A LOOK AT THE ELECTION-YEAR LEGISLATIVE SESSION

The General Assembly convened this week in Jefferson City, as it does the first week of every year.

This being an even-numbered year, a November election is looming, and the seats of all 163 representatives and 17 of 34 senators are up for election. Add to November's ballot five of the six statewide offices, including governor, and a battle royal between Gov. Mel Carnahan and U.S. Sen. John Ashcroft for the Senate seat. All machinations occurring between now and May 12's adjournment must be seen through this prism.

On the good side, Missourians can count the unlikelihood of being saddled with any tax increase in a year when politicians have to face the voters.

Thanks solely to the Hancock Amendment, the last several years have seen more than $700 million in tax cuts and another $800 million in Hancock refunds. Where the budget chairmen of the House and Senate committees are warning of tight budgetary realities, we see cause for applause. The Hancock Amendment, though far from perfect, is working as it was intended: as a brake on a state government that has been growing at between two and three times annual inflation, and as a force for economy.

We are told that decisions regarding Missouri's stake in the tobacco litigation will dominate much of the session. Here several observations are in order.

First, key lawmakers are agreeing that the oft-quoted figure of $6.7 billion to be received over 25 years is inflated.

Second, Democratic leaders who last year ridiculed Republican proposals to put to the people the question of the disposition of the tobacco money are now calling for just that. You can expect to see some form of this proposition on November's ballot, but the form it takes will be crucial. (A suggestion: "Do you favor returning the money to taxpayers, or handing it to the politicians to spend?")

Third, politicians being politicians, ideas for spending this not-yet-received windfall are as common as blackberries in July. Resisting these forces won't be easy. We have the answer of one candidate for governor on this issue: Republican Jim Talent wants it returned to taxpayers. Where does State Treasurer Bob Holden stand?

Transportation issues are vexing for state government. It is likely that any resolution of them will have to await a gubernatorial campaign fought out, in part, on this issue. Here we will decry, again, the lack of serious debate over Talent's bold plan, announced last summer, to issue bonds to finance these improvements. Here again, we await an announcement from Holden.

Where local issues are concerned, funding for Southeast Missouri State University is front and center.

To the university's annual budget is added a hoped for capital-improvement funding for the new River Campus in the amount of $12.4 million to go with last year's appropriation of $4.6 million. Whether all this can be done in one budget year remains to be seen, and much will hinge on announcements of private and local benefactions university officials have been pursuing, with much promise of success. When the tale is told, it is doubtful that any state project will approach the local funding match that will be boasted by the River Campus.

The burgeoning Southeast Missouri Regional Port Authority is requesting $1.4 million through the Missouri Department of Transportation on a competitive basis with a 20 percent local funding match. The money would be used to fill and prepare an additional 26 acres of industrial sites for which port officials say they have interested prospects.

When May arrives we will know much more. Till then, Missourians will watch with interest.