From the Managing Editor:
Checks and balances

The stink (pardon the quite literal pun) over the recently defunct Mississippi Beef Processing plant in Yalobusha County raises some important questions as state government tries to find solutions to a plethora of budget woes.

One of the best ways for our state to dig out from under the recurring red-ink budgets we’ve faced for the past few years is to generate more income by growing prosperous businesses in Mississippi. The Delta would especially welcome new industries that promise to provide employment and add substantially to the tax base, which funds our schools, our roads, etc. One of Gov. Barbour’s most important economic goals is the growth of just such businesses. So what kind of message does the recent catastrophic processing plant failure send?

The Governor is quick to point out that the sweet deal that allowed this plant to be built occurred before he took office. I don’t think there has been any concrete implication of illegality or criminal impropriety in the deal, but neither do I blame the Governor for distancing himself from such a major fiasco. There seems to be a lot of shuffling of feet and scratching of heads about what checks and balances were or were not in place that perhaps should have raised a red flag about some of the now obvious problems with the funding scheme that was agreed to. Worse still, it seems that the state was pulled into that unenviable position of having to throw good money after bad as the deal evolved.

Perhaps the new rules and regulations that will be implemented to scrutinize future state-sponsored economic investment projects will prevent such failures from occurring in the future — a left-handed blessing at best. It also seems inevitable that such tightening of oversight authority on proposed projects could have the unwanted effect of discouraging some of the more creative ventures that might truly be of great future benefit to our economy. We hope that whatever layers of bureaucracy are added to oversee future state-backed investments (and certainly such layers must be added) do not simply add more paperwork and red tape to the process thus discouraging those truly innovative entrepreneurs who would otherwise succeed here.

As to the larger question of the advisability of mixing public funds in private investments, that has always been a slippery slope and usually a tricky business. Stories of money passing under the table to crooked politicians in years gone by are too familiar and too common to be totally dismissed. And yet, if the state can triple or quadruple its investment by backing a factory or a new business, then everyone gains.

Turning over the control of which state projects should be funded to politicians also presents problems of political rivalry and thus potential inequity. Perhaps our Mississippi State Auditor’s office could be entrusted with the fiscal review of any proposed state-funded initiatives. As long as that office is considered trustworthy and above reproach, and as long as political pressures seem not to affect decisions rendered by the State Auditor, such a solution might be the best answer to future funding scrutiny.

I think we all agree that as the Governor and the Legislature try to improve our state’s economy, public investments in business and industry will go hand-in-hand with successful economic growth. Let us just hope that a large dose of common sense and sound business practice will be a part of whatever system of check and balances results. One shudders to think how many teachers could have been hired or how many Medicaid recipients could have been covered by the $54 million that disappeared down the rabbit hole. DBJ

Joe Meek
DBJ Managing Editor

---

<...HOME...>