Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s proposed one cent sales tax is not being well received, and State Senator Don Perata (pictured above) already has thrown gas on the fire with this outrageous quote, “”I’m glad the governor has come around to saying publicly what we’ve known all along – that we have to have taxes in order to correct the problems we’re in right now,” according to the Sacramento Bee.
So is there any other way to resolve our state’s budget crisis? How would the Libertarian Party resolve it, for example? Well, the California Libertarian Party has published an online article addressing this very issue. The article, entitled “California Smackdown 2008-2009” is written by Ron Getty. Here it is in its entirety:
California faces a $20 billion budget deficit, the result of politicians’ erroneous financial assumptions, a housing market downturn with reduced property taxes, and a possible recession brought on by the federal government’s inflationary monetary policy.
California’s government itself is a part of the deficit problem. It’s a huge behemoth with 500 agencies, departments, and divisions in eight broad categories. There are 345,000 state employees averaging $85,000 annually in pay and benefits, which costs taxpayers $29 billion alone. In comparison, private industry per capita pay and benefits average $45,000.
One method to cut the state deficit would require California state employees’ pay and benefits to be scaled to meet an average equal to private industry’s pay and benefits. This $40,000 cut per state employee would reduce the budget deficit by $13.8 billion in one short stroke.
There are other ways to trim a bloated, deficit-ridden state government budget.
One would be to make many agencies and commissions self-supporting through user fees; another would be to eliminate useless agencies and commissions altogether. Still another approach is to compare the services an agency or commission provides and determine whether the same service is being offered by a private company. The agency or commission would then be required to make a competitive bid for the service against a free-market privately-owned business. To be competitive, the playing field would need to be leveled by repealing all prevailing wage legislation as well as public servant union pay scales. If the private free market company offers a better competitive deal, the service gets outsourced.
If it is determined that an agency, a commission, or a council was created for the purpose of satisfying political campaign contributors and had no real reason for existence, it should be eliminated.
Let’s look at a few agencies, commissions, and councils that could be eliminated, supported through user fees, or outsourced.
The California Arts Council exists to encourage artistic awareness and expression among Californians. Since our state has 1,700 art galleries and 170 art museums, not to mention businesses supporting the arts through exhibits and local communities supporting art fairs, we seem to have enough art awareness. So let’s eliminate this $5 million California Arts Council boondoggle.
The Department of Consumer Affairs establishes licensing standards for some 225 professions, from accountants to veterinarians. With a $251 million budget and 2.4 million professionals covered, charging an annual licensing fee of $105 per professional to maintain this licensing would save the taxpayers $251 million.
The Adult Operations program for the Department of Corrections consists of 33 operating correctional institutions overseeing 170,000 prisoners and a $5.5 billion budget. With federal crackdowns on illegal-immigrant farm labor, California should literally “farm out” prison labor. Offering some 125,000 nonviolent prisoners at a competitive pay at $10 an hour would generate $2.5 billion, cutting the taxpayers’ burden in half. Hard-core prisoners could farm specialty herbs and spices inside prisons for sale to high-end markets and restaurants, further cutting budget needs.
The Department of Parks and Recreation oversees 85 state parks and 200 campsites, beaches, and hiking trails. The 2008-09 budget was going to be cut, with 48 state parks closed. These closures have been forestalled in the governor’s newly proposed $569 million parks budget. It’s time to take some radical measures to save the parks. California should get out of the parks business. It should sell the state parks, campsites, hiking trails, and beaches to private businesses or individuals to hold them in trust for the benefit of the public. This way, businesses and individuals could jump on the “Green Wagon” and save California parks.
Each business that adopts a state park would receive tax deductions equal to the cost of maintenance, upkeep, repair, and park staffing. Businesses could join together to adopt parks, hiking trails, campsites, or state beaches and split the tax-deductible costs. Private individuals could adopt state park areas though a nonprofit tax-deductible contribution corporation. In this way, the $569 million Parks and Recreation budget could be cut and still allow Californians to have outdoor recreation. Otherwise, we should do the politically incorrect thing and charge an entrance fee of $7 each to the estimated 80 million yearly parks visitors to cover the budget.
The examples I’ve cited to cut the budget deficit would save $18 billion. If the budgets of each agency, commission, council, or department were to be looked at in terms of user fees, outsourcing, or outright elimination, the savings could easily total another $18 billion.
The $20 billion budget deficit doesn’t require increasing taxes or finding new sources of revenue. It’s a signal that it’s time to smackdown California government spending.
Getty has laid out an ambitious plan there. It seems like a lot of “if’s” and some interesting negotiations between idea and implementation but at least someone is thinking critically about different ways to do things. I hope our representatives are looking at this stuff too.
‘I’m glad the governor has come around to saying publicly what we’ve known all along – that we have to have taxes in order to correct the problems we’re in right now.‘
That’s not what the governor said. What he really said was, ‘I don’t want to increase taxes, but I’m willing to compromise with you blackballing Democratic bastards!’ Of course, I’m paraphrasing.
SMS
PS: Found a pretty stupid waste of money –
‘ANAHEIM. Calif.—Anaheim is spending $90,000 on a be-nice-to-tourists training program for police officers, firefighters, taxi drivers and hotel workers in the Disneyland resort area.
The City Council unanimously approved the voluntary program, which will use Resort Maintenance District money collected from businesses in the resort area.
Councilman Bob Hernandez says good customer service will raise Anaheim’s image as a tourist destination.
