I’ve been too preoccupied to conduct my usual fisking of Seattle Times editorials in recent days, but that hasn’t made them any less worthy of mockery.
Temporarily increase the King County sales tax to maintain police, jails and courts? “Enough is enough,” the Times proclaims. “This page does not have a detailed, prescriptive answer to King County’s whole problem,” Frank Blethen’s crack editorialists admit, but that doesn’t stop them from insisting that criminal justice services — which account for over 70 percent of the county’s general fund — must be maintained at current levels, in the face of dramatically declining revenues, but with no tax increases. I guess that’s what passes for bold leadership down at Fairview Fanny.
And the Times consistently pushes its no-tax/yes-spend prescription on a number of other issues. We hear little argument from the Times that the state isn’t underfunding basic education, yet they maintain their virulent opposition to the sort of revenue hikes or tax restructuring necessary to pay for it. And just today their editorial page lauds First Lady Michelle Obama for her soft approach to childhood obesity that doesn’t include government mandates or taxes.
What is most appealing about the first lady’s approach is it is neither heavy-handed nor naive. The federal government will not become the food police but will instead encourage sensible initiatives such as added sidewalks to spur walking and exercise.
And how will we pay for these sidewalks and public service campaigns and whatnot? Certainly not by taxing sweetened beverages, the number one source of calories in the average American diet. The Times acknowledges that “obesity contributes to the nation’s soaring health-care bill,” but a targeted tax aimed at reducing consumption of empty calories while providing a revenue source to help pay for obesity’s growing consequences, well, that would be “heavy-handed.” And worst of all, it would be, you know, a tax.
So how would the Times editors balance their own conflicting demands for more government services and lower taxes? Well, despite their refusal to put forth “prescriptive answers,” I suppose we might tease a few hints as to how they might run state government, by examining how they have run their own business, and imagining how very different Washington state might look today had Frank Blethen been governor over much of the past decade, with his editorial board holding the reins of the legislative leadership.
Buoyed upon the economic euphoria of the previous bubble, the first thing Gov. Blethen would have done upon taking office in early 2001, would be to purchase the state of Maine, and at a highly inflated price, only to sell it at a total loss a decade later after pumping millions of dollars into subsidizing his acquisition’s own growing deficits. Then, with hundreds of millions of dollars of highly leveraged debt coming due at the same time revenues started their precipitous tumble, Gov. Blethen would fight vociferously to drive neighboring Oregon out of business in the hope of attracting a substantial portion of its loyal taxpayers.
But none of this would be enough to balance the books. Wages would have to be cut, benefits slashed, jobs eliminated and unions busted… because it was organized labor, after all, who was really responsible for that whole Maine fiasco. And, just like the Times has managed to maintain the breadth, depth and quality of their news coverage while closing bureaus and dramatically shrinking their newsroom, so too our state government, under Gov. Blethen’s deft leadership, would be able to maintain, or even increase critical public services and infrastructure, while substantially decreasing both salaries and staff. I mean, just imagine how much better DMV would function if they had fewer offices and less staff servicing the same number of customers… and at lower wages to boot. All we need to do is make government operate more like a business!
As for schools, despite the worsening revenue crisis, we could trust Gov. Blethen to finally cut class sizes… by, you know, physically cutting classroom sizes, the same way the Times has cut the width of its newsprint by 15% in recent years. Just crowd those desks a little closer; the kids will never know the difference.
You get the point. Frank Blethen has done such a remarkable job guiding his proud family newspaper from perpetual prosperity to the verge of bankruptcy, that if there is anybody who we should turn to for advice on how to fix what ails state and local government, it is he and his fellow economic wunderkind on the Times editorial board.
I’m just sayin’.
UPDATE:
Carl points out that he kinda had this idea first.
