Home › News › County News
No budget leads to 10,000 layoffs
Download this story as a podcast!
Brian Baer / Sacramento Bee Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger talks during a news conference at the State Capitol in Sacramento, Calif., on Thursday July 31, 2008. Gov. Schwarzenegger on Thursday, trying to avoid a "full-blown" financial crisis in California, eliminated thousands of part-time and temporary positions and ordered that up to 200,000 state workers receive the federal minimum wage.
STORY TOOLS 
More from County NewsSACRAMENTO — Saying he needed to act "to make sure the state has enough money to pay its bills," Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Thursday ordered the layoff of about 10,000 temporary employees, the elimination of overtime and a hard freeze on hiring by state agencies.
In addition, Schwarzenegger ordered his finance director and the state's chief personnel officer to work with Controller John Chiang "to implement the necessary mechanisms" to reduce the pay of up to 200,000 state employees to the federal minimum wage of $6.55 per hour.
He said these actions were necessary because the Legislature has failed to pass a budget, and the state is now a full month into the fiscal year. Without a budget in place, the state cannot take out the customary short-term loans it needs to manage its cash flow at this time of year, and without that cash, it runs the risk of defaulting on its obligations.
Schwarzenegger insisted a 2003 state Supreme Court decision requires the controller to pay most state workers only the minimum wage until a budget is passed, but Chiang disputed the governor's interpretation of that ruling and responded he "has no intention of complying" with the order.
If the cut in pay to minimum wages were to be implemented, workers would receive retroactive pay for the difference between that wage and their regular salaries after a budget is enacted.
The minimum-wage issue remains in question for a number of reasons: Chiang's stance, lawsuits expected to be filed by state employee unions, and questions about whether the state's payroll computers could be programmed to carry it out. The layoffs of temporary workers, however, are effective immediately.
About 10,000 such workers were notified Thursday not to come to work today, which is the first of the month and the beginning of a new pay period. About 10,000 other temporary state workers were exempted from the order because they perform critical functions "directly related to the preservation and protection of human life and safety."
According to records from the Controller's Office, 411 temporary workers are in Ventura County, 194 of them employed by the Department of Parks and Recreation. Among other local part-time workers affected are 50 employees of the California Conservation Corps and 24 at the Department of Motor Vehicles.
Schwarzenegger's order does not affect employees who work in state agencies not under his direct control, which include community colleges, the courts, California State University and the University of California.
Administration officials said most of the laid-off temporary workers will be hired back after a budget is signed, but there is no guarantee all will be put back on the payroll.
"We feel, of course, bad that they have to go through hardship," Schwarzenegger said. "It is a terrible situation to be in. State employees are working very hard. They're the ones who make our state run, and they're doing a good job."
Schwarzenegger's order was immediately assailed by Democratic leaders of the Legislature.
"This regrettable action undermines the state's shaky economy, inflicts hardship on 200,000 hard-working Californians who have nothing to do with the state's budget stalemate and reduces services to everyone who visits a DMV office, expects safe highways or needs other state assistance," said Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland.
For months, state financial leaders have warned lawmakers that California would face a severe cash crisis if a budget was not enacted by Aug. 1.
Finance Director Mike Genest said the state's cash accounts could dip to about $1.8 billion in September, well below the $2.5 billion cushion he considers to be the necessary "safety zone."
"We're now in danger of a serious cash crisis," Genest said. "The absolute worst thing we could do as a state is to write a check and have it bounce."
Genest said the layoffs could save about $80 million in August and the minimum-wage reduction, if implemented, could save hundreds of millions more.
In a letter to Schwarzenegger, Chiang disputed the administration's estimates, saying there is enough cash "to meet all expenditures through September."
Lawmakers are deadlocked over a budget agreement, which would require a two-thirds majority vote. Democrats are backing a plan that includes $8 billion in tax increases to help balance a $15 billion deficit. Republicans say they will not support tax increases.
