House budget committee Archives

Missouri Senate panel wraps up work on $5.8 billion coronavirus response plan

April 7, 2020 By Alisa Nelson

A Missouri Senate committee with a say in the state’s piggy bank has sifted through Gov. Mike Parson’s request for $5.8 billion in extra cash during the current state budget year. Members of the Senate Appropriations Committee did the work while some of them donned protective masks and kept their social distance from one another. The committee hearing was live streamed so the surroundings were absent of some staffers, lobbyists, media and members of the public.

The funding plan, which would be used in the state’s response to the coronavirus, includes $5.1 billion in federal funds, $247.5 million in state dollars and $379 million in other funding. When the federal money would come in, exactly how much Missouri would get and if it will be a lump sum or a round of payments is unknown.

Missouri Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on April 7, 2020. Due to the coronavirus outbreak, the hearing was live streamed and some committee members wore face masks.

Some of the highlights of the request include about $1 billion in federal funds to Missouri communities and $900 million to the Missouri Department of Public Safety to help the state and local governments pay for protective equipment.

During the committee hearing, State Budget Director Dan Haug says the market on personal protective equipment to fight the coronavirus is ridiculous.

“We think a 90-day supply, which would take us through the end of the fiscal year of PPE – the personal protective equipment, is about $150 million,” he says. “That’s very fluid. I will tell you we had an order for PPE for 30 days. It cost us 18 million dollars. A week later, it cost us $40 million.”

Sen. Jeanie Riddle, R-Mokane, says she represents counties with zero personal protective equipment.

“Not for firefighters, not for law enforcement, not for their health care providers – nothing. So, I hope that we have the access to be able to distribute that money around the state and not just two communities only,” says Riddle.

An estimated $600 million would be reserved for temporary hospital sites – roughly $100 million each for three months. Whether or not the state actually needs these places as hospital overflow locations will depend on the severity of the respiratory virus throughout the state. Under the plan, the state would hire 199 full-time equivalent temporary employees to help at these sites.

Another big chunk of cash – $1.5 billion in federal funds – would be for K-12 public schools and $304 million in federal dollars would aid Missouri’s colleges and universities.

The Missouri Department of Mental Health could get $22 million in federal money to help with crisis counseling, suicide prevention programs and individuals with developmental disabilities.

For the Missouri Department of Social Services, the state would provide nearly $334,000 to help with additional nursing care, $528,000 in federal money to help victims of domestic violence and $40 million in federal funding for nursing homes.

Sen. Bill Eigel, R-Weldon Spring, spoke about the COVID-19 pandemic’s impact on Missouri nursing homes, specifically about personal protective gear. Eigel, a member of the Senate Conservative Caucus, said they need additional funding and offered an amendment to prioritize $125 million for the care centers. Haug said the amendment would result in cuts to other places in the budget.

Several members voiced support for Eigel’s proposal, including Sen. Mike Cunningham, R-Rogersville. He cites a nursing home in his district on the brink of closure.

“Possibly within three to four weeks, there’s going to be 100 and some people who will have to relocate. There’s no place for them to go in the area and I just think it’s the wrong thing to do,” says Cunningham. “My concern is where else can we go to get money if we can’t do this. This is a population that definitely needs it.”

Committee Chairman Dan Hegeman, R-Cosby, left the line open for later discussion.

Hegeman has requested a monthly tracking for lawmakers to know where the money is coming from and how it is being spent. Haug says the state is working on getting this system in place.

The Senate committee has taken the governor’s position in some cases. In other cases, it’s taken the House Budget Committee’s or has come up with its own changes.

The full Senate plans to take up the package on Wednesday. The plan would then move on to the Missouri House of Representatives.

To see the governor’s full list of recommendations, click here.

Secretary Ashcroft calls for eliminating Missouri’s presidential preference primary

February 3, 2020 By Brian Hauswirth

The Secretary of State wants to do away with Missouri’s presidential preference primary (PPP), saying it would save taxpayers millions of dollars.

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (right) applauds First Lady Teresa Parson in the Missouri House chamber in Jefferson City on January 16, 2019 (file photo courtesy of Tim Bommel at House Communications)

Republican Jay Ashcroft made his comments about the PPP, while testifying last week before the House Budget Committee in Jefferson City.

“An election that has really no bearing on the presidential race,” Ashcroft testifies.

He tells Budget Committee members that Missouri is using a caucus system now, to choose delegates.

“You all know that we have a presidential primary, we spend $9.1 million of taxpayer money,” says Ashcroft. “And then we ignore the results and we have a caucus that actually chooses delegates to choose who goes to the national conventions.”

If state lawmakers approve Mr. Ashcroft’s call, it would not impact this year’s PPP, which will take place on March 10 across Missouri.

None of the Budget Committee members from either party had follow-up questions for Secretary Ashcroft, about his call.

Ashcroft says doing away with the PPP would save $9.1 million ever four years, plus interest.

Missouri’s Legislature adopted the presidential preference primary in 1986, for one PPP to be held in 1988. Some at the time said it was aimed at helping then-U.S. Rep. Richard Gephardt, D-St. Louis County, in his 1988 presidential campaign. Congressman Gephardt ended his presidential run in March 1988, and ran again and was re-elected for his congressional seat.

