AREA LEGISLATORS: LACK OF FUNDING THEME OF SESSION

JEFFERSON CITY - Legislators from Southeast Missouri agreed there were plenty of highlights and plenty of disappointments in the 1992 session that concluded Friday night. A tight state financial situation was the overriding influence of the session.

"It was a very hard, difficult session," said Rep. Mary Kasten, R-Cape Girardeau, from her first floor capitol office just after adjournment. "The lack of money made it especially tough this year."

Kasten, completing her 10th year in the House, said it is hard to judge a session until there is time to evaluate the bills and see exactly what was passed. Usually, when looking from a distance, legislative sessions are deemed productive, she said.

"We have a lot of pressing needs in this state and I wish there was a way we could do more, but money is just real tight," added Rep. Larry Thomason, D-Kennett. "Still, we did deal with some tough issues this year. As far as effort goes, it was a darn good session."

Sen. John Dennis, D-Benton, who is retiring after 16 years, rated the session slightly above average. "The worst part about this session is there was no money to meet a lot of our needs. There was some money, but not enough to do what needed to be done."

"When there's no money, it is hard to do anything monumental," commented Rep. Marilyn Williams, D-Dudley.

Rep. Dennis Ziegenhorn, D-Sikeston, serving his sixth term, said it is hard to compare sessions "because needs change. In each session there is always one very important issue that makes it a good session."

Generally, the Bootheel contingent cited passage of a workers compensation reform bill and a fuel tax increase to fund new highway construction as the major accomplishments of the 1992 session.

Likewise, they were disappointed by the inability to agree on a new school foundation formula. Several were stunned by the failure of the Senate to approve a bill tightening penalties for drug offenders.

On Friday afternoon, most legislators were touting the drug bill as a major achievement of the session in anticipation of approval by the Senate. But a problem with one of the unrelated amendments on the bill led two senators to kill the measure.

One of those stunned by the bill's failure was Rep. Mark Richardson, R-Poplar Bluff, who served on the conference committee that whittled down the pile of 32 amendments placed on the bill by the House.

"I continue to be extremely frustrated with the process. I think part of the problem with people's low respect for government has a lot to do with the legislative process," observed the freshman legislator. "Until we take a serious look at reforming the way we legislate, we will have a problem."

But Richardson conceded, "the end result (of the legislative process) is not always bad."

In order to properly deal with the foundation formula, several area House members said it might be productive to call a special session to deal with the issue.

Rep. David Schwab, R-Jackson, said he doesn't like the idea of special sessions but agrees the issue needs to be resolved soon.

"It is an issue we will have to deal with or the courts will do it for us," said Schwab. "It is something that is hard to get a consensus on."

Added Ziegenhorn: "I am very disappointed we did not pass a foundation formula change. I would support having a special session on the foundation formula if there was a clear indication a compromise was likely."

But Williams opposes the idea of coming back for a special session. "We have kicked it around for several years and the Senate has turned it down. Why should we spend money on a special session?"

Several school districts have filed lawsuits, contending the forumula is unfair.

Ziegenhorn was active in the workers compensation effort as chairman of the insurance committee and said he looks forward to continuing the reform process.

"I am very excited about our great start on workers compensation," said Ziegenhorn.

"This workers comp bill gives us a good groundwork to go from next year," added Dennis. "It's going to take a long time to get that completely worked out. You have problems between the employee and the employer and then have lawyers following the employee around if he gets hurt; then the doctors get involved also."

Sen. Jerry Howard, D-Dexter, said: "I think we got as good a compromise as possible during this session."

Thomason said the bill was "an initial major step on workers comp. It is very significant - very important. There are a lot of good things in that bill."

Richardson said the bill was "a substantial first step."

Kasten called it "the biggest achievement of the session. It still needs a lot of work, but it is a very good first step. We just had to get something passed this year."

Rep. Williams was not as generous in her comments about the workers comp bill, although she agreed with the urgency of the problem. Williams was one of nine House members to vote against the final bill Friday morning.

"I just didn't feel like it did what needed to be done for small businesses," said Williams. "We needed to do more for small business."

She would have preferred the final bill have caps on premiums that was in the original House version; Williams said she did not want to pass a bill that lacked significant reforms.

Rep. Jim Graham, R-Fredericktown, agreed with Williams that the bill was not perfect, but followed his other colleagues in praising what passed. "It is not as strong as we need but it is a start. We all know the seriousness of this problem."

In debate over a new foundation formula, the Senate version, sponsored by Sen. Harold Caskey, D-Butler, tended to increase funding for outstate school districts; the House version, sponsored by Rep. Annette Morgan, D-Kansas City, favored urban school districts more.

Howard contended that Caskey's approach, "is the fairest formula we can get at this point."

He added, "If they don't resolve the foundation formula the courts will, and the people won't like what they do."

Thomason said Morgan's approach would hurt schools in his district. "The last think I wanted to see was a bill that penalized schools in Southeast Missouri," he declared. "Given Annette Morgan's formula or no bill, I prefer no bill."

Graham pointed out that there is really no consensus on the foundation formula and is not sure what it will take to get some kind of agreement.

"I am really disappointed by our inability to deal with the desegregation issue and the foundation formula," said Richardson.

Kasten, who was a school board member 20 years before her election to the House, said she fears pending action by the courts that could take the formula decision away from the legislature.

"I am really disappointed we did not get it done and I'm afraid the courts are going to come down hard on us," said Kasten. "I'd rather see us come to some conclusion."

Some House members, especially Republicans, criticized the way Democratic leaders allowed amendments to be tacked on to the governor's drug bill.

"I really didn't like all the amending that went on," said Graham. "The leadership and governor played politics with that."