In Delaware the 8% seems to have turned into a 4% cut.
The problem as expressed here before, is one of scale. We can easily say, just cut the number of people we don’t need, and let the rest do the work.
That does not stack up.
For one. Those people cut would rather have ninety – two percent of their pay, than none at all.
For two. Those who say the economic impact of an 8% cut on our economy, for some reason fail to calculate that the same impact occurs if 8% of the states employees are laid off.
For three. As citizens of this state, we receive much better service by having more human beings assisting us, than by having fewer who are paid well… Imagine, standing in line at the DMV with only two people processing applications? Don’t worry, we are told… they are being paid well… Uh, ok.
So the concept of trying to accomplish more with less should not be viewed as a vice and vilified by every labor union known to man. It should be considered a virtue.
The alternative is layoffs. or higher taxes to drive more revenue though our coffers.
The populist argument is simple. People matter more than money, so tax corporations and pay people money…. I like it.
But I can remember hearing from those responsible for making Delaware a corporate friendly state, exactly how much good change came from getting rid of those negatives that impact businesses…
We honor Russell Peterson for his Coastal Environmental Act, but look at the News Journal Archives (print only) describing the bankruptcy possibilities faced by the second smallest state at that time (’79)… If we utilize our ability to take money from corporate entities because we can… then what do we have to offer them that is so great to maintain the balance and make them stay here and employ our workers? Why is Delaware such a great place to set up or keep a business if in that process, we destroy our best asset? In other words, why would Paris Hilton purposefully get fat and stop wearing make up? Same thing.
Balance is the key. And Markell is the man for that. For if this state goes too populist, it will hurt our reputation among those whose commercial enterprises actually fund our lives…
His 8% is a brilliant stroke. It keeps people employed, and trims our deficit down. It may need some tweaking.. especially on the lower end of the pay scale… but it shares the suffering better than the massive layoffs that must come if we cannot close the gap in any other way.
We pin hopes on green energy. Yet, who would want to set up a business here, if New Jersey offers it cheaper there?
Do not be quick to steal from corporations. If you’re going to steal, make sure it is from everyone, so no one can say we could have had any other choice…
But, the whole point of this article, is to demonstrate how Michigan is attempting to solve their crises. It can get quickly out of hand, there.
There is a movement to put on their ballot, a proposition requiring the downsizing of their government. In this report filed by Jamie Edmonds of WIXL TV (who just happened to graduate from the University of Delaware’s School of Journalism in 2005). there is the stirring of a citizens movement to simply downsize government.
-Their proposal would eliminate ten seats in the Senate and 28 seats in the House and two supreme court justices.
-It would roll back a lawmaker pay raise
-It would ban lobbying for two years after leaving office.
– It would cut state departments and salaries.
“What we are doing we’re having less government, less bureaucracy, more accountability to people,” Byrum said.
The group supporting this needs 300,000 signatures by July 7th to put it on the ballot.
Now Delaware does not have a ballot Proposition Clause. We are too representative and have our government too firmly entrenched in our pre-colonial traditions, to ever go that route. But, the anger is out there among our people… And accountability must be taken by those whom we put in office.
That is why the 8% cut proposed by our governor Markell is a sound one. The alternatives which are now only being explored by the Joint Financial Committee of our Legislature, are all much worse…
Remember. When it comes to suffering, all must suffer equally for it to work… That should be our mantra. All must suffer equally. All.
8 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 18, 2009 at 4:28 am
Brian Shields
For one. Those people cut would rather have ninety – two percent of their pay, than none at all.
I would rather fire one person to save 25 from having their pay cut. The inability for legislators to step on toes to make difficult decisions… when that is what they are elected to do… means that they are weak and do not have the best interests of the people in mind.
I find it incredibly interesting that they would upset a huge block of voters with a vested interest, and run them through the wringer for 6 months, rather than to attempt to fight the corruption from within.
It just goes to show you that they are part of that corruption. I hope that voter block votes their fat asses out.
June 18, 2009 at 6:17 am
kavips
The correct math is to fire one person out of every thirteen. At 62,100 employees, only three hundred have left since November 2008, 4776 must be fired under your circumstances.
4776 done. ka-put. out of work, no money. begging for $$.. and are there any spouse, or children affected by these mass layoffs you propose? Probably one, or two…..
My way, all still work.
My way, all still contribute to society.
My way, we don’t have to undergo massive training expenses when our economy returns and we have to take people off the street and start teaching them the basic ropes like … how to talk to people….
So what you consider weak… as if often with those who are young… is often the use of ones intelligence to see options in the future that cost more if such actions are taken..
It’s about money. The 8% cut is the best idea out there….The 4% will look good this year, but will require an 12% cut next year… (4 + 8)
No offense. Cutting one out of every thirteen people, is not a good idea.
Likewise voting people in because they “act” tough when drunk, but who have no idea of what is going on, would be like putting the owners of a pizza business in charge of the state… At least the liquor imbibed by the top state officials would increase…. lol. (take that, Grottos)…
June 18, 2009 at 11:21 am
Brian Shields
I was going by percentages as a rough number. 4% is 1/25th, to cut 1/25th of the government would be, using your numbers, half of what you quoted to be the number of employees, 2484. Still a high number, still alot of homes and families, and is still painful. It still needs to be done.
When was the last time the Delaware Government shrank? I have no idea.
June 18, 2009 at 4:56 pm
mhomewood
Unless I’m mistaken, your 4776 number is pretty close to what I’ve heard Markell wants to lighten State Government by (the # I’ve heard is 4000). Short of mass retirements, I’m not sure how that number is going to be achieved. Although I’ve been a big opponent of the pay cut, I’m certainly on board with Furloughs, which by my math would approximate to about 2.5 days per month. At least that way I get something out of my lost pay 🙂
But Kavips, you’re right…The 4% is going to mean looking for more money for next Fiscal year’s budget.
And Brian, you’re right. I’ve been involved with a few technology projects that the purported purpose was to save the State salary money. We finish the project, automate the system, and the positions that were supposed to disapear never do.
June 18, 2009 at 9:49 pm
kavips
Actually I was basing off the 8%. You based off the 4%. And rumor is now that it is 2% pay cut.
Which to listen to government employees bitch, means that they are doing far more work for less pay…
One cannot expect to keep up the same level of services.
We must remember that government is is actually an extension of society, put in place by us to protect ourselves from those out to fleece us of our property.
So at some point we will need to grow government again, and hopefully, that time will come quickly.
It is hard to lay off government workers. Better is to follow the Japanese model… Don’t hire new ones. Build robots to do their duties… Yes, we hate the automated telephone prompters, but their effectiveness has improved over the last decade so they are almost more efficient than a human being…
If only those business would upgrade from the 1995 model… lol.
June 20, 2009 at 11:22 am
kavips
But I did want to reiterate that a University of Delaware journalism Grad was responsible for the article that initiated this post…
Go Jamie.
June 20, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Tina
I like what you are doing here. Keep up the good work!
Tina
June 21, 2009 at 8:31 pm
delawarerepublican
For one, Delaware has too many employees and the truth is state government is not structured for efficiency or value for taxpayers. In the last 8 years there have been 1500 additional state employees.
For two, If you tax other sources then you also hurt the economy also and there is not a direct one to one impact. The $91 million pay cut is small compared to the GDP of Delaware which in 2005 was $56,483,000,000
For three, having more people in the wrong departments and not enough in the right one makes no sense. For instance, we are short in DNREC for pollution control.
Mike Protack