Issues appropriated only in the conference committee Items not requested by an agency and appropriated only in one house| "The same prudence which in private life would forbid our paying our own money for
unexplained money for unexplained projects, forbids it in the dispensation of the public
moneys." - Thomas Jefferson |
The budget also includes over 463 appropriations for member and special projects that most likely were added to the budget without sufficient review, debate or accountability. These items total $348.3 million. This type of expenditure has historically been defined as a budget turkey. Of this amount, $266.4 million (380 items) worth are most likely bonafide turkeys. Due to time constraints and the profusion of the member issues, an in-depth examination of individual budget turkeys is extremely difficult. However, Florida TaxWatch is confident that the group of appropriations included in this report are likely Budget Turkeys and should be vetoed by the Governor. After the vetoes, we are recommending that the Legislature be called back into Special Session to reappropriate the funds in a more deliberative, equitable, and non-parochial manner with a focus on statewide needs.
The total appropriations for 463 Member Issues were items or projects worth $149.6 million in General Revenue and $198.7 million in trust funds. These special interest issues cost $58 for each Florida family, representing $23 for every man women and child in the state.
This year, we at Florida TaxWatch are required to develop the suspect budget issues from broader criteria. Though Florida TaxWatch continues to be concerned about the details of issues, the short time line allowed by the passage of the budget during the session, less than a quarter as much time for analysis, as well as the extraordinary number of special interest projects, ten times as many suspect issues, disallow the focus on detail of the item. Specifically, the veto time frame for the Governor has been reduced from 15 days to 7 day, which in fact cuts as much as one month of time from the review process. This subsequently curtails Florida TaxWatch's time for analysis, since our report is designed to make recommendations to the governor before he files his veto message.
Thus we have gathered the group of suspect/Member Issues in this report for the purpose of requesting the Governor to examine them closely for appropriateness. We understand that the broad corralling process may well include "birds of another feather", i.e., a few chickens, pigeons and other harmless fowl. However, the responsible action is to include all that fail to meet the minimum levels of the sunshine policy process and err on the side of inclusion.
Upon close examination by the Governor, we request that the Governor veto the inappropriate items and recall the Legislature in a Special Session to reappropriate the funds in an open public debate. Florida TaxWatch has divided the Member Issues into the following groups, with a notation of the numbers and amounts of money the member issues generated in each set.
More Likely to Contain Turkeys:
Issues appropriated only in the conference committee
Items not requested by an agency and appropriated only in one house
Less Likely to Contain Turkeys:
Items not requested by an agency and appropriated by both houses
-- 1990 Turkey Watch |
Member issues and special projects are a code name for legislative activities that are often to circumvent the priorities and, in some instances, the intent of the common purpose governmental programs.
The special nature of the potential Budget Turkey projects not only ignore priority, they short-circuit the accountability process of performance and outputs. They are rarely relevant to any designated public outcome, since they are not generated as part of a purposeful plan. In short they are quick fixes for political or parochial gain. They represent shallow political accomplishments with little relationship to real leadership in governing.
In this pursuit of special interests, there is an erosion of governing principles that inspired many to seek public office. This decline from broad principle to parochial particulars substantially changes elected officials from those representing the people to those representing special interests.
As in previous years, it is important to understand that exposing a budget item as a "budget turkey" does not mean that the budget item is "bad" or lacks merit. The notation indicates that the item has been funded before establishing it as a top state function or priority, often ignoring a careful prioritization process established to fund the state's vast and most pressing needs within limited resources. Always the question must be asked: "Is this the best use of the Florida taxpayers' dollars or is this funded because its sponsor has the power to jump it over other pressing statewide priorities needs?" The priorities of all citizens, even those represented by less powerful legislators, must be considered and funded fairly.
The table below lists the traditional criteria used by Florida TaxWatch to identify budget items as a "turkey."
1. Projects or programs that did not go through any review process allowing for proper evaluation: agency budget requests, governor's recommended budget or legislative committee hearings. 2. Subsidies to private organizations, councils or committees which can and should obtain funding from private sources. 3. Local government projects benefitting local area residents but lacking significant local funding support and/or overall benefit to the state as a whole. 4. Projects lacking an empirically demonstrated public benefit but instead benefitting some special interest. Appropriations which circumvent competition and mandate that a specific vendor or project receive funding. 5. Low priority projects that get funded over higher priority items. 6. Inappropriate sources and questionable appropriations -- e.g., only partially funded with a large annualized cost in subsequent years, funded from inappropriate sources and/or duplicative of existing programs. |
Last year, the tactics of the Legislature included a proforma adherence to the criteria used by Florida TaxWatch to identify turkeys. Florida TaxWatch acknowledged this effort but did not allow it to go unnoticed and designated those budget items that met the letter but not the spirit of the criteria the status of parochial projects. This year, no such differentiation will be made.
Instead, a standard acknowledging the level of public exposure will be used to assign turkey status. This requires that each item be reviewed at a minimal level, that is it must have undergone thorough examination by way of Agency request and legislative committee oversight or by a thorough review and analysis evidenced by exposure in nonconference process in both chambers of the legislature.
This and previous Turkey Watch reports are not attempts to record only government waste or inefficiency.
While in some cases that may be a factor, this report offers an independent assessment about the honesty,
integrity and public review of the state's $45.3 billion 1998-99 budget.
The fundamental criteria used in this analysis are: Items that appeared only in the conference committee budget are automatically turkey candidates with the exception of those supported by substantive legislation; Items that appear only in House or Senate budgets are turkey candidates; Items that were requested by an agency and appropriated in at least one house are excluded from the turkey list; Items that appear in both the House and Senate budgets, but are not part of the Agency request or Governor's Recommendations may or may not be budget turkeys. |
Most budget turkeys are added onto the state budget during the waning hours of the legislative session. This maneuver circumvents the normal planning and budgeting process which, by necessity, requires close scrutiny by state agencies, the Governor's Office of Planning and Budgeting, legislative committees and staff, and meaningful citizen input. Florida TaxWatch's Turkey Watch criteria acknowledges the authority and responsibility of legislative initiative. However, that initiative has a proper form and structure, based on an honest and appropriate process, established by the Legislature itself. With budget turkeys, this process is bypassed.
Likely Turkey Candidates:
Items generated in the conference committee: 90 items at a cost of $102.5 Million
Items not requested by an agency and heard in only one house: 290 items at a cost of $163.9 Million
Total: $266.4 Million
Possible Turkey Candidates:
Items not requested by an agency but heard in both houses: 83 items valued at $81.9 Million
Probable Non-Turkeys:
Items requested by an agency and heard in one house.
Items requested by an agency and heard in both houses.
Last year the entire turkey list totaled $51 million; this year, just the "conference breed" turkeys weighed in at $102.5 million. The total list of likely budget turkeys for this year is an astonishing $266.4 million for FY 1998-99. This could approach or exceed one third of a billion dollars given that probably some items in the category reviewed by both houses could be in the turkey candidate category. In the past few years, if an item has had the recommendation of the agency and received review in one house, it generally has not been assigned turkey status. Items requested by the agency and both houses are not assigned turkey status except in rare circumstances.
The failure to demonstrate accountable behavior is at least as serious as the waste of money or the inappropriate assignment of priority. With many challenges facing our state, the Legislature should focus on funding issues of statewide concern, not the profusion of local projects.
Other serious issues such as the reduction of bonding, fully addressing the intangibles tax law and improving the Taxpayers Bill of Rights could have been addressed by the Legislature. Such long lasting and profoundly relevant issues take a back seat to festivals, local building projects, and local development projects with few norms or standards and little accountability.
By mocking accountability, the legislature erodes it in the rest of government.
| "A turkey is an unnecessary, costly, special interest project ... in someone else's district."
-- Anonymous |
Given the profusion of member issues and likely budget turkeys the definition of fiscal conservatism may take on new meaning. Or worse it may lose all relevance as a political construct that has significance in the discernable behavior of the body politic. Fiscal conservatism is not founded upon principles that pander to parochial needs or respond to the pressure of special interests. Public expenditure is restricted to the support of a common good that allows the optimum of individual initiative and free behavior. Fiscal conservatism operates within the confines of specific parameters. These parameters answer questions such as: What is just? What is required? What is prudent? What is accountable? And is government the last resort to these ends?
Nothing about turkeys brings these questions to mind. In fact the genesis of a turkey is based on the contradictions to what is fundamental to fiscal conservatism. Fiscal conservatism is not a selfish orientation; it is a generative one that fosters growth in individuals and the community as a whole by excluding special treatment and fostering wholesome competition and cooperation, as well as a public forum for thoughtful debate and public inspection. At the same time it delimits in a frame work of law the unwholesome processes such as parochial favoritism and the authoritarian expression of raw power.
One of the best arguments for stopping turkeys is the many urgently needed state services that the money could otherwise fund. In addition, a fiscally conservative Legislature could explore more ways of giving something back to the taxpayers. A few examples of what could be done with the more than $150 million in General Revenue currently appropriated for these "special projects":
The Legislature is discussing a $50 tax rebate to homeowners. That rebate could be almost doubled or
expanded to a larger number of taxpayers.
Long-sought additions to the Florida Taxpayers Bill of Rights (reduced statute of limitations, paying
interest on delinquent refunds and reducing the interest paid on late taxes) would cost an estimated $70
million. There is widespread agreement that these provisions are fair and needed but they fail each year due
to budget constraints.
Reduce state bonding by $150 million and save taxpayers $150 million in interest over 30 years.
More than 5,000 new public school teachers.
An additional $60 in funding for every K-12 student.
Over 40,000 new child care slots
Repeal of the Alcoholic Beverage Surcharge Tax ($105 Million)
