As next year’s legislative session approaches, discussions regarding the 2010 bonding bill are ratcheting up. Each even-numbered year, the Legislature shifts its focus from the budget to consideration of building projects around the state. These projects range from state trails and parks to buildings on college campuses and zoos, all of which are paid for by the issuance of state bonds.

The list of projects under consideration is always three to four times the number the Legislature ends up funding in the final bill. This takes the horse trading and political gamesmanship to a new level. However, the debate next year may not be as much about the overall dollar amount of the bill, but whether there should even be a bonding bill. In legislative circles of the big spenders, that statement is almost considered blasphemy. But there are sound economic reasons for taking this fiscally prudent approach.

For more than three decades, Minnesota has had a guideline that debt-service payments should be no more than 3 percent of general-fund revenue. Maintaining a low debt service cost has helped the state obtain a triple-A bond rating. This excellent bond rating means the state pays less in interest on its debt. Last March, the state’s Management and Budget Office projected that for the first time, state debt-service payments would exceed the 3 percent limit. This has led to questioning by some lawmakers as to whether there should be any bonding bill in 2010. Adding to the state’s debt during a period of declining revenue will push debt-payment levels above the 3 percent level for many years into the future and could jeopardize our triple-A bond rating.

Seldom in the past have lawmakers been able to resist the desire to place more debt on the state’s credit card, and 2010 is likely to be the same.

As a veteran of the process and a former chairman of the House Capital Investment Committee, I can attest to the validity of the old axiom, “the most dangerous place to be is between the hogs and the trough.” With 2010 being an election year for all 201 state legislators, the pressure will be on legislators to bring home the bacon, and the results of that attitude will be to heap more debt on to the taxpayers.

The last time the Legislature didn’t pass a bonding bill was in 2004, the second year of my chairmanship of the House Capital Investment Committee. That year, the House passed a bonding bill with more than 100 votes, but the Senate didn’t. In a strange twist, all of the GOP Senators voted against the bill. Because bonding incurs debt, it requires a three-fifths majority to pass a bonding bill.

Therefore in 2004, the DFL-controlled Senate needed at least some Republicans to support the bill. After the first attempt to pass a bill failed, the DFL Capital Investment chairman, Sen. Keith Langseth, refused to bring the bill back up for reconsideration. The result was no bonding bill in 2004. Somehow, business went on as usual, even without more state building projects adding to our debt load.

Given that DFLers have the necessary three-fifths majority in both the Senate and the House to pass any bonding bill they desire, in 2010 the scenario of no-bonding bill would likely have to originate with Gov. Tim Pawlenty. Only Pawlenty’s threat of a veto could keep the big spenders from putting the state deeper in debt.

Not passing a bonding bill in 2010 would certainly be the fiscally responsible action to take. With a projected shortfall of $7 billion in the next biennial budget, why would any responsible lawmaker incur even greater debt by voting for a bonding bill in 2010?

The big spenders at the Capitol have already maxed out the state’s credit card. It’s time to say no to more credit-card spending, rather than begging the credit-card company, i.e. the taxpayers, to increase their spending limit.

Phil Krinkie is a former Republican state representative from Lino Lakes and the president of the Taxpayers League of Minnesota. The eight-term lawmaker chaired the House Tax Committee and two other House panels. You can contact Krinkie via e-mail at: philk@taxpayersleague.org. This column originally appeared in the St. Paul Legal Ledger Capitol Report.