Ambushed!

Well, guess what.  The House State Affairs committee overturned their vote yesterday and they have decided to pass Rep. Lake's legislation to do away with retiree's COLA and send it with a recommendation to pass to the House floor.  So I'm giving you my opinion of what happened today in that committee.  

It was really ugly.  The item wasn't put on the agenda, and Chairman Leorstscher (R) kept it to the very end of the meeting.  He even admitted to reporters afterwards that the decision to keep the issue off the agenda was intentional so nobody could come to testify.  

All of the Republicans who voted in our favor changed their votes. 

Here's what I think happened.  When the legislation first came up, all of the Democrats and about half of the Republicans voted their conscience and rejected the bill.  They made the decision based on solid information given to them by the PERSI Board members and several of us who testified against the bill.  But sometime after the meeting, Rep. Lake (R), who sponsored the bill, put his head together with Republican leadership and the Governor's office and they decided that this action simply couldn't stand.  

Sometime last night Wayne Hoffman (a right-wing blogger who used to work for Bill Sali, R) sent an email out to all of the members of the committee with some actuarial tables saying how big the "unfunded liability" will grow if we don't take this little bit of money away from our retirees.  The people who changed their votes used that table to "hang their hat on", and several of them spoke of how angry they were at the PERSI Board because they hadn't given them all of the information.  

The first point is that all of these Representatives should have considered the source of the material they were getting.  Wayne Hoffman is hardly an expert on investments.  Secondly, even if the material they received from Wayne Hoffman raised some questions in their minds, they should have given the PERSI Board members an opportunity to explain the information and to tell them why it was not applicable to this situation.  But they didn't.  

The fact that they would take information provided by a right wing-nut (my opinion) of the conservative movement over the wise and considered advice of the PERSI Board should be frightening to every voter in Idaho.  Frankly, I think many of these Representatives are smart enough to know this, which leads me to believe that they were given the information simply to have an excuse to change their votes to keep the Republican leadership and the Governor happy.  

Although these Representatives said that this information given to them by Wayne Hoffman was intentionally kept from them by the PERSI Board, that simply isn't true.  Unfunded liabilities were discussed in the first hearing, and all of the Representatives had an opportunity to express their concern.  Yet, they didn't. So all this drama and sudden concern about this unfunded liability looks to me to be pure theatrics.  

One very telling point was that Representative Raul Labrador, who voted in favor of the COLA yesterday, was conspicuously absent from today's committee hearing.  Of course, he's running for a statewide office, and he was certainly smart enough to know he didn't want to go on record as voting against a COLA for more than 33,000 PERSI retirees!  I just wish he had the courage of his convictions to come and stand up to the rest of the Republicans, who apparently are willing to sell out due to some pressure from above.  

The Dems were really angry.  They all testified and all of them said how this action was reprehensible and they all complained that the Chair did not put this on the agenda and how they did not give PERSI a chance to address this concern by not informing them of the hearing.  

It will go to the floor quickly, probably tomorrow, and then it will go to the Senate.  They are advancing this very quickly because they only have until next Wednesday to get it passed because at that time the COLA will have taken effect.  

Please contact all of your state Representatives and urge them to vote against this bill.  And, if you sent a "thank you" to any of these Republicans who were for the COLA before they were against it, please send them an email right now and let them know how you feel.  Here's a link to the state house membership website: http://legislature.idaho.gov/house/membership.cfm

  

Rep. Lynn Luker (R)

Rep. Eric Anderson (R)

Rep. Max Black (R)

Rep. Carlos Bilbao (R)

Rep. Raul Labrador (R) 

Rep. Russ Mathews (R)

Rep. Steve Kren (R)

Rep. Erik Simpson (R)

  

Success on HCR 42!

Well, we had a real success this morning.  The House State Affairs Committee voted to hold HCR 42 this morning.  Quite a surprise!  And yet, why should we be surprised when our legislators do the right thing?  We should expect it, am I right?  What this means is that, unless Rep. Lake (R) Blackfoot, the sponsor of the bill, finds a way to bring it back or slip it through in some other fashion, we should be okay on this and the PERSI retirees will get the 2.48% COLA that was recommended by the PERSI board.  

