Missouri approaching Ground Zero

KENNETT, Mo. -- One of Missouri's foremost state-budget analysts is Jim Moody, who served as former governor John Ashcroft's fiscal director and lived through a trauma not unlike that now being experienced in the administration of incumbent Bob Holden.

In a statement the other day, Moody once again pointed out the financial dark alley that exists between Jefferson City's revenue and the ever-expanding dollar demands of more and more state-sponsored programs. In other words, our state government is enduring more bite than bucks, with no relief in sight.

To put it another way, Missouri is overextended and underfunded, and until a few months ago, no one seemed to notice.

One doesn't have to look far to confirm the dire predictions, unfortunately with impeccable accuracy, that seem to be occurring on a nearly daily basis from the state Capitol. One doesn't have to be a fiscal genius to realize that the steady growth of the federally sponsored Medicaid programs, covering more and more residents, will take a deep bite in actual revenue gains, nor does it take an Einstein to realize that the inequitable distribution of state school payments not only remains in effect but grows at the same time the number of school-age children increases.

Added to these factors is the legislative intention to throw more and more criminals into state prisons in an effort to assuage public nervousness, creating a steady stream of new penal institutions that over the past two decades have doubled in number and size. Staffing of these units does not come cheaply, nor does bare-minimum staffing at Missouri's mental health facilities for a growing, long-neglected population.

Money to sponsor several of these programs has in the past been forthcoming from the federal government and the growing, but hardly spectacular, increase in state tax revenue. With the federal government once again operating in the red, with record-high deficits already affecting Washington's ability to prepare for war with lower, not higher, tax collections, Uncle Sam has been backed into a serious cash flow problem not unlike that being endured by all but a couple of 50 state governments. Where is Ronald Reagan's deficits-are-good philosophy now that it's so badly needed?

Moody's suggestions include a 15 percent reduction in all 16 departmental budgets, an answer that raises some questions, particularly by agencies whose revenue has been set by constitutional authority. Agencies such as the departments of transportation and conservation receive designated amounts which cannot be quickly altered. Another Moody suggestion overlooks the danger of changing preservation write-offs already guaranteed by Jefferson City and whose stability would be seriously questioned by investors and other sponsors of valuable, long-term developments. The state is not a broker of securities; it is the guarantor of long-term, secure investment programs.

If Missourians insist on what has been a continuous program stream in Jefferson City and if citizens appear adamant in opposition to higher taxes to finance these projects, then perhaps Moody's recommended 15 percent cut across the board is at least a viable suggestion, except there aren't more than a handful of legislators in the state willing to take the heat for such drastic, dramatic action. The truth is that virtually all of the programs now in place in our state were -- and are -- needed and were enacted in response to the petitioning of a segment of the state's population. As witness:

Missouri has greatly added to drug-abuse prevention programs because virtually every family in the state has experienced addiction or fears its effects. Reducing either enforcement or treatment, or both, would create a serious threat to what we like to believe is a mature, drug-free population. The cost of these programs, while high, is far preferable to an arbitrary funding cut.

Missouri has doubled its prison-cell facilities over the past two and a half decades primarily at the insistence of a public that is understandably frightened by proliferating cries in their neighborhoods. A reduction in these programs, we have been warned by experts, would see a return to abnormally high rates that create serious public-safety threats.

The state has made a consistent effort to protect the public by closely monitoring such resources as local water supplies and the air we breathe, saving the lives of thousands of residents whose life spans would be dramatically shortened without such efforts. Are these needless deaths worth any cut?

Anyone conversant with intergovernmental operations is aware of an overriding official indifference to common economy of operations. Politicians build empires, not public appreciation for holding down spending, and bureaucrats dislike studies that discover their indifference -- two reasons for that $1 billion budget shortfall. Jefferson City will not find affluence from reductions in essential programs, but it will earn public support for drastic efforts to cut needless waste.

Jack Stapleton is the editor of Missouri News & Editorial Service.