After the legislative spring break and a wonderful Easter holiday, the Senate resumed session this week. The legislative spring break always marks a transition in the pace and perception of each legislative session. Whereas before spring break time is seemingly unlimited, after spring break the finite nature of the session comes into play more and more as both chambers work toward a hard and fast end-date.
Prior to spring break, the House sent their version of the fiscal year 2017 budget to the Senate. Sen. Schaefer and the appropriations committee have worked long hours this week to mark-up the House version of the budget and to prepare the Senate's version which will likely come out of committee next week. After the Senate version comes out of the appropriations committee, it will be debated on the floor and voted by the Senate as a whole. Differences between the House and Senate versions will then be reconciled by conference committees and the final budget will be sent to the governor for signature.
The constitution requires the Legislature to send a balanced budget to the governor no later than the Friday before the last day of session. As has been the case previously, I expect the budget to be sent to the governor well in advance of the constitutional deadline, with the goal being to do so early enough that the governor must take action on the budget while the Legislature is still in session.
This budget, like every year's budget, is both interesting and challenging. At the beginning of every year the House, Senate, and the governor's office agree upon a consensus revenue estimate. This estimate is exactly that, an estimate of the amount of revenue the state expects to receive in the coming year. This calculation is based upon economic data, current and past receipts, and a variety of other variables and is generally relatively accurate.
If you take the fiscal year 2016 supplemental budget the governor has presented to the legislature and combine it with the fiscal year 2017 budget the governor proposed, every cent of every dollar of general revenue growth goes toward increased Medicaid costs. In addition to requiring every cent of every dollar of revenue growth, the governor's proposed budget requires an additional $28 million in general revenue just to meet the increased costs associated with Medicaid.
Said differently, if the Legislature were to approve the governor's proposed budget, in spite of projected revenue growth of approximately $367 million, every program funded with general revenue, other than Medicaid, will have a combined $28 million LESS funding in FY2017 than in FY2016. Every dime of growth is sucked up by Medicaid and it still is not enough to cover the costs. There is a finite amount of general revenue available, so the $28 million more required to cover this year's increased Medicaid costs must come from somewhere else. This trend is absolutely unsustainable and is prohibitive to other budget priorities such as fully funding the state's K-12 education foundation formula.
Sen. Schaefer has been the chair of the appropriations committee for six years. He possess a depth and breadth of knowledge on the budget and the appropriations process that is unmatched in the era of term-limits. Additionally each senator who serves on the appropriations committee has multiple years of experience. These men and women know the budget process and they also understand the basic fundamentals of budgeting: wants that exceed the dollars available have to be prioritized to reflect priorities.
The governor has made his priorities abundantly clear, which is to put the pedal to the metal on entitlement expenditures at the expense of anything and everything else. I am grateful for Sen. Schaefer's leadership of the appropriations process and look forward to the Senate's version of the FY2017 budget being a better reflection of Missourian's priorities.
In addition to hours of effort spent on the budget, the Senate put its final stamp on HB1983, an ethics bills which prohibits elected officials from serving as paid political consultants. This bill is now on the governor's desk awaiting his signature. Two other ethics bills are in conference committees, and I expect both to come out of conference soon and be sent to the governor.
This week the Senate also gave initial approval to SB623, sponsored by Senator Doug Libla. SB623 seeks to provide additional revenue for Missouri's roads and bridges by putting before Missourians, on the Nov 2016 ballot, the option to increase the motor fuel tax (both gas and diesel) by 5.9 cents per gallon.
If approved by the voters, this fuel tax increase will generate approximately $236.5 million annually. Of that $236.5 million, according to the current distribution formula, approximately $165.5 million will go to MoDOT, $35.5 million to cities, and $35.5 million to counties.
I have been an outspoken advocate for increased funding for Missouri's transportation infrastructure, and I voted in favor of putting this gas tax increase on the ballot. Not everyone likes the gas tax option, and I fully understand that fact. As I said on the floor during debate, the need does not go away just because we cannot agree on a solution. If SB623 is approved by the House and goes on the November ballot, the day after it is approved or disapproved, Missouri will still have more than 10,000 bridges and 32,000 miles of road to maintain.
My purpose and my intent is to serve the constituents of the 6th Senatorial District. If you are in the State Capitol during the coming weeks and months, please stop by your office in Room 321.
State Sen. Mike Kehoe, R-Jefferson City, represents the 6th District.