What bothered me most about this legislation was that the justification for the legislation was touted to be "fairness" and "equity".  By this they meant that we shouldn't give PERSI retirees a COLA because active public employees are suffering from furloughs and layoffs.  As active public employees and as retired public employees, we all need to band together to stand up for each other.  To me this looked like a way to further attack the morale of our state workers and divide us as a group. 

It is true that active state employees are suffering from furloughs, layoffs and a lack of raises.  But visiting that suffering on our retirees, who just last year were forced off state health insurance, won't do anything to ease the suffering of active public employees.  

Here is the truth about the COLA:  

• If it were eliminated, there would be NO SAVINGS of state money.  The money in the PERSI fund comes from contributions of retirees in the years they were working, contributions of active employees, contributions of employers, and investment income.  
• Part of the COLA will be to make up for deferred COLAs from previous years
• Contribution changes for active employees are determined by many factors, but will NOT BE AFFECTED by this COLA. 
• The PERSI Board recommended this COLA, and the legislature, to our knowledge, has NEVER over-ridden their recommendation.
• PERSI retirees are not just retired state employees, but are retired teachers, firefighters, ditch riders, police officers, and many others. 

Here are the people who voted to support public employees and retirees and who have confidence in the PERSI Board of Directors.  Please call or email them to say "thank you".   

Rep. Elfreda Higgins (D)

Rep. Anne Pasley-Stuart (D)

Rep. Lynn Luker (R)

Rep. Elaine Smith (D)

Rep. Eric Anderson (R)

Rep. Max Black (R)

Rep. Carlos Bilbao (R)

Rep. Raul Labrador (R) 

Rep. Russ Mathews (R)

Rep. Steve Kren (R)

Rep. Erik Simpson (R)

Rep. Mary Lou Shepherd (D)

Rep. Phylis King (D)  

Here are the people who voted against public employees and retirees and who apparently do not have confidence in the PERSI Board of Directors.  Please contact them to find out why they are not supporting public employees and retirees.   

Rep. Thomas Loertscher (R)

Rep. Bert Stevenson (R)

Rep. Ken Andrus (R)

Rep. Brent Crane (R)

Rep. Joe Palmer (R)  

Here's a link to a page with all of their contact information: http://legislature.idaho.gov/about/contactbycommitteePrinterFriendly.htm?searchText=22&house=House

Cut your wasteful spending, Governor Otter!

Governor Otter continues to advocate trimming government spending which not only costs the jobs of state employees, but also costs services to other Idahoans who are in desperate need of those services.  Families are going hungry at an alarming rate, and yet the current administration and most of our Idaho legislators still refuse to look at raising taxes on the wealthy or even cutting sales tax exemptions for large corporations.  There are many ways the state could raise the revenue side of the budget equation without raising taxes on low and middle income Idahoans, but for some reason, the powers that be simply refuse to even consider taking these actions.  

But what is even more frustrating is Governor Otter's unwillingness to look at his own contributions to wasteful spending.  "Big spending amid cuts" in the Statesman is an article about how ITD used almost $70,000 of taxpayers money on groundbreaking or dedication ceremonies since last June.  The article said "Otter's office wanted [these ceremonies] to be the 'governor's signature events.'"  In this time of recession and state employee lay offs, this doesn't seem like a good use of my tax money.  The article is interesting (and long), but the most interesting part of the story to me is that no one seems to be responsible.  At least no one is claiming responsibility.  I'd like to see whose name is on the contract and who approved the signing of the contract.  And I'd like a Governor who is responsible enough to question whether this expense was justified, rather than just claiming he didn't know how much the ceremonies cost or which budget was paying for it.  Certainly he's smart enough to know someone was paying for the events, and he should be responsible enough to make the call to cancel this type of event at least until we've climbed out of this recession hole.  

We have to give kudos to Representative JoAn Wood (R), Rigby.  She seems to be the only one who is outraged by this expense.  "I am appalled. I am appalled," she told the Statesman.  So are we, Representative Wood.  So are we.  To spend almost $70,000 of our taxpayer money to give the Governor a nice photo op is unacceptable in this economy.  Here's the link to the whole story: http://www.idahostatesman.com/newsupdates/story/1062582.html

Oregonians are acting like grown-ups!

