Click the Banner for More Info
Showing posts with label state. Show all posts
Showing posts with label state. Show all posts

Sunday, October 19, 2014

Tancredo tried to eliminate federal Dept. of Education. What chunks of state gov would he ax?

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

You knew Texas Gov. Rick Perry's famous Oops Moment would hurt Perry himself, because it made him look so stupid, but I really thought the substance of Perry's incomplete thought–that is, which federal departments should be shut down–would become more of a recurrent theme in conservative GOP primary circles.

I mean, it separates you from the crowd: Shut down the Commerce Department! The Education Department!

This comes up, just not so often.

For example, in a recent appearance on KLZ 560-AM's new "Wake Up" show with Randy Corporon, Rep. Tom Tancredo, who's running for governor, boasted about his efforts, when he was a regional director of the U.S. Department of Education, to shut down the Department of Education:

TANCREDO: I was elected to the State Legislature in 1976, re-elected two more times. I was appointed by Ronald Reagan to run the U.S. Department of Education’s regional office here, in Colorado – six state region. I did that for him and Bush I [one]. Our purpose was to try and implode the whole thing, because we wanted to get the federal government out of education, as much as possible. We couldn’t even get a Congressman to introduce the bill to abolish it, so we tried to do it administratively, and, um–.

HOST RANDY CORPORON: Starve the beast.

TANCREDO: Starve the beast.

CORPORON: Cut back the budget.

TANCREDO: Exactly. So, I found out that that’s what you had to do. That’s the only way you could actually get rid of people that were extraneous – let’s put it that way. [chuckles] I had 22o people employed at the U.S. Department of Education, in the regional office. Two hundred and twenty-two. Now, I emphasize the word ‘employed’. Some of those people were working there, [but] not many. And, um, it took me four years – and as I say, I had to go back to Washington every year and ask for a budget cut in order to actually work through the process of reducing the staff. And I — and there were other reasons why we ended up moving downward, but we got to the point that we had sixty people left, when I left, out of 222.

Left hanging here is, what departments would Tanc cut, wholesale, from state government? That would've been a more relevant direction for Corporon to steer the conversation, given that Tancredo is running for governor.

Perry, you recall, had three federal departments he'd shut down. You get the feeling, when it comes to state government, a guy like Tancredo can top that. Maybe we'll hear about it next time he's on KLZ.


View the original article here

Monday, October 6, 2014

Enterprise Apache Hadoop: State of the Union

So what's in store for 2014? This deck was from Shaun Connolly's (VP of Strategy, Hortonworks) State of the Union webinar. ...

So what's in store for 2014? This deck was from Shaun Connolly's (VP of Strategy, Hortonworks) State of the Union webinar.

In this deck, you'll find:
- Reflection on Enterprise Hadoop Market in 2013
- The latest releases and innovations within the open source community
- Highlight what's in store for Apache Hadoop and Big Data in 2014

Total Views0Views on SlideShare0Embed Views0

View the original article here

Sunday, September 28, 2014

Are we running a state or a fast food chain?

(Quite a smackdown of the Denver Post – promoted by Colorado Pols)

On Thursday, the Denver Post editorial board published a brief but disingenuous editorial that can only fairly be described as a declaration of war against Colorado’s middle class vis-à-vis Colorado’s state employees.

At issue, ostensibly, is the 3% pay raise that state employees have been advocating for since last fall and which was given temporary approval by the legislature’s Joint Budget Committee on Monday.

But really the issue goes well beyond state employees – this is an issue of whether Colorado is going to have an economy that works for the middle-class. This is about whether or not Colorado policymakers are going to lead on the issue of income inequality or whether they’re going to perpetuate economic stagnation for Colorado’s middle-class. The Post has clearly chosen the side of economic stagnation for the majority of Coloradans and now the question is which side are our elected leaders on?

The Post blithely states that the 3% raise plus average merit pay comes with an $88 million price tag. That number is presented without any citation or context in a deliberate attempt to stoke maximal outrage. The Post neglects to mention that the governor’s budget request is for $58.5 million in salary and merit pay funds, a request they seem to endorse when stating, “It’s not a question of whether state workers deserve a pay hike.”