If a budget agreement is reached in the next few days, the state could issue routine short-term bonds known as revenue anticipation notes, which would be paid back within the fiscal year. But if there is no budget very soon, finance officials may be forced to issue riskier bonds known as revenue anticipation warrants, financial instruments that not only come with higher interest rates but would also require the state to pay credit insurance.
The last time the state was forced to issue such notes, in 2003, it paid $140 million for these credit enhancements. Genest said estimates are that, given today's troubled financial markets, the cost would be two to three times higher this year.
That kind of borrowing may yet be required, but, he said, the state should do everything possible to avoid having "to put $200 million or $300 million down on the table just for the privilege of talking to bankers."
Posted by 2wheelsguy on August 1, 2008 at 6:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As I watched the "Terminator" in his expensive suit sign the executive order that will cause 10,000 layoffs as well as reducing the pay of hundreds of thousands of hard-working State employees to Federal minimum wage (which is less than California minimum wage) in these horrible economic times, it made me want to vomit. That fat roidhead probably earns more off his investments alone than 200 or more of the hard working State employees affected by the executive order earn from actually working. He has no regard for those who actually work for a living and ought to be recalled/"terminated."
Posted by Legal_American on August 1, 2008 at 6:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We California tax payers are currently forced to endure $10 BILLION of our tax dollars being spent each year to subsidize illegal aliens. Over an 18-month period, that equates to $15 BILLION. So if we stop subsidizing illegal aliens, that would wipe out the shortfall and instead leave us with a $1 Billion SURPLUS over an 18-month period, versus a $14 Billion shortfall.
We've been catering to the illegal immigrants for far too long. I know where I'd make the first cuts. How much can be saved by printing everything in English? No matter what the country of origin, immigrants should learn the language!
Posted by Ms_California on August 1, 2008 at 7:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This guy is a loser! Just for the record... I didn't vote for him! I voted for the porn star! haha but seriously, I didn't vote for him and this is the exact reason why. What makes him think he can just break the lives of the common people who work these jobs? Does he think that everyone has Skeletor for a wife and millions of dollars in the bank? Honestly, is he going to pay any late fees and help any of these people who may lose everything they worked their whole lives for with this stupid BS move of his? How many people is this stupid order going to cause to file bankruptcy? How can he expect people to live off of $6.55/hr? People based their lives on the incomes, they have car payments, house payments, kids in braces etc.... Is this just a "fire under their a$$" move? This isn't going to motivate people, this is going to piss people off and cost the state more money in lawsuits etc. I don't see that he is offering to give up his nice cooshy income to help with that. Hey Arnold.. why don't you donate some of your stinkin millions to help your Calyfornya out of it's budget problems A$$H0!E!
Posted by garion246 on August 1, 2008 at 7:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Skeletor for a wife"...lol
Posted by RC on August 1, 2008 at 8:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Arnie should take a pay cut.This is BS and I am soo glad I did not vote for him. I feel bad for thede hardowrking prople that may lose their pay, homes and cars.
Posted by Just_wondering on August 1, 2008 at 8:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
He cut pay on the wrong group of people. If he wants to get the legislators moving, he needs to cut their pay to $6.55 an hour and take away their "benefits" like McClintock's daily stipend for living in Sacramento. Once again, the wrong people are punished for the legislators wrongs.
Posted by Scarlette on August 1, 2008 at 8:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Correct me if I am wrong... but the Gov. does not take a salary from the State of California. I totally disagree with anyones pay being reduced to the California minimum wage. And as for the 10,000 temps. being laid off, why not make the full time employees work a little harder???? It seems to me that the one s who are not doing their job is the state Legislation. GET OFF YOUR REAR ENDS AND DO YOUR JOB!!!!! IT would appear that the legislators are the ones not doing their job and need their pay cut. Hurry up and pass a budget all ready!
PS
(Cal Trans one man in the hole 4 looking down watching him work!!!)
Posted by latina79 on August 1, 2008 at 8:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Can you imagine how many people will now be forced to sign up for welfare assistance. Who the hell can live off of $6.55 an hour??? Unbelieveable!! Glad I didn't vote for him.
Posted by hotwildflower on August 1, 2008 at 8:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
He doesn't receive a paycheck, that has already been established.
