Mort Report: Another Unusual Budget Year by District 24 Representative Will Mortenson (Dec. 16, 2021)
If you follow the legislative process much, you have probably heard that state government is headed into another highly unusual budget year. Last week, the Governor laid out her plan for allocating unprecedented federal dollars as well as far-better-than-projected state revenues.
Before sharing thoughts on the proposed budget, two distinctions are critically important: federal funds vs. state funds and one-time spending vs. ongoing spending.
First – over a billion dollars of federal “stimulus” money was allocated to South Dakota. These federal dollars have tight and complex strings attached. We can’t send them back to pay down federal debt or use them to rebate/cut taxes. We have to use them as the Feds say, or the Feds will send the money to California, Minnesota, or Illinois for their state to use.
Second – I cannot overemphasize the importance of the term “one-time.” This revenue should be thought of as a lump-sum windfall rather than operating revenue. That means we can’t use the one-time funds for ongoing expenses like salaries, programs, or operations, since we’d be creating an expense without knowing whether we can pay for it the following year.
The most important budget decision each year pertains to state government’s ongoing, core responsibilities: education, state employees, and meeting our Medicaid obligation. This year, the Governor proposed a 6% increase in those areas. 6% is a big increase – bigger than any proposal without a tax increase for decades. 6% is only possible because state revenues had unprecedented growth – up more than 10% from last fiscal year. So, the Governor says we can afford 6% and I know our schools, state employees, and Medicaid providers need it. At this point, I’m inclined to support the proposal.
The eye-popping one-time proposals, in terms of size, largely pertain to federal funds: $600M for water projects statewide, $100M for daycare provider startup or expansion, and $69M for a new health lab. In addition, $50M of the $200M going for a housing development program will be federal funds.
I’m more encouraged by the Governor’s proposals for state funds, which don’t have the same strings as the federal projects: renovating the Cultural Heritage Center, building capacity at our technical schools, expanding campsites at Custer State Park, and fixing the fountain feeding Capital Lake (as we wrote about in November).
Even if I see the merit in many of the Governor’s proposals, I am constantly cognizant of the fact that these are taxpayer dollars, not mine, and not the government’s. Even if DC is content to endlessly spend, we are not. We need to be as prudent when there is $500,000 available as we are when there is $500 million. Just because the budget year is unusual doesn’t mean we should apply any less scrutiny.
I hope you’ll help me keep tabs on the worthy projects – and the unworthy ones. If you have any advice or perspective, please drop me a line at Will.Mortenson@sdlegislature.gov.
Big Ballot Measures Coming by District 24 Representative Will Mortenson (Nov. 30, 2021)
In the 2022 general election, South Dakotans will decide two questions with profound impact on our communities, our laws, and our budget: Recreational Marijuana and Medicaid Expansion. These blockbuster topics will cast a shadow over our Capitol when your legislature meets in January. I expect bills to be introduced that attempt to affect both measures – by limiting their scope, preempting their purpose, or altering their terms.
The legislature ought to let the people have their say. I do not think the legislature should cut in front of measures that thousands of petitioners have already signed. Both ballot measures should get a vote of the people, as the petition signers intended. If either ballot measure is passed, the legislature must ensure that such measure is implemented fully and faithfully.
Medicaid Expansion and Recreational Marijuana arrived on the ballot following different paths. Medicaid Expansion will be placed on the ballot after a petition drive sponsored by the big hospitals. Legal marijuana had a more tumultuous path.
Last week, the Supreme Court ruled that the sponsors of Constitutional Amendment A messed up. I read the Court’s 77-page ruling. The opinion said nothing about the people’s voice or about whether legalizing marijuana is a good idea. The ruling simply said that the sponsors (lawyers from Washington, DC and Sioux Falls) failed to follow the state constitution. Our constitution says that amendments can only address one subject, and these sponsors put a measure on the ballot that combined three subjects: hemp, medical marijuana, and recreational marijuana.
I think the Supreme Court made the right decision, but I was frustrated by the result, because many of my neighbors feel that their time, energy, or vote was wasted. I wish the sponsors had followed the correct process, but they did not. Fortunately, the sponsors have learned their lesson, and petition organizers are gathering signatures to put the single subject of recreational marijuana on the ballot in 2022.
So, next November, we’ll get to vote on these two important questions. In the meantime, the legislature should not try to pass a modified version of either the Medicaid Expansion or Recreational Marijuana measures. We should let these proposals get a vote of the people. If the voters pass them, the legislature should honor their intent and should only consider legislation that faithfully honors that intent. That’s also how I will view legislation next session that affects the medical marijuana measure (“IM26”) that voters passed in 2020.
I encourage all voters to start researching these measures now – the cost, the impact, and the experience of other states that have adopted them. As with every election, we’ll have big decisions to make in 2022. The legislature should let the people make them.
Comments