{"id":9679,"date":"2026-05-04T05:55:28","date_gmt":"2026-05-04T10:55:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/westplexnews.com\/index.php\/2026\/05\/04\/earmarked-spending-slows-but-does-not-stop-as-missouri-budget-faces-fiscal-crunch-2\/"},"modified":"2026-05-04T05:55:28","modified_gmt":"2026-05-04T10:55:28","slug":"earmarked-spending-slows-but-does-not-stop-as-missouri-budget-faces-fiscal-crunch-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/westplexnews.com\/index.php\/2026\/05\/04\/earmarked-spending-slows-but-does-not-stop-as-missouri-budget-faces-fiscal-crunch-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Earmarked spending slows but does not stop as Missouri budget faces fiscal crunch"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
\n

State Sen. Brian Williams, a Democrat from University City, questioned a dozen new earmarks added to the state budget without being voted on in the Senate Appropriations Committee. He is shown in a 2021 photo (photo courtesy of Missouri Senate Communications).<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

When the Missouri Senate debated the <\/span>state operating budget<\/span><\/a> last month, state Sen. Brian Williams pressed the chamber\u2019s budget chairman to identify who requested a dozen earmarks added after the bill cleared committee.<\/span><\/p>\n

For 25 minutes, Williams, a University City Democrat and senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, asked state Sen. Rusty Black, the Chillicothe Republican who chairs the committee, to explain the new spending items inserted into the Department of Social Services budget.<\/span><\/p>\n

Black said the additions came from conversations with senators and the governor\u2019s office.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe changed some dollar amounts in here as well by working with senators,\u201d Black said. \u201cAnd the governor\u2019s office also had some programs that they cared about that they reached out to me (about).\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The exchange offered a rare public glimpse into a process that usually leaves voters with little way to know who requested money for local projects, favored organizations or state institutions.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Independent is tracking more than 150 earmarks among the 16 appropriation bills that must be passed by Friday\u2019s constitutional deadline. The earmarks would use $348.3 million, including $164.6 million of general revenue, if all are included in the final spending plan for the year starting July 1.<\/span><\/p>\n

The price tag for earmarks increased $87.2 million, including $72.2 million of general revenue, when Black\u2019s committee added 19 items to the state capital construction budget.<\/span><\/p>\n

The total state budget will be about $51 billion, including building maintenance and construction. The general revenue portion will be about $16 billion.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"
Senate Appropriations Chair Rusty Black, a Republican from Chillicothe, begins the Senate\u2019s budget debate April 22 (Annelise Hanshaw\/Missouri Independent).<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The general revenue commitment to earmarks is nearly equal to the $190 million sought by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to fully fund the state\u2019s school foundation formula. Citing sluggish general revenue receipts, Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe didn\u2019t include it in his <\/span>January budget proposal<\/span><\/a> and it was not added in either chamber.<\/span><\/p>\n

Estimates made in December warned <\/span>revenue would decline<\/span><\/a> during the current fiscal year and Kehoe\u2019s budget estimated in January that only <\/span>$265 million would remain<\/span><\/a> in the general revenue fund on June 30, 2027.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Through Thursday, general revenue is down 0.8% for the fiscal year.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s like talking out of both sides of their mouth saying that they don\u2019t have enough money for the $190 million to fully fund the foundation formula, which is constitutionally a priority of our budget, and then to happen to spend the same amount of money on small projects,\u201d said state Rep. Kathy Steinhoff, a Columbia Democrat. \u201cWe need to take care of our essential bills first. And I think educating our children is one of those essential bills.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

Earmarks growth<\/h4>\n

\t<\/p>\n

After years of tight budgets limited the ability of lawmakers to send money to home projects, a growing general revenue surplus loosened the state checkbook starting in 2022.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In 2023, The Independent identified <\/span>275 earmarked items<\/span><\/a> in the final budget plan, and more than 400 new earmarks made it into the budget passed in the <\/span>2024 legislative session<\/span><\/a>. Last year, the number that made it to Kehoe\u2019s desk only reached 250.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Kehoe <\/span>vetoed 109 earmarks last year<\/span><\/a>, reduced the amounts allocated for 23 and withheld funds from 23 more.<\/span><\/p>\n

Along with his vetoes, Kehoe issued a warning that he cut the items because the end of the state surplus is in sight. After peaking at <\/span>nearly $5.8 billion<\/span><\/a> in the general revenue fund, plus $2.2 billion in other money, in June 2023, the account balances were $2.9 billion in general revenue and $545 million in other funds as of Thursday, the last day of April.<\/span><\/p>\n

The items added last week in the Senate Appropriations Committee ranged in size from $100,000 for a Dallas County government maintenance building to $15 million for a parking garage to be part of a new convention center in Jefferson City.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe had several people within the Senate that thought these were valuable items that would help in their home areas,\u201d Black said after the committee finished its work. \u201cThey felt there was enough value for us to pass them in the committee and for them to work with the governor\u2019s office to see whether those items are valuable enough in the governor\u2019s office to stay in.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

It is relatively easy to identify earmarks in the budget, because the appropriation has language directing it to a particular place, usually defined by population and geography, or organization, using language that only identifies one possible recipient.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

But none are <\/span>publicly identified<\/span><\/a> with the name of the legislator requesting the funds, or if it is, it\u2019s added at the urging of a state institution like a university or a lobbyist for a private concern.<\/span><\/p>\n

State Rep. Betsy Fogle of Springfield, ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee, argued a requirement that every earmark have a lawmaker\u2019s name attached as the sponsor would hurt Democrats.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cAs a member of the minority party, oftentimes I get my wins by partnering with the member of the majority who is publicly talking about it,\u201d Fogle said. \u201cIt is hard to decipher who\u2019s responsible for some of these, but ultimately, the chairman is responsible for vetting the project.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

In an interview, Williams said he didn\u2019t oppose any of the spending he questioned during the Senate debate. The point of the questioning, he said, was transparency.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe appropriation process should always be transparent,\u201d he said. \u201cWe should always be clear on what members prioritize certain appropriations or certain budget items.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The smallest earmark anywhere in the budget is $150 for a reflector at the Lebanon rest stop on Interstate 44. The largest is $104.6 million, not requested by Kehoe in his <\/span>January budget proposal<\/span><\/a>, to begin the Capitol Building project to make legislative offices accessible to people with disabilities.<\/span><\/p>\n

Other notable earmarks in the budget include:<\/span><\/p>\n