I agree with Legal American, there are so many cuts that could be made such as the printing in English only, in addition to cutting all the extras for the prisoners. Quit babying those who are breaking the laws...now the legal citizens are the ones suffering!
Posted by daugtherofimmigrant on August 1, 2008 at 8:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I have said it Muchas, oops MANY times... makes you wonder why those who have control to get rid of illegals or illegal expenses dont? They find other ways to cut costs but don't touch the welfare, housing, or to subsidize the illegal aliens like Legal_American put it? Makes you wonder huh?
I know quite a few people who can stop asking for welfare and get their @asses to work but why when they can get everything for free unless it's taken away from them they will never work.
Arnold is an idiot by the way!
Posted by Ms_California on August 1, 2008 at 9:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I read today that there is a huge number of illegal immigrants that are packing up and returning to Mexico because the economy is so bad in the U.S.. go figure!
Posted by tsetsaf on August 1, 2008 at 9:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This move was forced on the governor by the legislators. His role is to manage the government but he has no control over the budget for the government.
Think of it as an allowance. Normally he receives $100 a day and he pays out $100 a day. With no budget set by the legislature he is now receiving $0 per day and is still required to pay out $100 per day. Where should he get the money?
Posted by daugtherofimmigrant on August 1, 2008 at 9:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ms_California - that was funny.
Was that wishful thinking?
Posted by wbogaardt on August 1, 2008 at 9:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks to the wonderful Democratic legislators. Apparently they can't figure out a budget and realize schools are given up 70% of the state budget. Frankly, if my employer cut my check to minimum wage or didn't pay me a check, I'd leave them. Apparently state employees can't make it in the private sector and have to rely on handouts which our state Democrats are more than willing to give.
Posted by Rocket81 on August 1, 2008 at 9:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
All those years of big bucks from property taxes and such were wasted by our "leaders" and now look what has become of it. The rule here is you dont have to spend everything you take in. Our government has failed us big time and the elected officials should recant all those big raises and pension increases and take a hard dose of reality. Those in government positions know who they are.
Posted by hotwildflower on August 1, 2008 at 9:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There are so many "fluff" areas that can be cut but all we hear about are cuts from schools and people trying to earn a decent wage...why not cut the "fluff" first!
I know at home when times are tough, we cut out the entertainment money, the eating out, the extras in the grocery bill..maybe they can follow this simple principle?
Posted by Ms_California on August 1, 2008 at 9:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
No daugtherofimmigrant, it wasn't my wishful thinking. It just struck me funny that even the illegal immigrants who came here for a better life are now moving back to their native country where they can be better off. Let's be honest people immigrate here to make a better life for themselves, it must be pretty bad if they are moving back because it isn't better for them. Just goes to show that our economy is in a horrific state right now. Maybe I will immigrate to Mexico... haha
Posted by hotwildflower on August 1, 2008 at 9:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It's my wishful thinking...maybe they can get in line and come back the right way?? Then we can have a big ol' party to celebrate!
Posted by Fred on August 1, 2008 at 9:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I suggest a combo of cutting fat and higher taxes for the weathly. It makes no sense that you pay a higher % tax than Warren Buffet - he says so himself. The more you make, the higher % you should pay - right now the rich pay very little tax. Fix the tax code to a fair system, it is well documented that the rich are getting richer and the gap is widening.
Fred
Posted by pjlove10 on August 1, 2008 at 9:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I can't belive I voted for this tool. Okay, so he doesn't get a paycheck, he's said so. But he has no right displacing 10,000 hard working California citizens because he and the powers that be can't finalize a budget. Here's a plan, just for starters: Stop allowing illegal immigration!!!
"I'll be back..." my *ss.
Posted by wynonarose on August 1, 2008 at 10:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The legislators are the ones holding the budget up. California can't operate without a budget. This should have been worked out months ago. I doubt Arnold can cut the salaries, but he sure did let most of the temps go. Wish he could lay off the legislators instead.
And, I agree we spend way too much money subsidizing the lazy and not nearly enough subsidizing education and legal enforcement.
