Louisiana House Bill HR74

Louisiana 2017 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/1/17
• Refer: 5/2/17
• Report Pass: 5/17/17

Caption

Requires legislative instruments with a fiscal cost of one hundred thousand dollars or more to be recommitted to the House Committee on Appropriations

Impact

With this change, all legislative instruments exceeding the fiscal threshold will be subjected to additional scrutiny, which could lead to greater accountability and transparency concerning state expenditures. The recommittal process is expected to give the Appropriations Committee the necessary oversight on fiscal matters, potentially influencing the overall budgeting strategy of the state legislature. By enhancing oversight, this resolution could lead to more informed decision-making regarding financial commitments and appropriations during legislative sessions.

Summary

House Resolution No. 74 amends House Rule 6.8(F) to require that any legislative instrument with a fiscal cost of $100,000 or more be recommitted to the House Committee on Appropriations. This rule change aims to streamline the process by which fiscal matters are managed within the legislature, ensuring that significant financial implications are adequately considered before any further progression of bills. The resolution replaces the former requirement that specified only costs derived from state general funds, thus broadening the scope of legislative instruments that necessitate review by the Appropriations Committee.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HR 74 appears to be generally supportive among those who prioritize fiscal responsibility and oversight within government operations. Advocates argue that this measure is necessary for better governance and sound financial management. However, there could also be concerns about the potential for increased bureaucracy in the legislative process, with some fearing that the additional recommittal requirements may slow down the passage of important legislation necessary for addressing other critical state issues.

Contention

Notable points of contention may arise regarding the implications of this bill on the legislative workflow. Proponents of streamlined legislative processes suggest that careful scrutiny of fiscal impacts should not come at the expense of timely legislative action. Critics, however, may argue that this resolution could inadvertently hinder responsiveness by encumbering the legislative process with additional layers of review, particularly for bills that require urgent attention. The balance between fiscal prudence and legislative efficiency will likely be a continued topic of discussion among lawmakers as HR 74 is implemented.