We’ve just received word from Edd Hendee that CLOUT has officially endorsed Talmadge Heflin for State Representative District 149.

Heflin has a reputation in Austin as a staunch fiscal conservative and unmatched expert on the state budget–which makes the following letter, provided by Heflin to CLOUT and subesequently to LST pretty cool.

I want to take this opportunity to respond to the CLOUT questionnaire and the lawsuit filed by Mr. Edd Hendee. This effort is a positive step in working to keep spending down and will help in applying pressure to reduce taxes.

As Chairman of the Appropriations Committee in the House, the bill authored by me and that passed out of my committee, decreased general revenue government spending for the first time in over three decades. I have been credited with balancing a budget with a $10 billion shortfall in 2003 with spending cuts, not increased taxes.

The lawsuit filed by Mr. Edd Hendee and CLOUT has many similarities to one I filed in 1991 as a member of the Texas House of Representatives. Joined by over 30 of my fellow house members, I filed a Writ of Mandamus with the Texas Supreme Court asking them to compel the Legislative Budget Board (LBB) and Committee (defined in Government Code 316.005) to carry out their duty to adopt a growth rate for the budget as required by Article VIII, Section 22(a) of the Constitution and as defined in Chapter 316 of the Government Code. The Supreme Court refused to hear the case, but as a result of the filing, Lt. Governor Bullock committed to convene the LBB and adopt a growth rate from 1992 forward. This provision had been ignored since 1980. To be sure a growth rate was adopted, I passed a bill in the first called session of the 72nd Legislature to add 316.002 (3) (e) that stated if a growth rate was not adopted, the rate of allowed growth would be zero. From that point forward a growth rate has been adopted.

Regardless of whether the lawsuit is won or lost, some valid points have been made for improving the enforcement of Article VIII Section 22 (a).

I believe having the full Legislature vote to adopt the growth rate, recommended by the LBB will be a positive change. Having the entire legislature involved in this debate will lead to a more open process and may result in a more accurate rate being adopted and will more fully comply with the provision in the Constitution. After making the change in general law, in subsequent sessions, this could be the first issue taken up after both bodies are organized for the new session.

Since the process has been in force for over a decade, it seems to be in order to review the accuracy of using growth in personal income as a growth indicator for the state’s economy. If data shows that Gross State Product or some other method is a more accurate measure, then the legislature should bring it forward for debate and action.

When the growth rate is adopted it is a prediction of what the growth of the economy is believed to be and when actual data is collected, there should be an adjustment so the next prediction will be more accurate. If high rates are adopted (as has been the case in some years) and they are never adjusted for actual growth, then the budget is allowed to grow faster than the constitution allows.

With the assistance of CLOUT, I will work to see that these three corrections are made to assure the Constitution is followed.

Thank you for bringing this important issue forward.

Sincerely,

Talmadge Heflin

Bottom Line– Hendee and CLOUT are right, and if Heflin wins he’ll fight to force the legislature to abide by the spending limitations in the Texas Constitution.

And no one will be able to claim the ideas underlying the lawsuit are a bunch of crackpot theories being pushed only by a few knuckle-headed talk-show hosts.

Put that in your ballot box and stuff it.