Let the Governors’ Debate Begin
GOP gubernatorial hopeful Steve Poizner’s new plan to chop taxes, slash welfare and Medi-Cal spending and build up a $10 billion state budget reserve deserves cheers from voters across California, whether they’re Republicans, Democrats or independents.
Not over the details of the plan, necessarily, since there’s plenty for people to dislike in the economic blueprint the state insurance commissioner laid out Monday.
But every voter in the state should be thrilled whenever one of those-who-would-be-governor lays out a detailed plan, numbers and all, and says “Here’s what I’ll do if I’m elected.”
There’s not a politician or voter in California who can argue with a straight face that state government is running so well no changes are needed. OK, then, it’s up to the candidates for governor to get the debate started.
Pension Issue Rises
The public employee pension issue is gaining traction. Results from the recent Field Poll indicate that voters are becoming concerned with the potential cost to the taxpayers as a majority of those polled support changes to the government pension system. Polling the public on pension issues has hardly ever been done.
Public pressure from newspaper editorials and a radio ad campaign by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association against a Metropolitan Water District pension increase plan forced the water district’s governing body to pull the pension proposal off its agenda last week. Rallying public opposition to a pension program is not something you see everyday.
Part of the responsibility for this public awareness of pensions falls to the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility founded by former Assemblyman Keith Richman. Current president Marcia Fritz has led the organization on an aggressive education campaign to inform the public about pension excesses and potential taxpayer liability.
Staring At Goats and Paycheck Protection
If the first two times you don’t succeed, fail. Fail again.
One would think that the devastating defeats of so-called
"paycheck protection" initiatives — Propositions 226 (in 1998) and Prop 75 (in
2005) — would have ended the fantasy that California voters are going to back
initiatives to limit how labor unions use their dues.
But I have in my hands an Oct. 7 letter from Robert W.
Loewen, president of the Lincoln Club of Orange County, declaring to supporters
of those defeated measures that his organization intends to launch another
paycheck protection initiative in 2010 and in "2012 if necessary."
The letter’s logic – and I use that word generously – is
that there are four main reasons why the next 2-3 years are the "perfect time"
to pass paycheck protection. 1. The state of the economy (the letter offers no
explanation of the connection between paycheck protection and the economy). 2.
"Widespread populist outrage over the expansion of government, much of which is
already being blamed on the unions." 3. A recent Supreme Court decision
upholding Idaho’s ability to ban the government from automatically collecting
dues for government unions.
California’s Shocking Jobless Numbers
Just how many Californians need a job? The answer may be larger than you think.
Judging by the official unemployment rate of 12.2%, California has more unemployed workers than the entire population of New Mexico. To provide a job for every unemployed worker, California’s economy would have to generate nearly 2.3 million new jobs.
But a growing number of “underemployed” workers in California’s labor force aren’t included in the conventional unemployment statistic. These workers, who want full-times jobs but have settled for part-time work, now number more than 1.4 million.
Add 2.3 million and 1.4 million and you get 3.7 million. That number, which exceeds the entire population of Oklahoma, represents a startling 20% of California’s labor force. Simply put, one in five California workers wants full-time work, but can’t find it.