POTENTIAL IMPACT OF HANCOCK IS MATTER OF DEBATE FOR LEGISLATORS

Two Southeast Missouri legislators have distinctly different views on the impact passage of the Hancock II constitutional amendment should voters approve the measure in November.

Rep. Larry Thomason, D-Kennett, is majority whip and vice chairman of a legislative committee that said last week that Hancock II would force $1-5 billion in spending cuts. He said it would make Missouri "a third-world country" by forcing massive cuts in services.

But Rep. Mark Richardson, R-Poplar Bluff, who is waging an aggressive campaign to be the Republican leader in the House next year, said the amendment will not stop government.

"We won't be seeing `closed for business' signs on state offices around Missouri," said Richardson. "It will be a lot tougher for us to conduct the affairs of government in the legislature with Hancock II, but certainly not impossible."

Regardless of the fate of Hancock II, legislators will still administer a $12-$13 billion budget and a "ton of programs," Richardson said.

Thomason and Richardson agree on two things: The amendment is poorly written, which makes some of its potential impact uncertain; and the amendment has a good chance passing Nov. 8.

Richardson said there is tremendous support for the amendment in Southeast Missouri, flamed by voters' frustration over the federal budget, which "seems to be totally out of control with no hope of balancing in site."

That frustration has been transferred to state government, particularly since passage of Senate Bill 380, a $250 million tax increase for schools that to many voters represents a broken promise by Governor Mel Carnahan to send any school tax increase to voters.

Richardson said now that Hancock II is on the ballot, many concerned people are trying to analyze the amendment.

"It appears to me that both sides are, at best, overstating or under-stating the impact of it," said Richardson, a lawyer.

The Republican lawmaker is critical of a well publicized report on the impact of Hancock II drafted by former Ashcroft budget director Jim Moody, which suggests its impact would be devastating.

That report was one of the resources used by the joint committee on legislative research when it approved a fiscal note last week.

Richardson contends the projected first-year impact of more than $1 billion is far overstated. He things the figure is closer to $300-400 million.

He said the "sky is falling" tactics of Hancock II opponents will backfire when presented to an electorate already distrustful of government officials.

"The fact of the matter is the sky is not falling," said Richardson. "The more opponents say the sky is falling, the more voters will say, `what's your point?'"

But Thomason stands by the committee determination. He called the wording in the amendment "very pathetic."

He said the Hancock plan attacks SB-380 to negate the taxes approved in it. The problem is, Thomason said, if Hancock passes, the formula will have to be rewritten and there would be insufficient money to comply with a court ruling last year on the issue.

Thomason charged that Mel Hancock, a congressman from southwest Missouri who authored the original Hancock amendment in 1980, "has only a vague touch with reality. He is so caught up in being a populist, he loses touch."

In 1992, Thomason said Hancock was silent when Republican Gov. John Ashcroft expressed support for a 6-cent gas tax increase without a vote of the people. But a year later, when Democrat Carnahan was in office, Hancock complained.

"This is nothing more than partisan politics by Mel Hancock," said Thomason.

Thomason said he hopes voters will take the time to understand the impact of Hancock II. "If the public understands what it does, they are smart enough to reject it. But my fear is people won't take the time to understand it," he said.

But Thomason predicted if it passes, the amendment will be short-lived. "I have a strong suspicion it will pass. And when it passes we will have no choice but to do what it says, and within a year, people will come back with a petition to take Hancock totally off the books," said Thomason.