Gov. Matt Blunt expected to cut $26.4 million from state budget

Legislators declared the budget balanced on the assumption the cuts would be made.

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- Gov. Matt Blunt is expected to cut millions of dollars out of the budget passed by the legislature. And that's just the way lawmakers planned it.

Legislative budget writers acknowledged Thursday that the $19.2 billion budget they passed last month is balanced on the assumption that Blunt will trim $26.4 million in state general revenue spending through line-item vetoes or by withholding expenditures.

Blunt's budget architect, Mike Keathley, declined to provide a specific dollar amount targeted for cuts. But he confirmed: "We do intend to line-item veto some stuff."

The governor already has signed into law the budget bills funding public debt payments and school districts for the fiscal year starting July 1. That means the cuts would have to come from the rest of the budget, which funds higher education, social services, prisons and various state agencies.

When proposing a budget in January, Blunt asked lawmakers to authorize more spending than he believed the state could afford, suggesting his administration would later identify nearly $240 million of cuts. He outlined those specific cuts in late March, as legislators already were well into their budget work.

But lawmakers did not follow all of Blunt's budget-cutting suggestions. For example, Blunt in March suggested eliminating state subsidies for Amtrak's twice-daily passenger train service between St. Louis and Kansas City. But the legislature chose to continue funding it.

After the House and Senate passed different budgets, and a conference committee began preparing a final version, members of Blunt's administration provided lawmakers with a list of programs and dollar amounts Blunt likely would cut.

Legislative budget negotiators would have needed special approval from the House and Senate to reduce the budget to the amounts suggested by Blunt. But the conferees never sought that approval.

Counted it as savings

Instead, according to negotiation details only now revealed, legislators appropriated the full $26.4 million Blunt indicated he would cut and counted it as a savings that could be used elsewhere in the budget.

"I viewed it as, we know that money is not going to be spent there, so why let it there? Let's use it in places it can be spent," said House Budget Committee chairman Brad Lager, R-Maryville.

Technically speaking, legislators appropriated more than they figured the state could afford. But they declared the budget balanced by assuming Blunt would follow through with $26.4 million in line-item vetoes.

Legislative budget staffers said they could not recall a previous budget being balanced on the assumption a governor would veto some of the spending.

Senate Appropriations Committee chairman Chuck Gross said it also was unusual for a governor to tell lawmakers -- in the midst of crafting a final budget -- precisely what spending levels he would accept for certain programs.

"When you've got a governor who tells you he's going to take certain actions, that's a good thing," said Gross, R-St. Charles.

Blunt's administration and the legislative budget writers declined to say which programs Blunt had suggested he might cut.

But Keathley said the governor was reviewing 136 budget line-items in which the legislature's appropriation exceeded the governor's recommendation.

He said Blunt also was considering line-item vetoes based on legal and philosophical objections.

Because the state's finances are constantly changing, it's unclear whether Blunt will need to cut $26.4 million to balance the budget, Keathley said. Stronger-than-expected May tax revenue and lesser-than-expected state agency spending could result in more money being available for the next fiscal year, meaning Blunt's cuts could be less.

But the legislature's budget also assumed some savings in other areas that now look unlikely to occur, Keathley said.

The $26.4 million in assumed gubernatorial cuts accounts for less than 1 percent of the nearly $7.2 billion in state general revenue appropriated in the budget.

"In the scheme of things it's not much. It's little pieces here and there," Gross said.