New refrain from second fiddles

KENNETT, Mo. -- Anyone who kept track of the proceedings of this year's session of the Missouri legislature is aware that, given an unusual set of circumstances, the record of our elected representatives in Jefferson City could have been much, much worse than the one that was written by the session's final day on May 17.

While some legislative sessions seem to perform almost effortlessly, others require the kind of hands-on attention citizens expect, but don't always receive, from their 163 state representatives and 34 state senators. This year's session presented a sizable group of challenges that were reminiscent of those that faced lawmakers back in 1991 and 1992.

The role and importance of legislators is often overlooked, or never recognized, by a public that believes it has no direct connection with actions taken in the state Capitol except to protest higher taxes and egregious acts of favoritism. As a result, until a crisis emerges our lawmakers are forced to play second fiddle to the executive branch.

Governors may propose, but it is the legislative branch that is expected to dispose, and, depending on the circumstances, this is either a relatively easy assignment or an extremely difficult one.

This year was the latter.

As Gov. Bob Holden outlined his vision for the state last January, it became obvious that numerous adjustments would have to be made throughout this year, following the events of Sept. 11 and the subsequent weakening of the nation's economy. The governor's recommendations, in a normal year, would have been viewed as sensible and normal in a world before terrorism transformed our federal and state governments and their citizens into a world that was anything but normal and sensible.

To their credit, most of the members of Missouri's legislature responded in a mature, thoughtful manner, a response for which they seldom received credit as the session traveled through its normal phases.

Holden's State of the State speech noted the prospect of a tighter-than-usual budget that would reflect only minimal increases in state spending, with very little available for programs that elected officials like to foster and promote, particularly when they are hunting for constituent votes.

The governor's agenda was further influenced by the shifting of leadership in the Senate, with Republicans taking control of the upper chamber and exercising a brand of conservatism that hadn't been seen since the heyday of conservative Democratic control four or five decades earlier.

Holden not only had a revenue problem, he also had a leadership dilemma that most assuredly placed his agenda in some danger, if not extinction, requiring a great many cautious and careful steps.

Most Missourians, unaware that events following Sept. 11 were changing their state government just as they had changed their own lives, perhaps never fully appreciated the thin-ice climate in Jefferson City, but it was there, and it was effectively having an impact on the course of state government for an undetermined period of time.

This influence was as visible on the session's final day as it was throughout the country on the day following the Sept. 11 attacks in New York and Washington.

Without compromises between the two branches of government, Missourians would certainly have been unable to appreciate the fine tuning that came from all the second fiddles in their state Capitol. Budget and appropriation committee members performed well above expectations during the past four and a half months, exercising for the most part sound judgment and exerting a strenuous effort to deal with some problems that had been around Jefferson City for far too many years.

Most of us cannot appreciate the effort that is required to reduce a $19.2 billion spending pattern to one that totals $18.9 billion. If the solution seems simple, consider that one out of every three dollars spent by the state comes from Washington, which is faced with its own national security and fiscal problems.

Consider too that Missouri's increasing population serves to increase the number to be served, and so $1 spent this year will need another 2 percent or 3 percent to meet the number now waiting to be served.

Inflation also takes its toll, and one Federal Reserve Bank official estimates that every $1 spent a year earlier now requires the expenditures of an additional 3.26 percent -- just to serve an additional constituency. Try that on for size the next time you are attempting to balance the family budget.

The two branches of government were on virtually the same wavelength when it came to the need for additional funding for local school districts, and most wanted to maintain valuable welfare-assistance programs that have served to reduce the state's poverty levels and have brought some degree of new life to the underprivileged. Both compromised in proffered solutions to the state's highway crisis, resolving it with the best of several difficult alternatives.

Reductions in important mental health programs were virtually assured, particularly in light of past overtaxing corrections policies, all helped along by a statewide inattention to agency inefficiencies and wasted spending.

Nor did Jefferson City seem to have time to consider whether its vast investments in electronic government constitute wasted tax dollars. These are correctable oversights that in more normal times can -- and should -- be addressed.

And, finally, the state provided the necessary indifference to special interest pleading for creative financing of projects designed only to aid the rich and affluent.

Listen carefully and you will hear the second fiddles playing that old song's latest version, now titled, "Take Us Out of the Ball Park."

It's a wonderful song. Let's all sing the last chorus.

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