Posted by Morris1 on August 1, 2008 at 10:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I love it when people say, tax the rich. They just don't seem to understand that the rich pay 95% of all the taxes in this country. The rich have businesses that hire employees. Tax the rich, they take their money and their jobs overseas. Californians have continued to spend on expensive ballot initiatives because they think it is taking money from someone elses pockets not theirs. Well guess what. It takes from us all. STOP VOTING FOR ALL THESE SPENDING BILLS, CRIME BILLS that politicians tell us we need. There is plenty of money in this state but it is not being managed, plain and simple. Taxes will just push people out of California and more jobs will be lost. VOTE NO ON 6 & 9, two more spending bills put up by the tough on Republicans that have not figured out that locking everyone up and building more prisons is the wrong approach. They have no learning curve. 30 years of tough on crime and other spending bills and here we are. WELCOME TO CALIFORNIA, THE PRISON STATE!
Posted by Ms_California on August 1, 2008 at 11:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well what do you expect when they pay $1Million for a toilet!
Posted by wbogaardt on August 1, 2008 at 11:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Fred must be a Democrat. More money you make more taxes you pay. Heck the amount of taxes I pay I can employee two folks on a very nice living wage. What do I get for it. Pot hole ridden roads, traffic jams, and poor public education. You have to spend your money wisely and not frivolously. Go figure why half a million Californians left the state with the highest taxes, worse services, and nation's highest unemployment rate right now. Thank you Democratic leaders.
Posted by megnosis on August 1, 2008 at 12:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Morris1 is way off. The top 2% do have 95% of the nations wealth--- BUT they only pay 60% of the total tax burden, they do not come anywhere near to paying their fair share of the commons.
If you were to put an across the board flat tax on everyone, then that 2% would be paying 95% of the taxes. That means in the current system, more proportionate taxes are paid by the lower 98% -- most of that by the middle class.
Until Reagan's idiocy, the wealthiest of us had a 71% tax rate(and we still had tons of millionaires) and we were the wealthiest CREDITOR nation in the worlds history. As soon as he dropped that we went into deficits. We are now the largest DEBTOR nation in history.
Conservatives have trashed this country, destroyed our commons(infrastructure(roads, bridges, waterways, power grid, carbon fuels, national parks, education systems)).
While the abuses incurred on our system by illegals have not helped, it is not their fault we're in the messes we're in. We've had conservatives pounding for too long about lower taxes when we need to be able to provide for the common areas and providence useable by all, not the elite that can buy the best privately.
Taxes are a civic responsibility that conservatives fail to respect or acknowledge.
Posted by Adam_Monroe on August 1, 2008 at 12:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How about stop payment to all members of the state legislature until the budget is approved? That outta get it knocked out pretty quick...
Only allow them to leave for 10 minute bathroom breaks every 3 hours.
Posted by hotwildflower on August 1, 2008 at 12:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Adam, excellent suggestion!
Posted by pjlove10 on August 1, 2008 at 1:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How about this. We sit down every member of the California state legislature in one big room. Tell them it's movie time. Okay? Ready.. here's the kicker. Put on every single Schwarzenegger movie ever made, including "Jingle All The Way". The last one still standing gets to finalize the budget. Whoever can sit through that garbage for hours on end can handle anything.
For the record, I actually enjoyed Total Recall. Johnny cab anyone?
Posted by hotwildflower on August 1, 2008 at 1:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh come on...I love the Terminator movies and I also love Commando...
The real torture is Kindergarten Cop.
Posted by Ms_California on August 1, 2008 at 1:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
TWINS!!! Hotwildflower... Twins was the worst!
Posted by hotwildflower on August 1, 2008 at 1:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh...you got me there!
Posted by pjlove10 on August 1, 2008 at 2:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I feel like Pumping Iron I'm so upset. I wanna just Total Recall this entire administration, but it's too late. I wonder if Schwarzenegger walks around Commando in the office. It's really all a bunch of True Lies if you ask me. What we need is a Last Action Hero to save the day...