Trust me Republicans, you do NOT want your State of Federal government run like a business, it would double or triple the cost. I’ve worked in government and private sector. The private sector pays over twice as much as I got working for the government directly. If you live in the real world and try to convince someone that Microsoft, Amazon, Google and the Federal Government will all compete for a computer science grad and pay them similar salaries, you’d be LAUGHED at. 99% of government jobs (with few notable exception around corruption) are FAR FAR below the private sector pay/benefits. Why did I ever have my Federal job? It was a job in the area where I used to live, close to my family. There weren’t many private jobs in my expertise in that area. When I moved out to Seattle, I went private, and doubled my salary the first year. Seriously folks. You get what you pay for.
@1 99% of government jobs (with few notable exception around corruption) are FAR FAR below the private sector pay/benefits
Really? Can you provide the supporting data?
Goldy queefs: ‘If Frank Blethen was elected governor…’
He STILL wouldn’t give you a job Goldy. I suggest you seek elsewhere, if you are looking at all that is. This chronic unemployment of yours has to stop sometime. Good luck! (And I mean that sincerely.)
Sidewalks usually are paid for with special assessments against abutting properties. And they aren’t cheap — pouring a sidewalk in front of your house can cost thousands of dollars. And you’re given no choice about pyaing for it, nor can you blame your local elected city council members because, you know, it’s a federal mandate so the city fathers had no choice, either. None of this is a problem for Frank — as long as they don’t build sidewalks in front of his house.
@3 Goldy doesn’t need a job, and he certainly doesn’t want want. Why should anyone work for someone else? Entrepreneurship and independent consulting is the wave of the future. McGavick’s $2.13-an-hour waitresses are a thing of the past; the future consists of hospitality consultants charging restaurants B2B rates of $50 an hour or more. Why shouldn’t all workers go into business for themselves and charge their business clients the same “shop rates” that businesses charge their customers? Why should business owners have a monopoly on business ownership? Workers deserve to ride that gravy train, too! After all, they do all the work.
@2 I learned yesterday that another of my valued contacts in state government is leaving. Today is his last day. Retirement is more attractive than staying in a state government with downsized staffs (= more work for survivors) and frozen pay trying to serve an ungrateful and hostile public. Almost without exception, the state employees I know (and use as information and policy contacts) are leaving as soon as they can get out. I don’t have to ask them why; I know why — too much bullshit, not enough appreciation, low pay and benefit takeaways, and above all, they’re fed up with a citizenry that takes out its hatred of taxes on government workers.
@4
Frank and his buddies probably live in subdivisions where the community association has barred putting in side walks. I mean, first it’s side walks, then it’s street trees, next thing you know people will want to put up clothes lines. Clothes lines! What is the world coming too?
The &%#$#@! city of Tacoma thinks they need they need their own asphalt plant. They could buy that asphalt on the free market for half the price!
Or maybe not.
@1 The really sad thing is the Feds pay far better and have better benefits than the State or any city or county government around here.
@2 the state job classifications and pay are a matter of public record. I’m sure there is enough material there to do a full salary study.
But just as another anecdote, my aunt works as senior policy counsel for a state agency. She graduated 5th in her class from one of the top 5 law schools in the country. She’s a very experienced attorney with a very impressive resume, including a stint working for the Federal Government, and as an executive for a Fortune 50 company. She could easily make 4x what she currently does by returning to private practice, and even more if she did consulting on the sort of regulatory matters she deals with as a policy counsel. Especially as she’s widely recognized as THE authority in the state on the area of law she deals with.
@4 Frank lives on a double lot fronting on Lake Washington in the Mt. Baker neighborhood. Several years ago, the property was assessed at $4 million.
A few years ago, the Seattle Times Company was worth around $900 million, and the Blethen family owned 51% of it (the other 49% was owned by Knight-Ridder, which subsequently was acquired by McClatchy), which put the Blethen family holdings in STC at about $460 million. And that doesn’t count other businesses, investments, or personal assets held by family members. There are a couple dozen Blethen heirs, but even so, Frank is (or was) a very rich guy.
Chris Stefan @9:
Yes and no.
