The Jury Talks Back

5/18/2009

Campbell’s budget proposal

Filed under: California Politics — aphrael @ 6:19 am

Former Congressman Tom Campbell, in anticipation of today’s debate among likely Republican gubernatorial candidates, has released a counter-proposal to the governor’s May Revise. It’s an interesting proposal.

I particularly like the observation that it’s unwise to budget on the assumption that a certain amount of fraud will be rooted out, and the observation that we can propose all the cuts we want to the Department of Corrections but can’t actually implement them unless the court receiver agrees. In addition, his point that one-time fixes aren’t helpful is very well taken. On the other hand, I think the notion is absurd that public employees can successfully be talked into a 15% pay cut.

13 Comments

  1. Wow. That last sentence was … awkwardly phrased. Not enough coffee yet. :)

    Comment by aphrael — 5/18/2009 @ 6:31 am

  2. why bother talking? cut their pay 15% across the board, and they can either stay on the j*b or leave for a different one.

    if they go out on strike, do what Reagan did, and hire replacements.

    Comment by redc1c4 — 5/18/2009 @ 10:39 am

  3. Since the real issue is that the state and local governments have signed contracts absurdly favorable to the employee unions, and which guarantee huge pensions that are hard to undo, there are really only one way out: Bankruptcy.

    Unfortunately, bankruptcy would be mediated by the Obama administration, so that probably doesn’t work either.

    Comment by Kevin Murphy — 5/18/2009 @ 10:48 am

  4. Kevin, on some level that strikes me as saying that it’s better for the judiciary to draft the state budget than it is for the legislature to do so.

    That seems like a very odd position for a conservative to take.

    Comment by aphrael — 5/18/2009 @ 11:00 am

  5. No, it’s like saying the damage is so great I have no idea how to fix it.

    Between the idiot bond initiatives, local personnel largess, runaway immigration population growth and bloated bureaucracies, I’m not sure there is a way out.

    Not even massive tax increases will work.

    Comment by Kevin Murphy — 5/18/2009 @ 11:53 am

  6. it’s like saying the damage is so great I have no idea how to fix it.

    Oh, i’m with you on that. I’m just democratic enough to think it should be done by the people or our elected representatives, rather than by judges. :)

    Comment by aphrael — 5/18/2009 @ 12:26 pm

  7. Over twenty years of managing four different small businesses, 35 to 160 employees, two comments still remain with me.

    At one unionized company, my second week on the job one of the workers came up to me and said, “Bosses come and bosses go, but we’re always here”

    At the second, non-union, after three months of struggling unsuccessfully with internal inertia, I was discussing the situation with the owner when he said, more serious than not. “Maybe I should just fire everybody and start over again”

    Unfortunately for all of us in the rest of the country, California’s problems affect us in one way or another.

    Kevin may be absolutely right, the damage may be so great that short of starting over again there is no way to fix it.

    Comment by ra1650 — 5/18/2009 @ 12:28 pm

  8. Kevin

    Damn, I hit submit too soon.

    I didn’t mean to imply that you suggested starting over again.

    Comment by ra1650 — 5/18/2009 @ 12:31 pm

  9. Aphrael wrote:

    On the other hand, I think the notion is absurd that public employees can successfully be talked into a 15% pay cut.

    Not at all. You tell them, “If you don’t agree to the 15% pay cut, then you will just have to go on strike, and take a 100% pay cut. Since this goes even further in the direction the state needs to go to reduce expenses, we welcome this action on your part.”

    It’s all a matter of having the balls to not be intimidated by the public employee unions. You tell them that they must agree, or they will be replaced by people who would be happy to have the work for 15% less.

    Comment by The Dana who plays hardball — 5/18/2009 @ 12:36 pm

  10. Actually, the strike issue doesn’t arise IIRC in CA with employees that are classified as “Public Safety”.
    Part of the allowance of collective bargaining was that PS employees had to forego “job actions”.
    The most that they are allowed to do to inconvenience the general public, is to “work to rule”.

    Comment by AD - RtR/OS! — 5/19/2009 @ 8:32 am

  11. …and please, someone tell me how Tom Campbell is any different from Arnold?
    Just another squishy RINO.

    Comment by AD - RtR/OS! — 5/19/2009 @ 8:33 am

  12. AD – RtR/OS: the budget proposal I linked to is quite different from the proposal that Gov. Schwarzenegger has put forward.

    Comment by aphrael — 5/19/2009 @ 9:58 am

  13. Well then, the only way it could pass a heavily Democrat Legislature is if it was actually more to the Left of Arnold than Arnold is of the GOP.
    Otherwise, it is just another excercise in futility.
    The spending priorities of the State of California will not change until the composition of the Legislature is changed.

    Comment by AD - RtR/OS! — 5/19/2009 @ 10:05 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.