forgotston.com

Governor Blanco is outraged over the incompetence of the Federal Government in estimating the cost of rebuilding the levees in Southeast LA. The governor should have been outraged sooner over the incompetence of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to design and build levees in Southeast La in the first place. In any case, it’s refreshing to discover another person in LA who has not lost her capacity to become outraged over the outrageous.

Another suggestion

A few days ago I suggested that rather than expand state spending, the $400 Million in extra state funds be used to reduce business taxes and fees to stimulate the economy. There were no takers on that idea. Today another suggestion.

If rebuilding the levees is such an important issue that the lack of funds for rebuilding them is enough to outrage the governor, why not use the $400 Million to help rebuild the levees?

Four hundred million dollars is not enough to rebuild all the levees, but its a start. To paraphrase the late U.S. Senator Everett Dirksen, a hundred million here, a hundred million there, pretty soon it adds up to real money. The $400 Million is expected to recur every year by the Blanco Administration. Otherwise, a big chunk of it would not be proposed for teacher pay raises.

It’s a matter of priorities

I realize that teacher pay is an important issue to teachers. However, I have yet to see a study that shows a direct relationship between higher teacher pay and educational achievement by the students. In fact, just the reverse seems to be the case. Jesuit High School in New Orleans is one of the top schools in the country yet its teacher pay scale (non-religious teachers) is below that of the New Orleans Public Schools.

If cutting business taxes to stimulate the economy is not a higher priority that teacher pay raises, then perhaps rebuilding the levees in Southeast LA is.

We hear arguments for pay raises for school support workers because, for example, without school bus drivers the kids wouldn’t get to school. If one buys the logic of that argument then surely one would agree that without proper levees, the buses will again flood and the children will not be able to get to school. Of course, that begs the question of whether the schools themselves flood without levees.

It may be a chicken or egg question to some, but after the firsthand experiences of the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, its hard to argue against levees being the top priority. Let’s use the extra money which was generated by the disasters) to help rebuild the levees. If later the Federal Government appropriates the full amount needed, then the money can be used for pay raises, slush funds or whatever. Regardless, it might mean a few lives and homes saved in the meantime.

Lead by example

Why not practice what we preach. If levees are such a priority that our governor is outraged over the failure of Congress to appropriate the money, lets set a good example by showing them our priorities right here in LA. Otherwise, we are in effect telling Congress that teacher pay and slush funds are a higher priority than levees. If that is the case then we deserve not to get what we deserve.

C.B.

Uncategorized CB 9:40 am

The headline “La. plunges to last in income” on the front page of today’s Baton Rouge paper screamed outrage. (See story here.) Once again, Louisiana leads the nation in terms of bad lists in comparison to the other states.

Contrast the fact that the per capita income in LA plunges to the fact that the Blanco Administration has increased the state’s spending to record levels. Contrast both to the over 300 bills filed by the leges to increase fees (alias for taxes in a even-numbered year).

The bottom-line is without the increase in the budget and increased taxes the current level of taxation in LA will take a larger portion of our income to fund government at the state and local level.

It’s bad enough that we cut another notch on LA’s Misery Index. What’s worse is the effect is to make the poor people of our state poorer.

It’s time to cut taxes and the budget not increase taxes and spending.

C.B.

Uncategorized CB 9:20 am

According to the story in Saturday’s Daily Monopoly, LA state government has a bonanza of money.

Basing the operating budget on such “recurring” funds, as the Blanco Administration has done seems to depend on LA being hit by disasters each year. It is the only way that money from insurance companies and the Federal Government can continue at the same levels which are generating the increased consumer spending that is driving the revenues upward.

Nevertheless, the Blanco Administration is assuming that the money will continue indefinitely otherwise they would not be budgeting it for things such as pay raises for public school teachers and college professors.

There is a note of caution in the article. That is when the “spending bubble” pops (assuming no more disasters in the next fiscal year) whether our underlying economy can sustain the same level of revenues.

As I understand the current source of additional revenue, most is based on State Sales Taxes and gambling revenues. Basing the state’s operating budget on the current level of revenues is a gamble at best. Therefore, if we are going to gamble on our future finances, I have a better idea of how to use the “recurring” revenues. Let’s use this “recurring” revenue to eliminate all business taxes and fees.

There are several advantages to my suggestion. First, it will address the underlying economy and make sure that when the “spending bubble” bursts, the economy will be robust enough to sustain the current level of revenues. It means that the businesses which benefit from the cuts will return those benefits in terms of business spending and more importantly salaries and jobs. Second, it will allow the revenues to rise over time based on a strong traditional economy and not one based on disasters, natural and man-made. Third, as revenues rise from the strong economy money will be produced on a recurring basis (not as much of a gamble) that can be used to fund teacher pay raises and other things.

During the upcoming “non-fiscal” session, taxes can be eliminated. The prohibitions (LA Const. Article III, Section 2(A)(3)(b) against reducing taxes during the session apply to exemptions, exclusions, deductions or credits. My suggestion is an out right repeal of specific taxes in their entirety with no phase out.

Of course, my suggestion requires a most unusual move for our politicians. It means, instead of instant gratification by spending more money, it will require restraint. It could mean that only our children and grandchildren will directly benefit from the actions and not necessarily ourselves. It could mean that the only reward for such political courage will be a recordation in the history books of having been a part of turning our once great state around for the better.

The ball is clearly in the court of the leges. All they have to do is to DO IT!

C.B.

Uncategorized CB 11:08 am