So fully 2/3rds of what the Post insinuates is an extreme and untenable financial outlay had already been requested by the governor and is endorsed by the Post. Let us assume, arguendo, that the Post’s completely uncited $88 million figure is correct. The governor’s total budget request for 2014/15 is $21.9 billion dollars – $88 million dollars is just 0.4% of that total budget. If 30,000 middle-class workers aren’t worth 0.4% of our budget then what are they worth?

Next the Post posits another uncited data point, that “99% of state workers received some increment of merit pay” last year. This may actually be a true statement as far as it goes, but it doesn’t describe in any way the reality of the state’s merit pay system for workers. If you scored average on your performance plan (a Level 2 out of a possible 3) and had wages at or below the median in your salary range your merit pay ranged from 0.6% to 1.1%. That’s hardly the boondoggle that the Post would like to portray the merit system as. In fact, it means that many employees were, at best, keeping up with inflation. Is a pay raise actually a raise when it doesn’t actually increase your buying power?

To dive a little deeper into this complex issue let’s actually look at what’s happening in two departments, one “blue collar” and one “white collar” – Corrections and Information Technology. Based on data received by Colorado WINS from the Department of Personnel and Administration through an open records request, there were 2787 Correction Officer I and II’s with the state last year and only 12% received a Level 3 (the highest rating) on their performance evaluation, while 87% received a Level 2. In the Governor’s Office of Information Technology, a department one would anticipate to be stocked with high-achieving innovators motivated by potential merit pay, only 20% reached a Level 3, 78% received a Level 2. So while a significant reward for exceptional performance exists in theory, we see that in practice real gains through the merit pay system are few and far between.

Finally the Post gets to the issue of what they describe as a “generous” retirement savings plan that state employees enjoy. Let’s be absolutely clear – PERA is the only source of retirement income for state employees, they don’t receive Social Security – which also means that the state doesn’t pay the employers 6.2% share of Social Security tax either. In fact, in the latest PERA Comprehensive Annual Fiscal Report (CAFR) the state’s normal cost [1] for 2012 was just 1.64% of payroll. Compare that to the private sector where employers pay 6.2% of payroll into Social Security and 4.45% of payroll into some sort of tax deferred retirement plan. So the state’s annual contribution to their employee’s retirement is actually well below what the private sector provides, 1.64% compared to 10.65%. Meanwhile employees pay 8.05% of their annual pay into PERA. Can a system where employees pay 83% of the normal costs of their retirement be accurately described as “generous”?

During the recession state employees tightened their belts to continue to provide the highest possible level of service to the people of Colorado while working without any pay increases for 4 years. Let’s not forget that for two of those four years the employees not only didn’t receive a raise but they elected to take a 2.5% take home pay cut in order to stabilize PERA, which had been savaged by the excesses of Wall Street and the near collapse of the world economy. Last year, as the state economy improved, state employees were voted their first raise since the 2008 legislative session.

So with the full picture in front of us the question is, is the governor’s proposed 1.5% base building raise sufficient to recruit, maintain and motivate a qualified work force for the state? One needs only to look and the Consumer Price Index to see just how short of the mark that initial proposal falls.

bls-denver-cpi

While state employees saw no raise in 2010, 2011 and 2012 and take home pay cuts in 2010 and 2011, inflation continued unabated – eroding the buying power of more than 30,000 workers by 7% from 2009 through 2012. These are workers who live in every county in this state; they are your friends, family and neighbors. Their economic impact is felt in every local economy – from Phillips County on the eastern plains to Delta on the western slope and literally everywhere in between.

The state is Colorado’s largest employer and when state workers fall behind it drags down every local economy in the state. If you say that you care about rural Colorado’s future then you should support wages for workers who live in rural Colorado that let them keep their heads ever-so-slightly above water.

As the governor stated a week ago in his State of the State address,

While the national economy around us remains sluggish, Colorado’s unemployment rate has not gone up. It has gone down, to the lowest levels since 2008. This is our fourth consecutive year of economic growth. According to a study from the University of Colorado’s Leeds School of Business, we can expect robust job growth in virtually every sector of the economy this year. Colorado is ranked among the top five states in the entire country for business, careers and job growth.

These are all things that we as Coloradans should be immensely proud of. But job growth and a friendly business environment alone won’t move our economy forward. What competitive business pays their employees, year after year, less than the cost of living? Are we running government like a competitive business, as so many advocate we should, or are we running a fast food chain?