Posted by SoSad on August 1, 2008 at 2:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Those "big wigs" need to take a pay cut.
Posted by BabyzDaddy_01 on August 1, 2008 at 3:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The rich pay 95% of all the taxes and we're STILL in debt? WTF?! Either we're really worse off than anyone can imagine if that scenario's true or Morris1 should re-check his sources.
I think it's: the top 5% (income-wise) of taxpayers are not paying enough taxes.
Posted by fungus on August 1, 2008 at 3:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ms_California:
Try again... Sit through "Red Sonia" and you deserve a medal! (Rumor has it that's what Arnold makes his kids watch when they're being punished!)
Posted by fungus on August 1, 2008 at 3:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
high_society:
I totally agree! Complaining on these forums does nothing!
It is our responsibility to put pressure on our elected officials to ensure that they are looking out for our well-being, rather than spending willie-nilly on their pet projects and other social programs when we don't have the cash. This state NEEDS to be run more like a business... when time are tough, lay-offs and cutbacks ensue!
Posted by EthicalPerson on August 1, 2008 at 5:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Terminate the Terminator!
Posted by sparks240 on August 1, 2008 at 5:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I also voted for the porn star. I liked her platform.
Posted by sparks240 on August 1, 2008 at 5:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And her movies are better than Arnolds!
Posted by mikeb6804 on August 1, 2008 at 6:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Let's put the blame where it belongs. On the state legislature. How long have these clucks had to craft and agree on a budget? Instead they work on stupid and useless laws. After they do agree on a budget, send them home and let them work 1-2 days a week and be paid accordingly. Most of them are nothing but a bunch of political hacks who will not cut out entitlements and expenditures which shouldn't exist anyway.
Posted by THESILKY1 on August 1, 2008 at 6:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Heres the Skinny.
The Govenator needs to govern the state. Don't punish the state work force, instead why don't you take care of the problem (Your Legislature)). As for the state worker, we are so behind the eight ball when it comes to salaries, it is stupid to say were overpaid. I personally went twelve years without a raise (Thanks Pete). Even at K-Mart you get a cost of living raise, at least once a year.
Take care of the problem, you stated you would fix. Politics as usual, only the state budget has tripled (Nice Job) Buddy......
Give Jay the 30 billion he needs to build more hotels for crims.....
Posted by ironwoman on August 1, 2008 at 6:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, everyone stop complaining and do something about it....you waste so much time on these posters and you all saw it coming!
(sarcasm)
Posted by marco85 on August 1, 2008 at 6:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hey, megnosis, first of all you don't think that 5% of people paying "only" 60% of taxes is enough?! That's 5 people out of a hundred paying the tab for 60 people out of a hundred! Secondly, your numbers are wrong. You should check out this recent article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12165...
People below the median income pay only 2.9% of total taxes. So the "rich" that you're whining about, you know the ones who do all the employing?, are paying over 93% of all taxes!
The solution to this budget crisis is not about taxing the rich. It's about fixing a wasteful government, with a 40% increase in revenue, that's squandering our money on useless programs, and funding the birth and raising of half of Mexico's children. Illegal immigration is costing this state billions of dollars each year. People who are taking the most out of society are putting in the least. Successful people who have sacrificed, and made a good living are paying enough. We have way too much politically correct government wasting our tax dollars on banning plastic bags, and fast food restaurants. Socialism has never worked, because there will always be lazy people taking advantage of the system.
Posted by freethought on August 1, 2008 at 10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Actually, Arnold has a higher track record of decent movies than Stallone (in my demented opinion, anyway). I liked all three Terminator flicks, Total Recall, True Lies, Predator, The Running Man, Eraser, and Collateral Damage (the last three to a degree - decent, but not great).
If you want to see the man at his worst, checkout Hercules In New York (Batman & Robin and Jingle All The Way were pretty horrible, too).
Posted by 2wheelsguy on August 1, 2008 at 10:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Only an idiot thinks state workers are overpaid. But idiots are the same folks who voted for the roidhead turned lardass governator Aunold! Let's terminate the Terminator; RECALL ARNOLD!
