cuts.

One area that did sustain cuts is our system of higher education. In his budget proposal the governor recommended a cut of 7 percent to all public institutions of higher education. While we couldn’t protect our colleges and universities from having to take some cuts, they were funded at a higher level than many thought was possible just a few months ago and the final budget reflected an additional $43 million above what the governor proposed. Included in that is $12 million to help universities educate our next generation of health care professionals, a $1 million increase to the Bright Flight scholarship program and $7 million increase to fully fund the A+ Scholarship Program. These increases represent some small but significant victories in a year when the money simply isn’t there to fund our higher education system at the level we would like.

Another area that received cuts serves as a good example of the kind of budget trimming we should focus on each and every year. These cuts come within the bureaucracy of state government. The bills we approved reduce the budgets for all elected statewide officials by 5 percent. We also approved an amendment that would reduce the salaries of any state agency official who makes in excess of $86,500. By capping some of the higher salaries we can save the state approximately $1 million each year. We also saved several hundred thousand dollars by eliminating a number of joint committees and by reducing the mileage reimbursement rate for House members. In total, it shows the legislature’s willingness to lead by example and to take the same cuts we’ve asked the rest of state government to endure.

While the budget is not perfect, it represents what I believe is the best we can do given the limited resources we have. It is never easy to cut or eliminate programs and services that Missourians have become accustomed to but fiscal restraint and balancing the budget is not only a necessity but the will of most Missourians.

If you have questions, you may reach me at my Capitol number 573-751-9465, at the local district number, 660-582-4014, by email at mike.thomson@house.mo.gov or by mail at Room 401B State Capitol Building, Jefferson City, MO 65101

Education Funding for Worth County Could Stay Unchanged

The Missouri House gave 1st round approval to a budget that would leave funding for Worth County and other schools the same as it was last year. The vote was taken last Tuesday. However, it would be $200 million less than what the State Funding Formula calls for. Assuming that it passes the Senate and gets signed by the governor, that would depend on whether the governor orders cuts in the budget in order comply with Constitutional mandates requiring a balanced budget. The House came up with the money by cutting budgets for public colleges and universities by 7%, causing Northwest and other universities to raise tuition rates.