City employees who enroll in the program—which includes training on Anaheim’s history—will get a certificate. ‘ -Chicoer.com
The Governor has NOT publicly introduced this proposal. It was, however, put on the table Sunday afternoon in a confidential meeting amongst the big five. The quid pro quo is that the Governor wants, as a first step, budget reform and increased blue pencil authority. Several Democrats, moderate and pro business, are unsure of the proposal and as well are not supportive of the Democratic proposal on the table regarding increased taxes.
This standoff is not going to be resolved anytime soon.
From the LA Times, to my email – more waste found:
‘Exclusive: FBI raids three Southern California hospitals in probe of Medicare fraud
The investigation centers on alleged fraud involving homeless patients recruited from skid row. City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo plans to announce civil litigation against the hospitals’ operators.
More soon at: http://link.latimes.com/r/R58V3G/20NFE/TGOG2Y/W6EO/9LQ0C/B7/t ‘
SMS
There’s always more than one way to skin a cat.
Every time we put the responsibility and authority for a “good idea” in the hands of government, that idea can only then be solved by taking money from people by force.
I have a rule for judging whether government should be doing a thing or not:
I ask myself, “Is it worth putting a gun to everyone’s head in order to get this done?”
If the answer is “no”. I start asking how culture , tradition and/or community could be used to fix the problem or promote the cause. The above articles demonstrate a small representation of just how easy it is to get the environmentally clean, morally correct, prosperous society we all want, without resorting to the same tactics as the Nazis and Communists did.
Our system of governance is so… last century. It’s time for change!
ALIVE * FREE * HAPPY
Libertarian
Art.
No matter how you sugar coat this mess, to suggest imposing more “user” and “licensing” fee’s to close the gap is still a form of increased taxation.
And while we can agree that there is a wide chasm between private and public sector compensation, not in my lifetime will our legislature level that playing field as suggested above.
We need to perform a sincere “line item” assessment of all state programs, and their funding, from four years ago to the present time to see where the wheels fell off the Wells Fargo stage coach creating an additional $40 billion in spending.
How did we provide necessary services for our citizens and businesses when the budget was at $101 billion dollars just a few short years ago?
I’ve officially changed my mind on the sales tax proposal. After I read this story by Mark Landsbaum at the Register I realized enough is enough. According to him, Don Perata also was quoted as saying this tax hike is a ‘start!’ You guys were right. The Dems are reminding me why I lost faith in them.
SMS
Does anyone doubt that imposing collective bargaining on civil service provided public employee unions a stranglehold on both State and local agencies? The power of public employee unions is a major cause of large deficits in many public agency budgets, including the State.
No one anticipated the consequences of superimposing collective bargaining on civil service. The premise of collective bargaining is that both sides come to the table as equals. Equality does not exist in public agency collective bargaining. Unions and civil service features simply give employees too much influence compared to collective bargaining in the real world.
Given the political influence of unions, change will only be via an Initiative. An initiative should:
• Prohibit public employees from receiving greater total compensation than comparably qualified employees in the private sector without approval of a majority of voters
• Require public services be put out to bid by the private sector if the cost of a public services substantially exceeds cost in the private sector.
Although initiatives to reduce public employee union influence are unlikely to be proposed soon, such structural changes will have to be considered at some point in the future. Otherwise, we will face perpetual budget problems.
I have seen the gimmick of comparing average governmetn pay to average private sector before, and it is a shell game. Government jobs tend to be higher paid because a signifanct number of them require professional expertise, college degrees and some require advanced degrees and licensing. Doctors, lawyers, psychiatrists, engineers, CPA’s, master degreed professionals such as social workers and psychological counselors, etc. are found in disproportionate numbers in government service compared to the “hypothetical average” of the private sector. It’s like taking the average salary of all employees of CHOC, or UCI, and comparing them to the average in the private sector (including unskilled jobs and workers). Apples and oranges.
How much will that penny really cost the taxpayers?
An analysis by the state agency that collects California’s sales taxes suggests that a one-cent increase in the statewide sales tax would bring in hundreds of millions of dollars less than anticipated and cost thousands of jobs.
According to the analysis, it also could result in a loss in business investment of $660 million and some 58,000 lost jobs.
http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_adctlid=v%7Cjq2q43wvsl855o%7Cxb9ky3yoyatpqc&issueId=xas7u1nejid2da&xid=xb9i5bec3g9fea&_adctlid=d%7Cx0rye2v8gr4ci1%7Cxb9nplle09e1su
How is it that with all of these intelligent and thoughtful proposed solutions, no one chooses to address the rampant Waste, Fraud, & Abuse in the budgets and operations of this State. Is there really an argument the waste is somehow justified? Or will we take the Medicare approach of saying that it is just too expensive to root out the fraud?
Call me crazy, but wouldn’t this be a justifiable trimming of the deadwood?
Does a police officer, a fireman, or a clerk really need a college education where private sector would not?
I’ve worked for a vendor for a LOT of government agencies, union permeated job sites where rigid rules and rigid unions go hand in hand, requirements that make no sense and would not exist in the marketplace.
I fear we are progressing towards a society where the middle class are all government workers and the poor is everyone not in the new aristocracy or their institutionalized minion.
We deserve better.
ALIVE * FREE * HAPPY
Libertarian
If the Minister of debt in Schwarzeneggeristan were to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana, CA would be out of debt in less than one year. Our overflowing prison population would dwindle as well further boosting revenue retention.
Purchasing marijuana should involve the same requirements as purchasing say, Viagra.
Did you know Kalifornia spends more money to incarcerate a single prisoner each year than it spends to educate one child in our government school system?
It is less expensive if we were to just send our kids directly to prison.
How do YOU feel about that?
Let your elected representative know.
(They are OK with it)