GS salaries are definitely well above Washington public employee levels, but the health insurance is vastly better for state employees. The employer contribution percentage for WA is much higher than for the feds, most prescription co-pays are lower, and so forth.
re RR @11:
Since McClatchy now values their 49% at approximately $0.00, methinks Frank’s STC stake is rather lower in value than he thought it would be by now. Of course, he’s undoubtedly clipping coupons and/or investing in companies with better balance sheets than his own, so I’m sure Frank isn’t really hurting.
Of course, if he were to go on to the big printing press in the sky in 2010, he could avoid significant federal
deathestate taxes. Waiting until 2011 could put his tax liability back to pre-Dubya levels. I wonder whether Tom Stewart was chuckling about that as he was falling out of the sky the other day.N @ #12: Don’t think Blethen hasn’t noticed.
Rather than pay an extra shilling from his wealth for taxes, he’s now gunning for the insurance benefits held by government workers.
In an editorial which rushes through questionable assumptions and disputable statements as if they were proven facts beyond question, his position is summed up in the lead paragraph:
“Welcome to the real world of paying more of health-care benefits”
Of course, the “reforms” of which he speaks is 1984-speak for making employees pay more and get less. He imperially adds that any cost increases incurred by the government plan are entirely due to “increased use” by employees (implying that it’s all their fault anyway).
He ignores, of course, that state employee’s also pay for their families to be covered under the plan, and increased use can be accounted for by spouses who were previously covered by their own employee health insurance, but which have been laid off over the past year. Or if not laid off, their spouses’ employer has taken a page from Blethen’s own book, and increased the employee cost and decreased the benefits to the point where it no longer makes sense for the employee to keep paying out premiums for benefits they never receive.
He also ignores the fact that public-sector employees often take lower salaries in return for better benefits. He wants them to keep the lower salaries, and then slash the benefits in a “race to the bottom” with the private sector.
Of course, if we had a decent national health care system like the rest of the industrialized world, this would all be a moot point.
Roger @ 6:
I can understand their desire to get out. What I can’t understand is the folks that scream and yell about “incompetents” in government but then somehow think you can get (and KEEP) a qualified, competent, and professional workforce by slashing wages, benefits, and denigrating their choice to serve the public.
Goldy, you’re fooling no one. They didn’t hire you. Move on.
That crazy nut professor who shot up her University was a far-left Obama supporter. HAHAHAHAHA!
http://www.bostonherald.com/ne.....ngType=Loc
“A family source said Bishop, a mother of four children – the youngest a third-grade boy – was a far-left political extremist who was “obsessed” with President Obama to the point of being off-putting.”
@17
Most people who go one shooting rampages are obsessed with something or another.
Scott Roeder was.
The kids at Columbine were, Tim Mcveigh was.
@1 your right I don’t want the goverment to be run like a business. Business exists to make a profit. I don’t want goverment to make a profit, that means they are taking to much from the taxpayers. Business need to take risks, and those risks need to be made with there own money. If goverment takes a risk it is taking it with our money. Goverment should be run more like a non-profit organization. I should take in no more than it needs. It should live within its means. Taxes should be for revnue to run goverment and provide th services that only a goverment should run, like fire, police, transit, road construction and the military just to name a few examples. goverment needs to understand that they are not needed in everything. Other organizations do the job better. Like churches and charities. Goverment should back off and let these groups do there thing. We would save money. We could help more people by getting most of the red tape eliminated.
Taxes should be kept to as low as possiable. Why? Because they hurt. There are people who are so taxed so mush that they are hurting. If someone is responsible and lives within there means but there taxes may cause them to lose there house or business that is tyranny. Tyranny that is unintended yes, but tyranny none the less.
As a Conservative I do not like paying taxes (I don’t have to like it I just have to do it.) I pay them because they provide revnue for goverment we all have the obligation to pay taxes. I just want to see those taxes raised justly and used only for what goverment is mandated to do.
poor goldy, still upset because the times didnt hire him.
…dude, just let it go…