Louisiana Budget Stabilization Fund, Amendment 4 (October 2011)
| Amendment 4 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Type | Constitutional amendment |
| Origin | Louisiana State Legislature |
| Topic | state budgets |
| Status | Defeated  |
The Louisiana Budget Stabilization Fund, Amendment 4 was on the October 22, 2011 statewide ballot in Louisiana as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment where it was defeated .[1]
The proposed measure would have provided for deposits and interruption of mineral revenue deposits to the Budget Stabilization Fund.
Election results
| Amendment 4 (October 2011) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| No | 443634 | 50.59% | ||
| Yes | 433204 | 49.41% | ||
Source: Louisiana Secretary of State, official results 10/22/11
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot question read as follows:[2]
| “ | To provide that if at any time mineral revenues exceed the base provided by law and monies are withdrawn from the Budget Stabilization Fund, no deposit of mineral revenues shall be made to the Budget Stabilization Fund in the same or ensuing fiscal year in which monies in the fund are appropriated or incorporated into the official forecast, except by specific legislative appropriation, and thereafter deposits of mineral revenues into the shall resume except in an annual amount not to exceed one-third of the most recent amount appropriated or incorporated into the official forecast.[3] | ” |
Constitutional changes
Amendment 4 would have added Article VII, Section 10.3(C)(5).
Note: Hover over the text and scroll to see the full text.
Section 10.3.
(C) The money in the fund shall not be available for appropriation or use except under the following conditions:
- (5)(a) If at any time mineral revenues exceed the base as provided in Subsubparagraphs (A)(2)(a) and (b), and monies in the fund are made available for appropriation or use as provided in Paragraph (C), no deposit of mineral revenues, except those deposits into the fund for such purposes included in the official forecast of the Revenue Estimating Conference, shall be made as provided in Subsubparagraph (A)(2)(a) in the fiscal year for which money in the fund is appropriated or for which money in the fund is incorporated into the official forecast nor for the ensuing fiscal year, except by specific appropriation by the legislature. Thereafter, deposits of mineral revenues shall resume as provided in Subsubparagraph (A)(2)(a) except in an annual amount not to exceed one-third of the most recent amount made available for appropriation or use as provided in this Paragraph for the next three years after the ensuing year, until either the balance in the fund equals the maximum as provided in Subparagraph (C)(4) or an amount equal to the amount made available for appropriation or use is deposited into the fund, whichever is less. Amounts which are not deposited into the fund in one fiscal year as provided in this Subparagraph shall be deposited into the fund in the subsequent fiscal year until the amount withdrawn or used is satisfied or until the balance in the fund reaches the maximum as provided in Subparagraph (C)(4). The resumption of these deposits shall not cease because of a subsequent withdrawal from the fund.
- (b) Except as provided in Subsubparagraph (C)(5)(a) of this Paragraph, in the fiscal year for which money in the fund is appropriated or incorporated into the official forecast or for the ensuing fiscal year, deposits to the fund shall be made as provided in Paragraph (A) of this Section.[3]
Support
Supporters argued that the proposed amendment would have ensured that withdrawals made from the Budget Stabilization Fund were replenished.[4][5]
In a statement the Council for A Better Louisiana announced their support for the proposed amendment. "While CABL does not generally support the proliferation of amendments to the constitution, we recognize that some are needed to change policies that are already established in the constitution. We believe all of the changes proposed for the October ballot are reasonable and make sense from a policy perspective," said Barry Erwin, president of the council, in a statement.[6]
Note: As of September 2011 there was no organized support or campaign effort.
Donors
According to the state campaign finance database, there were no registered committees (PACs).
(last updated December 2011)
Opposition
Opponents said that the amendment allowed too much leeway and that withdrawals should be replenished or repaid earlier than the two year limit set by the proposal. They argued that a shorter limit would have prevented legislators from routinely using the funds for non-emergencies.[4]
Note: As of September 2011 there was no organized opposition or campaign effort.