Posted by ebrockway on August 2, 2008 at 10:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I think it was all a bluff to get the legislature off their rear ends to pass a budget, and it backfired on Ah-nold something fierce.
They DO need to get something signed, and raising taxes will only incite more out of control spending, which will need yet ANOTHER tax hike, and on and on it goes...
Posted by freethought on August 2, 2008 at 6:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
One of this state's problems is the rediculous number of unneeded programs that serve very few and are super specific. Michael Shedlock, or MISH, offered some good ideas on which programs could be eliminated (link: http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspo...)
Wasteful programs include:
Small Business Loan Guarantee Program
Scrap the program and save $4,886
Heath and Human Service Agency
This bureaucratic boondogle provides advice to the state on health issues
Scrap the program and save $5,335
California Conservation Corp
Workforce development program
Government has no business doing workforce development
Scrap this in entirety and save $37,638
Department of Conservation Mineral Resources
An easy scrap in entirety.
The state has no business mapping mineral resources
Scrap and save $5,117
Housing and Community Development
Block Grants
An easy no brainer
Scrap the whole thing and save $4,276
Housing and Community Development
Enterprise Zones
A no brainer
Scrap this program and save $602
Housing and Community Development
Housing elements
This is a local thing and should be funded at local levels if needed.
Scrap this program and save $1,633
Housing and Community Development
Administration
Scrap this and save $848
Posted by freethought on August 2, 2008 at 6:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I forgot to mention that dollar amounts are in thousands (add ",000"). More wasteful programs:
California Science Center
This educational program should be paid for by those who use it.
Scrap the program (or the funding of it) and make the users pay for it
Save $17,934
California African American Museum
Same as above
Eliminate the funding and save $2,490
State Personnel Board Bilingual Service Program
Another no brainer
Scrap the program and save $5,522
Migrant Services
A no brainer
Scrap this program and save $6,866
Wildlife Conservation Board
This is easy.
Scrap the whole thing and save $204
California Tourism Commission
Scrap the program and save $1,047
Office Of Military and Aerospace Support
Scrap the program and save $557
California Film Commission
Scrap the program and save $1,204
Coastal Commission
Administration
Another easy one to kill
Scrap the program and save $1,729
Native American Heritage Commission
Scrap the program and save $786
Health planning and development
This is work training to promote recruitment of students into health fields
The program is obviously total and complete nonsense
Scrap it and save $5,059
Posted by freethought on August 2, 2008 at 6:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
yet more waste (yes, I am cutting and pasting from MISH's site):
Health planning and development
Song-Brown Program
This is work training to promote recruitment of students into health fields
The program is obviously total and complete nonsense
Scrap it and save $497
Health planning and development
Snaple Program
This is work training to promote recruitment of students into health fields
The program is obviously total and complete nonsense
Scrap it and save $9
Department of Health care services
Strategic Planning
This is an easy thing to eliminate
Savings $93,843
Coastal Energy Program
Another easy one to kill
Scrap the program and save $516
================================
Total savings by elimination of complete nonsense
$198,602(,000)
Posted by mandynathan on August 2, 2008 at 6:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Why don't they just start a new state of feudalism. That's just about where we're headed, at least in California.
Posted by freethought on August 2, 2008 at 6:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The article also makes an argument to trim various programs for an additional $1.4 billion in savings before even looking at the healthcare budget. The article goes on to say that another $18 billion can be saved by severely trimming "free" healthcare offered to those who have no insurance - not a complete denial of service, but a severe cut. Some of his cuts seem radical, but I can see his point (no that I agree completely), since we are facing a financial crisis of epidemic proportions due to out-of-control spending.
Any thoughts from anyone else?
Posted by bbbdugout on August 4, 2008 at 11:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
did someone say hard working state employees - I think that was a typing error - right - they backup to the pay window every two weeks - they have government jobs because they couldn't survive in the private sector - the benefits they recieve alone will put a burden on tax payers for the next three generations - but their no different then any other government agency or politians - just a bunch of thieves
(Requires free registration.)
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.