Our economy is driven by the middle class and state employees are a critical part of that middle class. A 2011 Denver Business Journal article cites the average worker pay in Colorado as $47,510. The state’s own salary survey this year showed that state employee salaries lag private sector workers by 9.2%. Don’t believe the state’s own survey? An independent audit by Buck Consultants shows that state employee salaries lag by 6.5%. Take your pick of numbers – it doesn’t change the fact that state employee pay lags behind private sector pay. And a 2% base building raise in 2013 followed by a 3% raise in 2014 doesn’t come close to putting workers back in the same financial position they were at in 2009.

This Post editorial is not just an attack on state employees; it is a divisive and insidious ideological attack on all middle class Coloradans. The Post wants to make this an issue of class warfare – pitting state employees against other middle class workers. But you cannot separate state employees from the rest of the middle class – state employees are the middle class.

Our economy nationally and here in Colorado isn’t working for the middle class. As the Denver Post reported in August, “In Colorado, the inflation-adjusted median hourly wage is down 1.7 percent [since 2000]…” Nationally we have unprecedented levels of income inequality. Workers are more productive than ever but that increased productivity is going to record corporate profits and record executive pay while middle class workers are in their third decade of stagnant wages. The state has a $500 million budget surplus, taking 0.4% of the state budget and investing a small portion of our annual budget back into Colorado’s communities helps the entire Colorado economy. State employees shop in your neighborhood grocery store, they buy clothes for their kids in your local stores, and they buy lunch at the restaurant on Main St.

In their editorial the Post, as an argument against state employee raises, says “…the pay of most private-sector workers [hasn’t] ballooned.” Shared misery is not a plan for economic growth. Wages need to rise for all middle class Coloradans and as Colorado’s largest employer the state can help Colorado’s middle class finally break free of the economic doldrums and start participating in the economic growth we all keep hearing so much about.

[1] Normal costs are the percentage of salary necessary to pay for the future benefits of an existing employee.


View the original article here

Friday, March 21, 2014

Westword interview offers illuminating national perspective on abortion issues in state elections

(Promoted by Colorado Pols) In a Westword interview published today, NARAL President Ilyse Hogue says Virginia's November gubernatorial race is "something of a test case" to find out if the anti-choice positions of a candidate prove to be his downfall, just as abortion issues tipped the electoral scales against 2010 Republican Senate candidate Ken Buck here in Colorado.

Westword's Michael Roberts reports:

The Virginia governor's race between abortion opponent Ken Cuccinelli and pro-choice hopeful Terry McAuliffe, which will come to a head in November 2013, a year before most of the other contests, is something of a test case, Hogue believes. Moreover, the strategy NARAL is employing there is the same one that helped elect Senator Bennet in Colorado — highlighting the anti-abortion positions of an opponent (in Bennet's case, Ken Buck) whether or not they make them central to their campaign.

"Senator Bennet and politicians like him recognize that when the extreme positions of opponents are exposed and candidates are forced to speak to them and defend them in the public square, they lose," Hogue maintains. "You hear politicians say, 'I don't want to talk about this. It's a social issue, and people only want to hear about jobs and the economy.' But that's fundamentally untrue. Women's economic livelihood is tied up with their ability to take charge of their family planning. That's the real way Americans understand reproductive health and reproductive choice, and the extremists are very out of step with the common family experience in this country. We applaud Michael Bennet for his willingness to expose the extreme agenda of his opponent, and we think it's a winning strategy we'd like to see replicated around the country.

"In Virginia, we're seeing indications that voters who are otherwise on the fence or identify themselves as independents are being driven to not only go to the polls but vote for the pro-choice candidate when they see the extreme positions of the opponents extreme positions on choice — and Senator Bennet's campaign provided great modeling on that," she continues. "The protection of women to make personal decisions with their families and their doctors has not traditionally been a partisan issue. In Colorado, the laws were passed under a Republican governor [John Love, who signed a bill allowing abortion in the state circa 1967]. So, in these hyper-partisan times, we're looking for states like Colorado to exemplify the fact that this is a family issue, not a Democratic or Republican issue, and that we expect our leaders to act accordingly."

If you've been amazed at the starring role abortion issues have played on the political stage here is Colorado recently, you'll enjoy the national perspective on the topic provided in Roberts' piece today.


View the original article here

Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Will Republican state chair be scolding Pueblo GOP county chair?