Donors
According to the state campaign finance database, there were no registered committees (PACs).
(last updated December 2011)
| State budgets on the ballot in 2011 |
 |
Media editorial positions
Support
- The Daily Iberian said, "This amendment would allow more time to pay back funds "borrowed" from the rainy-day fund but doesn't reportedly reduce restrictions on its use. And should this not be approved, it will cause a problem for the current budget."[7]
- Houma Today said, "It does not change the requirement that the state repay the fund, thus ensuring that there is money available in the case of an emergency shortfall. It does, though, give the state a bit more flexibility, which will allow it to use the rainy day fund as it is supposed to be used."[8]
Opposition
- The News-Star said, "Legislators should not use the "rainy day" fund except for true emergencies. This matter may be resolved by the judicial system. A current court dispute over current statute should be resolved before voters are asked to amend the constitution."[9]
- The Times-Picayune said, "Lawmakers in 2009 adopted a statute to allow the deferred deposits, but it is under court challenge. Lawmakers are trying to nullify that issue by changing the Constitution. The amendment, which would allow the state to pay back the Rainy Day Fund over a five-year period, would unnecessarily weaken the fund."[10]
Path to the ballot
If 2/3rds of the members of both houses of the Louisiana State Legislature voted in the affirmative, a legislatively referred constitutional amendment could have been placed on the statewide ballot.
On June 23, 2011 both the Senate (38-0) and House (101-0) voted in favor of referring the measure.[11]
The proposed measure was sent to the Louisiana Secretary of State and Governor for referral to the ballot on June 23 and June 24, 2011.
Timeline
The following is a timeline of events surrounding the measure:
| Event | Date | Developments |
|---|---|---|
| Senate vote | June 23, 2011 | Senate (38-0) voted in favor of referring the measure. |
| House vote | June 23, 2011 | House (101-0) voted in favor of referring the measure. |
| Certified | June 23-24, 2011 | Referred and certified for the 2011 ballot |
See also
Articles
- Election preview: Louisiana ballot measures focus on state budget funds
- Election results: Louisiana ballot measures
- Election aftermath: 3 Louisiana measures approved, 2 defeated in primaries (updated)
External links
- SB 147 summary (dead link) and full text (dead link)
- League of Women Voters of Louisiana - Voter Guide 2011 Louisiana constitutional amendments
- Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana - Guide to the 2011 Constitutional Amendments
Additional reading
- St. Tammany News, "Amendments will benefit students, veterans," October 12, 2011
- The Times-Picayune, "Louisiana voters will weigh in 5 changes proposed for state Constitution," October 8, 2011
- DailyComet.com, "La. voters to consider six amendments," September 11, 2011
- The Times-Picayune, "Louisiana Constitution amendments on fall ballots include cigarette tax question," July 14, 2011
Footnotes
- ↑ The Town Talk, "Louisiana voters approve scholarship and cigarette tax amendments," October 24, 2011
- ↑ Louisiana Legislature, "SB 147 full text," accessed June 28, 2011 (dead link)
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ 4.0 4.1 Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, "PAR guide to the 2011 constitutional amendments," September 2011
- ↑ Leesville Daily Leader, "Amendment four: Managing the budget stabilization 'rainy day' fund," October 12, 2011
- ↑ Associated Press, "Constitutional changes proposed on Oct. 22 ballot include tuition funding, cigarette tax," October 6, 2011
- ↑ The Daily Iberian, "Yes to 2, 3, 4 & 5; no to 1," October 16, 2011
- ↑ Houma Today, "Support proposed amendments," October 18, 2011
- ↑ The News-Star,"'No' to ballot amendments," October 1, 2011
- ↑ The Times-Picayune, "Constitutional amendment recommendations: Editorial," October 11, 2011
- ↑ Louisiana State Legislature, "SB147 - 2011 Regular Session (Act 424) vote," accessed October 6, 2011 (dead link)
| |||||||||||||||||||
