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.