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

A couple years ago, GOP Chair Ryan Call suggested that Sarah Arnold, who was an El Paso County GOP Secretary, resign because Republican office holders are not supposed to publicly criticize Republican policies–or favor one GOP primary candidate over another.

Call wrote that if Arnold "does not feel she can separate her personal opinions from her role as a County Party Secretary than she should consider resigning her position as a Party officer and thereby be free to speak out and be an advocate for whatever issues or causes, or for or against whatever candidates or Republican officeholders, she felt was most appropriate, free of the duty of loyalty and obligatory support that is a necessary corollary to official Party leadership." [BigMedia emphasis]

Pueblo County GOP Chair Becky Mizel should be hearing from Ryan Call soon, if he's consistent, because Mizel showed clear support for Tom Tancredo during an Aug. 16 radio interview.

At least that's what I take away from this discussion among Mizel, KNUS' Peter Boyles, and Jennifer Kearns, who's a spokesperson for the recall effort.

BOYLES: You guys can’t expect somebody with at least a room temperature I.Q. to go, “Boy, that Republican Party in Colorado, those are my guys!”

MIZEL: Yeah, but Peter, look at the people like Tom Tancredo, who are Republicans. You know, we’ve got Tom Tancredo, Cruz, people like that. [BigMedia emphasis]

BOYLES: Huh-uh. Tommy is the red-headed stepson of the Republican party, and all three of us know it. They just wish Tom would go away. I mean, that’s the truth. You know it. I know it. Becky knows it. I think smart people listening to this radio show wish – I mean, they believe,– not believe, they know the Republican Party of Colorado would just as soon Tancredo go soak his head.

KERNS: Well, that’s why –

MIZEL: Well, the same goes for Ted Cruz and Ted Cruz isn’t going to go away.

BOYLES: No. I agree.

MIZEL: So, you know, it’s — I think you do have to take it over from the inside.

You'd think that Mizel, who's found herself in the media spotlight due to the attempted recall of State Sen. Angela Giron, doesn't like Ryan Call much, given that she wants to take over the state GOP "from the inside." And she's certainly not scared of him, as she's violating rules that Call clearly supports. 

I shared Mizel's Boyles' interview with Arnold, and she wrote me that she's not surprised by Call's inconsistency in enforcing the thou-shalt-not- criticize-Republicans rule:

Arnold: Ryan Call is perfectly consistent in his inconsistency. He arbitrarily and capriciously applies the by-laws as it suits him (for example, it's okay if he contributes to a Democrat while a party officer, which is a clear violation of the by-laws, but not okay for someone to have a policy disagreement with the House Majority Leader while a party officer, as in my case–a topic on which the by-laws are silent). In fact, he's happy to change the bylaws so he could endorse Romney for President, an unprecedented act. The irony would be even more incredible since many Party officers (including Ryan) turned a blind eye in 2010 to the numerous endorsements of Tancredo as a third party candidate made by other party officers across the state, if he were to choose to pursue removal for mere comments about a candidate that don't appear, to me at least, to be an endorsement.


View the original article here

Friday, December 27, 2013

Has GOP recall candidate noticed that multiple issues are discussed in the state legislature?

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

You have to wonder what's up with Republican George Rivera, who's running to replace Sen. Angela Giron in a recall election, when he dismisses his unapologetic support for the personhood amendment by saying,

Rivera: "You know, the thing is, is this election is about one thing and one thing only"

That's what Rivera told KZNT talk-show host Derrick Wilburn Saturday.

Wilburn should have asked Rivera if he's ever noticed that guns aren't the only topic discussed down at the Capitol. Actually, it's next to impossible to keep track of all the different issues, including abortion issues.

Voters should know that, based on his opposition to abortion, even for rape, Rivera would have supported the five bills introduced last session that restricted access to abortion services in Colorado or banned it outright. (See Planned Parenthood Votes Colorado‘s legislative scorecard for details.)

Obviously these bills weren't going anywhere in Colorado now, with pro-choice Democrats in control, but things could easily change. If so, Colorado could pass legislation similar to what's become law in states across the country, restricting a women’s right to obtain an abortion. (See the Guttmacher Institute's chart for details.)

It's silly for Rivera to say that the election of any state senator is about one issue. That's not how representative government works.

Wilburn knows this, and he almost certainly saw, at least, that Texas passed one of the nation's most restrictive abortion laws just this year. So, he should have asked Rivera what he was thinking.


View the original article here