Missouri used caucuses in 1992 and 1996. Then in 1998, the Legislature approved a PPP with no expiration date. That was Senate Bill 709, which was signed by then-Governor Mel Carnahan.

The state has held presidential preference primaries five straight times: in 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012 and 2016.

During his testimony, Secretary Ashcroft also emphasized the importance of technology, in his office and in libraries.

Ashcroft testifies his office is willing to absorb the cost of the Legislative Library, which is located at the State Capitol.

“It’s not a lot of money, but we would allow you (state lawmakers) to zero out the budget for the Legislative Library. We would absorb the cost of that into our own budget,” Ashcroft says.

Ashcroft wants to use his office’s technology trust fund to update the Legislative Library, which he says it not electronically cataloged. He tells lawmakers it would provide a better library experience for them and for their constituents who visit the Capitol.

Ashcroft’s technology trust fund is supported by business filing fees. He notes it funded a complete overhaul of what he calls an outdated Secretary of State’s office phone system. Ashcroft tells lawmakers that under the old phone system, it was difficult to transfer calls from St. Louis, Kansas City and Springfield to the Jefferson City office. Many callers were cut off, because of the old technology.

He also testifies that filing fees collected by his office added $8.8 million to general revenue in the last fiscal year.

Budget working group to take a closer look at health, social services budgets

February 23, 2012 By Mike Lear

Seven members of the House Budget Committee are going to take a closer look at areas where the budgets for the Departments of Mental Health, Health and Senior Services and Social Services might be reduced.

Representative Tom Flanigan presents part of his Appropriations Committee's budget to the full Budget Committee.

The Appropriations Committee covering those agencies recommended that New Decision Items within those budgets receive 75% funding. Chairman Tom Flanigan (R-Carthage) explained to the Budget Committee Wednesday that his intent was to force a supplemental budget in January when better information is available related to those items, and what funding is still necessary at that time can be provided. Flanigan noted that his committee does not have authority to make cuts.

The Budget Committee has now created a working group that will look at new decision items in the budget bills for those agencies for any places where similar withholds could be made. Representative Jeff Grisamore (R-Lee’s Summit) said the process would help conserve as much money as possible for the “most vulnerable people.”

See what’s in those budget bills, HB 2010 and HB 2011.

The members of the working group are Republicans Rick Stream of Kirkwood, Sue Allen of Town and Country, Grisamore and Flanigan and Democrats Chris Kelly of Columbia, Gail McCann Beatty of Kansas City and Jeanne Kirkton of Webster Groves.

Kelly says Flanigan’s withholding method is an innovative, interesting idea and he’s anxious to look into it more. “Is it reasonable to hold some money back and put it in the supplemental bill to make sure the money’s being spent correctly and targeted correctly?”

Kirkton says she is concerned for the agencies that might have to deal with those 25% withholds. “If I were a department manager I would be very nervous about it. You hope the supplemental money will be there but there’s always the ‘what if’s’. What if we had another catastrophe, what if that money’s not there, what if revenues don’t come in? We always have to worry.”

Kirkton says supplemental budget bills are expected to come out early next week, so the working group will have to work fast.

House committee hears update from State Budget Director

February 22, 2012 By Mike Lear

The Nixon Administration has laid out its ideas for filling in the $460 million dollar hole in the fiscal year 2013 budget to the House Budget Committee.

State Budget Director Linda Luebbering

The gap in the budget had been $500 million but a recent mortgage settlement secured by the Attorney General’s Office has knocked that number down by $40 million.

State Budget Director Linda Luebbering says the Administration’s recommendations to balance the budget includes a $191.7 million reduction from where budget planners expected Medicaid would be. She tells lawmakers, “It’s an actual reduction of $20 million for general revenue from this year, but a $191 million dollar reduction from where we thought we would need to be because of the change in the Medicaid match rate.” Luebbering says it will not require a change in eligibility or a reduction in services provided.

$74.7 million of the administration’s budget recommendations also rely on measures still before the state legislature. A revenue collections bill would generate an estimated $12.9 million, with another $51.8 million to come from a tax amnesty bill. Both are sponsored by Representative Tom Flanigan (R-Carthage).

What had been a $16.9 million dollar recommended reduction to community and technical colleges has been scaled back to $10.5 million, also due to proceeds from the mortgage settlement.

Other amounts include $41 million from restructuring debt, $29.3 million in administrative savings, a $7 million reduction to biodiesel subsidy payments and a $2 million reduction to public health agencies.

The Administration’s top priority for the budget remains $203 million to the Foundation Formula. Luebbering says, “$198 million of that is needed just to keep the formula where it is this year.”

Luebbering tells the committee there are some positive signs in the economy. “The unemployment rate is down. We are starting to see a little bit of growth on the collections side. Not a lot yet this fiscal year. We were at 1.3 percent growth in our revenue collections at the end of January, so not stellar growth, but certainly it’s good to see that we’re continuing a positive on our collections numbers.”

Republicans question the validity of the lower unemployment numbers, saying that federal statistic does not count individuals who don’t have jobs and are no longer looking for them as being unemployed. Luebbering says the data still holds meaning, “Because it has historically looked at people who are looking for jobs or who have jobs. So, I think it is a historically relevant statistic that has been measured the same for years. Granted it’s not a complete number, but it at least is consistently calculated every month.”

The House Budget Committee will continue to hold agency budget hearings this week.