Looking at the reference in the newspaper to the Hancock Amendment

and its talk about refunds to public citizenry this morning, something sort of stuck me.

Think back to Katrina and the way the right was blaming Louisiana for their lack of money put away for a rainy day. It seems to me the Hancock Amendment may prohibit Missouri from doing that very thing.

On the other hand, considering the way Blunt's been renovating a governor's mansion that he has no intention of living in, putting new roofs on and fences around closed prisons...

many who opposed it said it would surely come back to haunt Missouri eventually. Perhaps that day has arrived.

They want to take it a step further.

It's called a Taxpayers Bill Of Rights. Also known in some circles as Hancock on steroids. It's very dangerous.......


<Snip> What Bearden proposed in the last legislative session was a limit on what the state can spend, as opposed to a limit on what it takes in. He said the Hancock lid is meaningless, and a spending cap would bring a more “disciplined approach” to the state’s budget.

Bearden’s proposal, which would have to be approved by voters as a constitutional amendment, would limit state appropriations to no more than the previous year’s plus inflation and population growth, expected to be about 3 percent or 4 percent a year.

<Snip>

Bearden’s proposal, which would have to be approved by voters as a constitutional amendment, would limit state appropriations to no more than the previous year’s plus inflation and population growth, expected to be about 3 percent or 4 percent a year.

Blouin said Bearden’s amendment would be disastrous for Missouri.

An analysis by the Missouri Budget Project estimated that if the proposed spending limits had been in place in Missouri in 1992, the first year of TABOR, the state would have had to cut an additional $792 million from this fiscal year’s budget.

Blouin said the state also would have given out far more than the $985 million in tax refunds it returned to citizens from 1995 to 2000.

“If we would have had TABOR instead of Hancock, it would’ve been $3 billion” in refunds, she said.

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/13087058.html

If we were to have another flood like '93 there would be nothing to help. We would be totally dependent on Federal resources for help. This may seem like the most short-sighted plan they could possibly dream up. But, it gets them a golden parachute job after just 8 years as a representative.

failing to thrive or survive in the crisis that they created. Talk about twisted values...

As I once heard someone say, Republicans run saying that government doesn't work, and when they get elected, the set out to prove it.