Senators explain position on FY 2016 budget

Senate lawmakers maintained yesterday that it is within their legislative authority to reallocate funds outside of government revenues made subject for appropriations by the administration of Gov. Eloy S. Inos, explaining their position to counterparts in the House of Representatives yesterday.

The House, though, believes this reallocation of earmarks would conflict with the NMI Constitution.

The six members of a bicameral committee assigned to settle the impasse over the Senate and House’s versions of the fiscal year 2016 budget met for the first time yesterday afternoon.

The majority of these six votes must agree on a $154-million budget before the end of the month to avoid a government shutdown.

The main point of contention appears to be the House and Senate’s interpretation of the law would allow or disallow the Legislature to use money not set as “subject to appropriations.”

The House, through conference chair Rep. Tony Sablan (Ind-Saipan) and the House legal counsel, explained their position. While the Senate, through conference chair Sen. Jude Hofschneider (R-Tinian) and their legal counsel, explained they are asking the Marianas Visitors Authority—by the way of the appropriation bill—to assist other entities that need such items enumerated in the law.

The House believes that reallocation of funds from constitutional earmarks is an amendment that must be done outside the appropriations bill. In other words, a public law should be passed to allow the Senate to direct MVA to move these funds.

The Senate believes, though, that because they created the “hotel tax” fund by law, they can undo that through a “notwithstanding clause” in the budget bill, and ask MVA to assist other agencies in the community.

To this, the House acknowledges that the Legislature has authority to appropriate funds, as well as the authority to earmark and establish taxes—but, when the Legislature appropriates and amends an earmark at the same time and in the same bill, they violate the Constitution, which prohibits doing both at once.

In an interview after the budget session, Hofschneider maintained the Senate’s position.

He explained that the “notwithstanding clause” is engaged when they are trying to “dismiss some of the provisions of that particular object in preparation for the law to do an action.”

He called this “well within our realms of our authority as legislators” to “address some of the concerns and some of the needs of the community.”

“I respect the opinions of the [House] legal counsel, but we are in the legislative branch. We are not in Judicial or Executive Branch, so we are being legislators, trying….to be creative within our responsibility to provide the services and the needs of the community that we feel appropriate for the year 2016,” Hofschneider said.

MVA funds
In Section 712 of the Senate budget, senators invoke a “notwithstanding clause” to direct MVA to assist the local hospital and Divisions of Customs. These change are as stated in the following provisions:

• (ii) Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, Marianas Visitors Authority shall allocate $530,000 from the earmarked funds to MVA pursuant to 4 CMC §13 1803 n hotel tax (80 percent) to fund the Division of Customs Service Ports of Entry 14 Enhancement Program to purchase of the following: (1) $200,000 for a stationary x-ray machine for the airport; (2) $255,000 for a container and loose cargo x-ray machine for the seaport; and (3) $75,000 for a handheld x-ray scanner to scan appliances, cars, large items at the seaport. The Department of Finance, Division of Customs Service shall submit all requests for payment(s) pursuant to the Division’s Ports of Entry Enhancement Program to MVA for payment.

• (iii) Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, the amount of $2 million from earmarked funds…shall be appropriated for the Commonwealth Healthcare Corp. for utilities. The CEO of CHCC shall be the expenditure authority of the appropriated funds and shall not reprogram the funds for any other purpose.