Veto day for Sonny Perdue: Casualties include indoor ski resorts, guns at airports, zero-based budgets

Tuesday was veto day for Gov. Sonny Perdue.

It is the day that a governor – any governor – earns his salary for preserving the Republic from 236 members of the Georgia General Assembly.

Or earns the ire of the most fervent of his party’s supporters. He did a little bit of both today.

My AJC colleague James Salzer has the details — particularly on line-item vetoes in the budget.

We’ll start with the more frivolous – the veto of HB 1251.

Serious people said the measure was aimed at a $1 billion indoor ski resort in Bartow County. It was sponsored by state Rep. Cicily Hill (R-Kingsland) and, in the Senate, by Chip Pearson (R-Dawsonville). Only projects valued at $100 million or more were eligible for a refund-as-you-go tax break

Perdue’s reason for the veto:

I cannot support legislation that funds up to 25 percent of the cost of a tourism project by allowing the developers to receive refunds on state sales taxes that are collected.

Politically, the most important veto of the day was the governor’s killing of HB 1023, the jobs bill — emphasizing tax breaks, mostly future — that state Rep. Tom Graves (R-Ranger) has touted throughout his 9th District congressional run to replace Nathan Deal.

His runoff rival, former state Sen. Lee Hawkins (R-Gainesville), has called the bill an empty shell because of its lack of immediate benefits. Perdue, a former state senator, was kinder:

HB 1023 contains various changes to tax policy, many of which may have merit but also have substantial impact on future state revenues. HB 1405, which I have signed, creates a Tax Reform Study Committee charged with the task of reviewing all our tax policies and proposing sweeping changes as needed to the General Assembly for its consideration next session.

Because of the long-term fiscal implications of HB 1023, I believe the tax policy changes it contains are best considered by the Tax Reform Study Committee, rather than signing them all into law at this time.

The governor signed SB 308, a measure proposed by Mitch Seabaugh (R-Sharpsburg) to rewrite the state’s laws governing the presence of weapons in public assemblies and the areas where permitted concealed weapons are allowed.

Seabaugh’s bill, now law, continues a state ban on concealed weapons in houses of worship and government buildings, but generally allows private property owners to determine where weapons will be allowed.

But Perdue drew a line at a fight with Congress over guns at Hartsfield-Jackson. He vetoed SB 291, sponsored by state Sen. David Shafer (R-Duluth), which would permit concealed carry in areas of the terminal not covered by federal restrictions. Members of Congress, including U.S. Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Decatur), had threatened to step in.

Said Perdue:

SB 291 changes a variety of provisions within Georgia law regarding firearms. Among others, this bill would allow firearms to be carried into unsecure areas of airports. I have already signed SB 308, which clarifies Georgia’s public gathering statute and preserves the rights of private property owners. I believe this language is sufficient and adequately clarifies the law for Georgia firearms license holders.

Tea party activists will be particularly upset by the governor’s vetoes of SB 1, a bill to demand zero-based budgeting, and SB 148, a measure to allow the Legislature to determine if entire state departments are worth keeping.

Said Perdue on SB 1:

Georgia first attempted this budget methodology in the 1970s under Governor Jimmy Carter and has abandoned it since that time. A survey of states finds that[,] of the states that currently maintain this methodology in their statutes[,] all have effectively abandoned the practice because of the additional bureaucratic process and overhead while producing few identifiable results. …

While SB 1 is motivated by an admirable goal, the realities of Georgia’s and other states’ experiences have demonstrated few results worth the overhead associated with this new process. Moreover, anyone familiar with the budget process I have employed during my eight years as Governor knows that I and my staff examine all facets of each agency’s budget each year.

Look for the governor’s veto of SB 1 to become an issue in the GOP primary for governor. A “disappointed” John Oxendine was quickest on the draw, declaring that, as governor, he would “work with the legislative leadership to implement zero-base budgeting.”

The governor’s veto message on SB 148:

SB 148 started in its original form as a bill I supported – it required regular analysis of regulatory boards within the Secretary of State’s office and recommendations to the General Assembly regarding elimination of boards that are no longer necessary….

Unfortunately, during the legislative process, the text of HB 236 was added to SB 148. This language creates a “Legislative Sunset Advisory Subcommittee” of the General Assembly, which would regularly review all statutory state agencies to determine if they should continue to operate.

Any agency reviewed by this subcommittee would automatically be repealed the following July unless the General Assembly took action to continue the agency…..

This bill is unnecessary and unworkable, and fraught with potential for unintended consequences. For instance, when any substantial agency was up for review and was determined to warrant retention, the bill continuing that agency would be a must-pass bill. Such bills tend to be inviting targets for unrelated amendments that could not pass on their own, leaving future governors with the unappealing choice of signing a bill containing terrible policy or vetoing it and eliminating a necessary agency.

Also, the governor declared that SB 148 impinged on the power of the governor. Which is also why he vetoed SB 480, a bill that would have allowed the Legislature to help him make those all-important revenue estimates that determine how large the state budget will be:

SB 480 creates a State Council of Economic Advisors that the Governor will be required to consult in preparing a revenue estimate for budgetary purposes.

“[T]he Constitution clearly separates the respective functions of the executive and legislative branches of State Government with respect to appropriations. The language and structure of the Constitution leave no conclusion other than that it is the exclusive function of the executive branch to prepare a budget report, including therein the revenue estimate….” 1979 Op. Att’y Gen. Ga. 40 (1979). Although I have used a council of economic advisors to assist me in the preparation of my revenue estimate, and believe that this is a wise course of action, I also believe that future governors are entitled to determine for themselves from whom to seek counsel on such matters.

For instant updates, follow me on Twitter.