« July 2005 | Main | November 2005 »

September 28, 2005

Who Should Really Do the Rebuilding?

Over the past few weeks our country has experienced two major disasters and the federal government has decided to step up and help the country rebuild. Many in the affected areas are demanding the government come in and bail them out.

I believe most public officials have been afraid to stand up and ask the tough question; should the federal government be offering to rebuild? I say no and here's why:

#1: Federal "help" can cause more problems than it solves. Currently there are a number of issues before the US Congress that are making life difficult for states in the nation. The one that comes to mind easily is education. Education has historically been left to the states. But now the federal government has decided that the states need "help." So without offering any additional funding, the federal government is forcing federal education reform onto states. Now the states are scrambling to change their systems to comply - mostly without being able to meet the federal mark. It is so frusterating that some states are just finally telling the federal govenment, no! But then they risk losing critical federal taxpayer money. Is education really better off?

#2: Money doesn't grow on trees - even for the federal government. The federal government is commiting billions of dollars to help rebuild New Orleans and yet the government is already running huge deficets. The President says we will still balance the budget and do it without raising taxes. If they continue down this path the budget could be balanced without raising taxes but it will only happen at the expense of the states and state taxpayers. The feds will continue to mandate certain programs, like medi-caid, but they will start sending less money. The states will have to balance their budgets within existing revenues or raise taxes at the state level. Either way, it will be left to the states to step up and do what our full time politicians should be doing.

#3: What happened to personal responsibility? Back to the states that are demanding the federal government bail them out. The governement shouldn't be the ones to go in a rebuild. If the insurance companies and the states themselves can't do the job, neither should the rest of us. Maybe people will have to move to another state where the infrastructure is already in place and they can find jobs and put their lives back together. But if they want to go home to rebuild, they should do it without the rest of us paying for the bill.

As for our Senators and Congressmen, it is time for them to realize they can't just keep spending. Until they have a plan in place to balance the budget, they shouldn't be offering to rebuild cities and states.

Posted by Jeff at 08:19 AM | Comments (1)

September 26, 2005

Are we getting ahead of ourselves?

Over the last few days the media has been celebrating the signing of the Legacy Highway agreement. Most of the local papers are hailing this as the start of construction. Others are saying that the environmental groups shouldn't be negotiated with and that other more important groups were left out of the negotiations. Maybe we should all take a step back and put this into perspective.

Ten years ago, the Legislature would not have even had a voice in all of this. There would be no talk of an up or down vote of any proposed settlement. Case in point - the "David C. " human services lawsuit that was negotiated and settled without the Legislature at all. It cost the state tens of millions of dollars, but did so without involving the branch of government responsible for the budget. Because of the lessons learned with the David C. case, the Legislature changed the law to ensure that when a lawsuit is being negotiated and signifciant taxpayer dollars are at stake (over 1 million dollars), the Legislature must approve it. That brings us to today. The legislature is involved in the Legacy settlement because it involves hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars.

Should we be negotiating with the environmentalists? First of all, the negotiations will be between the plaintiffs and the defendants. That includes the environmental groups and the Department of Transportation. Some are saying the trucking association should be consulted. They are not part of the lawsuit. The Legislature got involved when it was obvious that the original settlement agreement wouldn't pass. Now some feel that the new settlement agreement is a big enough improvement that it should pass in a legislative special session. Not so fast.

Last week's ceremonial signing by the Governor was only the settlement agreement. The final agreement - the real deal - has to be drafted. This will take at least a month and will be much larger than the outline presented last week. Once this draft is put together it will be reviewed by the Legislature. A lot will depend on the content of this final agreement. Some have already said they could vote for the outline but if certain things are in the final agreement they won't vote for it. Also, don't forget that it is an up or down vote. No changes can be made by the Legislature once the final draft is presented. There can be debate for and against, but in the end it will be an up or down vote.

So, don't get ahead of yourself. No matter what you think about the environment, 55 mile per hour speed limits, negotiating with terrorists, etc. It will all come down to one vote and no amendments. Now really is the time for the public to weigh in. There is still plenty of time.

Posted by Jeff at 03:29 PM | Comments (6)