A stimulus of our own unemployment is high in the United States, and even Washington's efforts haven't been able to drastically reduce the effects.
By Staff
The unemployed put a strain on the nation's social safety net and cost states money. The unemployed are unable to buy more than necessities and pay hardly any taxes, so businesses suffer and state revenue drops.
Prohibited from deficit spending by the state Constitution, Alabama cannot spend money it doesn't have. So apart from sitting on its hands and waiting for the recession to run its course, what can Alabama do?
It can spend some of the money it has.
That is what state Sen. Lowell Barron, D-Fyffe, will propose in a constitutional amendment he will introduce in the upcoming session of the Legislature.
Today, there is $2.6 billion in the Alabama Trust Fund, an account where royalties from natural gas and oil wells are placed; interest from that account goes into the state budget.
This month, Barron unveiled his proposal that $100 million a year be taken out over the next 10 years and committed to a much-needed road- and bridge-building project. One-fourth of the money would be given to city and county governments for local needs; the rest would go to the state Department of Transportation for statewide projects.
There are two problems with Barron's proposal. First, if the money is taken from the Alabama Trust Fund and spent, there will be less interest to go into the state budget. Second, there is nothing more tempting to Goat Hill pork-pushers as roads and bridges.
On the other hand, the advantages are obvious. People would go to work. The employed would buy things and pay taxes, which would make up for some of the lost interest. The employed are less of a burden on the state's and nation's social-service agencies. There's also the fact that the state's roads and bridges need to be repaired and improved. This would fulfill some of that need.
Alabamians of different lots are getting behind this plan. Even some Republicans, who last year helped kill this proposal in the state Senate, are expected to vote for it if changes are made and safeguards are written in.
Gov. Bob Riley's office "generally supports" the idea, but it would like to see the bill include language that the $100 million withdrawal must be approved every year. That way, if the economy improves and more revenue comes in, the state may not want to spend that much or in that fashion.
In addition, the governor wants to make sure people in the Department of Transportation pick the projects rather than legislators who might unfairly favor their districts over others.
This could be a wise and humane amendment. It will help individuals and families, it will help the economy, and it will help the state as a whole.
However, the governor is correct to want the legislature to approve this spending annually. Strict safeguards should be written into the plan so that the money will not become legislative pork.
If that is done, this bill will be worth supporting.
--The Anniston Star