The results of Oregon's special election to actually raise taxes on those people who can most afford to pay them is a breath of fresh air!  Here's a link to a story in the Oregonian: http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/voters_pass_tax_measures_by_bi.html


This shows us that a growing number of people are finally waking up to the fact that you can't have good services provided by your state government unless you're willing to pay for them.  And the truth is, many Americans are willing to pay for them, they just think that others should help shoulder the burden.  For too many years the low and middle income earners in Idaho have been paying far more than their fair share of taxes, and big business, big landowners (farmers), and wealthy people get all the breaks.  


While there's no doubt that Idaho voters are different than Oregon voters, and passing any kind of a tax hike in Idaho could be fatal for legislators in an election year when so many of them are up for re-election, here's hoping they will at least act like grown-ups.  Is it too much to hope that all of our state legislators will do what's best not only for state employees, but for the citizens themselves?  There is a bigger demand for state services now than there ever has been.  More Idahoans are unemployed and need retraining.  Is this the time to keep cutting funds for our colleges and universities?  More unemployed Idahoans than ever are applying for food stamps and other assistance.  Is this the time to cut Health and Welfare?  More young families than ever will rely on state parks for their family's camping vacations.  Is this the time to cut Parks and Rec?  


Here's hoping our own state legislators will realize that they MUST start looking at the revenue side of the budget equation.  We can't meet the needs of Idahoans by spending cuts alone.  We MUST find a way to bring in more money.  Here's for passing Rep. Shirley Ringo's temporary surtax on those Idahoans who make more than $125,000.  Here's for eliminating some of the big tax exemptions given to large companies like Micron.  Do we need to keep giving companies like Micron tax exemptions when they continue to ship jobs overseas and lay off more Idahoans?  


Here's for state legislators who are willing to make the hard decisions even if they do face difficult reelection campaigns.  It would be nice to see more idealism (working for the greater good) rather than more ideology in our state legislature.  

This week in the legislature

Nothing much has happened on our issues in the legislature yet, but I think things will start to bust loose next week.  I've told you about the legislation IPEA is supporting concerning the change in Human Resources to put authority back under the Personnel Commission.  Well, nothing has been introduced on that issue yet, but we're definitely working behind the scenes.  IPEA has a great legislative committee that is lobbying members of the germane committees as I write this.  The same can be said of our efforts to amend Title 18 (bribery statute) so we can conduct a statewide employee recognition program.  

There is a least one thing coming up that I think IPEA will be supporting, although I haven't run this through the legislative committee yet, so I am now speaking for myself. I have heard a rumor that a legislator may introduce a bill to require part time legislators to be treated the same as part time classified state employees when it comes to health insurance.  Remember when Mr. Gwartney upped the premiums that part timers have to pay for insurance?  Well, you should know that state legislators are exempt from that ruling and are considered the same as full time state employees when it comes to health insurance.  Here's an article by Dan Popkey in today's Statesman about this issue:

http://www.idahostatesman.com/1306/story/1051139.html

I am meeting with the legislator who may be proposing this legislation next week. If you will remember when this issue came up previously that the universities, at least BSU, was fighting the change in premiums for part timers as well.  Since that time a deal was struck and now part time faculty at BSU have also been given the same status as the part time legislators.  This leaves only about a hundred BSU classified employees that have been hung out to dry.  I think this is unfair.  I think the only fair way to deal with this issue is to consider all part time employees to be the same, whether they are classified employees, adjunct faculty, or legislators.  Of course, my preference is that they would just eliminate the change Mr. Gwartney put in place last year, but if they are going to increase health insurance premiums for part time employees, they should do it for all of them, or better yet, in my opinion, for none of them.  If they pass legislation that requires them all to be treated the same, I think the issue could go away entirely.  

Call for fairness in taxation

There certainly is a lot of activity at the new and improved statehouse, but none of our issues have surfaced yet.  That doesn't mean we're not working on them, though.  IPEA has been working all summer and fall to get two important pieces of legislation written: One would change the position of "Administrator" of Human Resources to "Director" of Human Resources; one would place that Director under the authority of the Idaho Personnel Commission.  The legislation has been written, and we have a couple of sponsors. We are still assisting the Representative who is carrying the bill to find cosponsors, and we think we may be making progress here.  Why is this important?  There are two main reasons:  This change would increase the professionalism of the management of Human Resources.  This change would also depoliticize the state workforce.  This change would also take Mr. Gwartney, and any of his predecessors in future administrations, out of Human Resource management.  We'll be asking for your support when this bill is introduced.  

