Louisiana Senate Bill SB146

Louisiana 2014 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/10/14
• Refer: 3/10/14

Caption

Authorizes limited redirection and transfer of funds supporting appropriations and allocations from the state general fund and dedicated funds in certain circumstances. (See Act) (2/3-CA7s10(F)(1)) (OR SEE FISC NOTE GF RV)

Impact

Should SB146 be enacted, it has the potential to alter how Louisiana's state financial management operates, particularly in terms of addressing budget deficits. Specifically, the bill enables greater flexibility in fund management by permitting the state to redirect funds in response to decreased federal support or projections of future deficits. These amendments to existing laws may lead to more effective management of state resources and avoid disruptions in state-funded programs.

Summary

SB146, introduced by Senator Crowe, aims to authorize the limited redirection and transfer of funds that support appropriations and allocations from the state general fund and dedicated funds under specific circumstances. The bill attempts to modify the definitions relating to budget deficits and allows for interim budget balancing powers by the governor when a projected deficit is identified or federal funding decreases cause a need for additional state funding to maintain existing expenditures. This bill is an effort to improve fiscal management within state funds and to ensure continuity of essential services in the face of budgetary challenges.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB146 appears to be cautiously optimistic among proponents who stress the importance of having mechanisms in place for financial flexibility. However, some skepticism exists regarding the potential implications this bill could have on the availability and allocation of funds, as concerns are raised about ensuring that critical programs are not compromised in the process. Legislators are keen to understand how this bill will impact long-term fiscal responsibility and the balance of state budgets.

Contention

Notable points of contention revolve around the bill's provisions for adjusting appropriations and the reassignment of dedicated funds during financial shortfalls. Critics argue that these measures could lead to the misallocation of funds and weaken the integrity of financial commitments to mandated services. Furthermore, the implications for how local needs may be overshadowed by state-level decision-making are a concern, prompting debates on the sufficiency of checks and balances within the proposed adjustments to fiscal policy.