(Constitutional Amendment) Provides relative to the budget process
Impact
If enacted, HB 546 would predominantly affect the state's financial governance by ensuring that all appropriations derive from a balanced budget and conform to the forecasts set forth by the REC. The bill obligates the governor to submit a general appropriations bill only after the successful passage of the general budget, effectively centralizing control and preventing any financial practices that might lead to fiscal irresponsibility. It seeks to safeguard essential funding for priorities such as higher education and health care, as it specifies that budget appropriations for these sectors must remain equal to or exceed previous funding levels.
Summary
House Bill 546 proposes amendments to the Louisiana Constitution regarding the state budget process. The bill aims to implement stricter controls and oversight on state revenue budgeting and appropriations by introducing the requirement for the Revenue Estimating Conference (REC) to pre-certify budget estimates submitted by the governor. Additionally, the bill mandates that appropriations not exceed the official forecast provided by the REC and prohibits the inclusion of nonrecurring revenue in state budgets, except under specific conditions sanctioned by law. These measures intend to create a more predictable and accountable fiscal environment.
Sentiment
The sentiment around HB 546 reflects a mixture of concern and endorsement among lawmakers. Proponents argue that the bill strengthens fiscal discipline and prevents careless spending by ensuring that state budgets do not rely on unpredictable one-time revenues. Conversely, opponents have raised apprehensions that these stricter measures might hinder flexibility and responsiveness to immediate needs and emergencies by constraining the legislature's ability to react to economic changes effectively. This indicates a broader debate regarding the balance between fiscal conservatism and responsive governance.
Contention
Notable points of contention include the provision that requires a unanimous vote from REC members for budget precertification, which critics argue could lead to gridlock. Additionally, the limitations on appropriations could restrict funding for programs not explicitly included in the general budget bill, potentially impacting local governments and charities that depend on discretionary appropriations. The debate reflects underlying tensions between enforcing budgetary restraint and ensuring adequate funding availability for essential services.
Requires spending due to constitutional or other mandates to be considered in a separate appropriation bill from spending that is not required to be funded if health care or higher education funding is reduced (EN SEE FISC NOTE GF RV See Note)