We're also concerned about budget cuts.  For some time we have been advocating for our legislators to look at the revenue side of the budget, and now, with the long recession, there is some support for this.  Unfortunately, there isn't enough.  We will support legislator's efforts to do something about the existing tax code so all of us pay our fair share, including the wealthy, large corporations, and the large landowners.  For too long the burden of supporting state services has rested on the low and middle income Idahoans and the small business people.  We think that should change. Did you know that the ceiling for state income tax is about $25,000?  That means, if you make $25,000, you're paying the same amount of state income tax as someone who makes $100,000.   

Here's an installment of Boise Weekly's "Unda' the Rotunda" column about the state legislature from this week.  Now, keep in mind, the Boise Weekly is the city's alternative newspaper, so it doesn't just "lean" left, it is unabashedly left, so keep that in mind if you read some of the other articles.  But, lately, this column has really been right on the mark concerning the state legislature.  

Here's this week's column which is about collecting taxes from the "scofflaws".

http://www.boiseweekly.com/boise/leaving-cash-on-the-table/Content?oid=1445646

Now read this column from two years ago.  Isn't it about time something is done about this stuff?  

http://www.boiseweekly.com/boise/unda-the-rotunda/Content?oid=935462

Governor's State of the State address

State employees should be concerned after listening to Governor Otter's State of the State speech yesterday.  In fact, all residents of the Great State of Idaho should be concerned.  As the speech progressed, it became increasingly obvious that Governor Otter simply isn't learning the lessons he should be when it comes to the "new normal" in the state's budget.  


Governor Otter explained his philosophy of Idaho government as one that respects its revenue as "the people's money".  Yet he apparently doesn't believe in spending that revenue on services to the very people he is talking about.  It was obvious that this is an election year speech because he still is still unwilling to address the problems around revenue.  I'm not talking about increasing taxes here, I'm just talking about making the existing tax structure fair to ALL of the people of Idaho, and not just wealthy landowners, corporate agribusiness, and big business in general.  Why is Governor Otter apparently unwilling to address these issues?  Because those groups are his biggest campaign donors.  


If this is "the people's money," then let's spend it on the people!  For instance, his suggestion to eliminate Parks and Recreation.  Holdbacks may already cause the closing of some Idaho state parks, and this is a terrible outcome.  Some legislators, and apparently, Governor Otter, believe parks should charge higher fees.  Yet I know that many Idahoans raising families use the parks because a camping vacation is pretty much the only family vacation they can afford.  I know that was definitely my situation when my sons were little boys. Think of all "the people" that this will affect.


Idaho working people have very little recourse when they are fired from a job in this "Right to Work" state, but at least they have the Human Rights Commission as a resource when they are fired for blatantly discriminatory reasons.  "The people" won't have that resource if Governor Otter gets his way.  


And phasing out funding for IPTV?  That's just crazy talk!  IPTV has just expanded its coverage of the legislature to include live coverage of JFAC.  In fact, I watched the Governor's speech by the internet streaming service provided by IPTV.  It's important for "the people" to be able to keep an eye on their legislators. Not to mention all the great programming IPTV provides.  In fact, I watched a program just this week about the history of the Idaho Capitol building.  


In fact, every commission and agency Governor Otter is considering phasing out is important to "the people", and the savings he cites for closing these commissions and agencies could be made up for if the legislature will close the tax loopholes for wealthy Idahoans.  


One last thing bears pointing out concerning the Governor's philosophy of Government.  Governor Otter and many of the Idaho legislators seem to think that the way to bring business to Idaho is by giving corporations tons of tax breaks and incentives.  But that myopic view of the way to entice businesses to Idaho will not serve us well in the end.  Businesses locate to states that have a well-trained and well-educated workforce (how will we get that with cuts to education and universities and community colleges?), and a great quality of life (how will we achieve that with fewer parks?).  Governor Otter, please wake up and smell the coffee.  Your philosophy of Government is out-dated and no longer serves our state well.