Legislature? What Legislature?

I'm concerned some lawmakers and leaders in the Capitol may have spent too much time debating nonbinding resolutions about federal policies, and forgotten that the General Assembly has actual responsibilities regarding appropriating money in Missouri.

Consider, for example, the following passage from Sen. Kevin Engler's most recent constituent newsletter (h/t The Turner Report):

Also this week, we continued to hear about some of the troubling news of budget withholdings and shortfalls that will affect people’s lives and safety. On top of over a $42 million dollar shortfall of this year’s budget for public education, the governor announced a $24 million withhold of the state’s investment in rural broadband and another $29 million that was supposed to go for interoperability of public safety communications systems. While I understand times are tough for the state. Much of these painful, unexpected cuts could have been avoided if a balanced budget were presented by the governor to the general assembly over the past two years.  (emphasis mine).

What, exactly, is Kevin Engler talking about?

Leaving aside what you think about the Governor's budget recommendations in 2009 and 2010 -- Engler's assertion is just absurd.  As Engler is no doubt aware, last year's budget was hammered out and passed by Republican majorities in the House and Senate.  And I assume he remembers voting to pass the darn thing last May. Since that time, of course,  Gov. Nixon has cut $600 million from the budget drafted and passed by Engler and his Republican colleagues. As Engler also knows, Republicans even considered the Governor's budget proposal last year. The public should certainly hold the Governor accountable for the bills he signs, but it's Engler's pals in the legislature must appropriate for every expenditure that's made. 

Rep. Marilyn Ruestman demonstrated similar silliness last week.  Yesterday, Peter Kinder's Chief of Staff, Rich AuBuchon, attempted to perform the same magic act and completely remove the General Assembly from the appropriations process. He wrote the following in response to Sen. Claire McCaskill's letter asking GOP leaders why complain about the stimulus money, but still use it for the state budget:

McCaskill trying to deflect damage of the stimulus. Nixon forced the state to accept it and now we have to use it before next year...

McCaskill's memory fades fast. It was Gov Nixon who accepted the stimulus for MO and the ARRA states how and when we spend it. Remember?...

Just got McCaskill's letter regarding Stimulus spending. It should have been directed to Nixon...not Icet and Mayer.

It's true that the Recovery Act required the governors of every state to sign certifications they would receive the money. But so what?  None of that money could be spent without an appropriation from the legislature. The idea that Congress "forced MO to spend the money" and cut the state legislature out of the process is ludicrous.  If Missouri doesn't spend the money by 2011, then the state just forfeits the money.  That would be dumb, but it's an option. 

In fact, GOP legislators publicly threatened to reject the stimulus funding last year. They (wisely) chose not to do so.  Later, House Budget Chair Allen Icet, Speaker Ron Richard and Kinder all said it would be a horrible idea to appropriate federal money for ongoing state expenses, lied about, and did it anyway. 

If politicians and citizens hate the Governor's budget recommendations, don't like the way he's chosen to withhold the money appropriated by the General Assembly, or are furious that he signed the legislature's budget bills, fine.  But these new talking points suggesting that the legislators are just a bystander in the state budget process are insulting and outrageous.