Favorite

McDaniel's manna gets more criticism 

An appearance of a groundswell emerges against Attorney General Dustin McDaniel's getting to divvy up large sums of legal settlement dollars that occasionally flow to the state.

The practice just doesn't seem right, at least to me and to a more liberal pundit like Max Brantley and to assorted more conservative ones, not to mention, of course, every Republican in sight.

The statewide newspaper did a takeout Sunday, almost seeming to invite a lawsuit about whether this practice, hardly a new one and hardly unique to Arkansas, is constitutional.

The appropriation of state money is supposed to be the legislature's exclusive purview under the state constitution. But, for a recent example, a lawsuit settlement payment of $18.5 million by Eli Lilly to the state for overstating the benefits of a brain drug was actually distributed outside the legislative process, essentially by McDaniel's dictates as laid out in the consent decree.

By his office's negotiation and by rounding: Eli Lilly wrote a $15 million check to the state's Medicaid Trust Fund, another $1 million for Medicaid separately and $2 million to the attorney general's office. McDaniel used a little of that $2 million to buy computers and software for his office so his people can do stings of Internet sex predators of children, a program he ballyhooed in a recent news conference.

State Rep. Jane English, Republican of North Little Rock, proposed a bill in the recent session to direct such settlement funds into the state treasury, where the legislature could distribute them. McDaniel ramped up his lobbying and held off the bill. It sounds as if the measure will come up again, with a tad more impetus next time.

My view of all this is more expansive and far, far more controversial.

I believe legal settlement money ought to go into the state treasury for legislative distribution. But then I also argue that the same goes for all these regulatory agencies that collect their own cash, from licensing and so forth, generating what gets known either as "cash funds" or "special revenue."

Typically, these regulatory agencies get the Legislature to approve their budgets with authority for them to spend their own cash funds or dedicated revenues. But it seems to me that all state agency money ought instead to go directly into the state treasury to await legislative appropriation by policy priority.

Just because an agency collects certain money doesn't necessarily mean it needs all that money operationally.

No longer, for example, should the Real Estate Commission get to keep its own cash and build its independent office palace. That money ought to go to the state general fund. The Real Estate Commission ought to rent spartan office space.

I say that even if the Legislature gives every cent to, say, the Arkansas Sports Hall of Fame, as, heck, it might. At least I could rail against that and constituents could have the opportunity to consider it in their votes next time.

I acknowledge that my view is rather impractical in its breadth.

What's different about the attorney general's settlement money is that, unlike agency-generated cash and certain dedicated revenue streams, it gets disbursed without even a perfunctory review by a Legislature signing off on an authorizing line item in the budget.

Are there arguments for continuing to let the attorney general handle the money this way?

The main one seems to be that a defendant like Eli Lilly might be less inclined to settle if, in the interest of its public relations, it couldn't be party to binding negotiations with the attorney general directing how the dollars would be spent.

The other is a judicial doctrine that settlement dollars ought to be used to address needs revealed in the lawsuit. But that gets us into a Norman French phrase, "cy pres," derived from Latin and made into a legal doctrine by the English.

We'll delve into that kind of thing in this space only under the greatest duress.

Favorite

From the ArkTimes store

Speaking of...

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

More by John Brummett

  • Obstruction is the preferred conservatism

    Is there greater conservative virtue in opposing federal health reform, period, or in saying it ought to be implemented locally instead of from Washington in the event we are unavoidably laden with it?
    • Oct 5, 2011
  • A fate not quite as bad as prison for Lu Hardin

    There is no crime in being overly and transparently solicitous for the purposes of aggrandizement and personal political advancement. That's simply acute neediness, a common and benign human frailty.
    • Sep 28, 2011
  • Can we talk? Can we get anywhere?

    Dialogue is good. It would be even better if someone would venture off script every once in a while.
    • Sep 21, 2011
  • More »

Most Shared

  • Take yourself there: Mavis Staples coming to LR for Central High performance

    Gospel and R&B singer and civil rights activist Mavis Staples, who has been inspiring fans with gospel-inflected freedom songs like "I'll Take You There" and "March Up Freedom's Highway" and the poignant "Oh What a Feeling" will come to Little Rock for the commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the desegregation of Central High.
  • Klan's president

    Everything that Donald Trump does — make that everything that he says — is calculated to thrill his lustiest disciples. But he is discovering that what was brilliant for a politician is a miscalculation for a president, because it deepens the chasm between him and most Americans.
  • On Charlottesville

    Watching the Charlottesville spectacle from halfway across the country, I confess that my first instinct was to raillery. Vanilla ISIS, somebody called this mob of would-be Nazis. A parade of love-deprived nerds marching bravely out of their parents' basements carrying tiki torches from Home Depot.

Latest in John Brummett

  • Gone to the DoG

    We're now longer carrying John Brummett's column in this space.
    • Oct 12, 2011
  • Obstruction is the preferred conservatism

    Is there greater conservative virtue in opposing federal health reform, period, or in saying it ought to be implemented locally instead of from Washington in the event we are unavoidably laden with it?
    • Oct 5, 2011
  • A fate not quite as bad as prison for Lu Hardin

    There is no crime in being overly and transparently solicitous for the purposes of aggrandizement and personal political advancement. That's simply acute neediness, a common and benign human frailty.
    • Sep 28, 2011
  • More »

Event Calendar

« »

August

S M T W T F S
  1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31  

Most Viewed

  • On Charlottesville

    Watching the Charlottesville spectacle from halfway across the country, I confess that my first instinct was to raillery. Vanilla ISIS, somebody called this mob of would-be Nazis. A parade of love-deprived nerds marching bravely out of their parents' basements carrying tiki torches from Home Depot.

Most Recent Comments

  • Re: On Charlottesville

    • And what a writer: And I quote:" I was first introduced to my wife in…

    • on August 18, 2017
  • Re: On Charlottesville

    • One of his best. Not just for what he says - but, most importantly, how…

    • on August 17, 2017
  • Re: On Charlottesville

    • agree, fine piece of writing, built from a fine body of thinking. the appomattox comment…

    • on August 17, 2017
 

© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation