August 04, 2009
An argument for I-1033.

\Tim Eyman's latest initiative, I-1033 would limit increases in state spending to inflation plus population growth. When confronted with this seemingly moderate, reasonable proposal, progressive blogger David Goldstein screams that this is Eyman's "most vindictive, dangerous and mean-spirited initiative yet." Goldy believes that it would constrain much-needed, much-wanted government services, without which doubtless we will all die.

You mean like this, Goldy?

About 10 months ago, 10 state troopers were accused of padding their resumes with degrees from a diploma mill, giving themselves an automatic salary boost.. Even though the state had passed a law making such resume padding a felony, the troopers were not charged criminally. But now the WSP is seeking to terminate eight of the troopers (2 have already resigned). So these eight have been on paid administrative leave for 10 months, collecting their trooper salaries while sitting on their butts. Now they can appeal the proposed termination if they choose, and relax for another 6 months or so while the WSP decides whether they really, really don't want con-artists in their employ.

Thanks to the Tacoma News Trib state salary database, the exact salaries of these eight are readily available.. They average about $62,000 per year, plus benefits, of course. So we have already paid about $500,000 in 'paid adminstrative leave' for these clowns, and will likely pay another $250,000 or so before appeals are exhausted. For what services? Zip, zero, nada.

In the private sector, they would have been given a parting boot, and been long gone. I guess the good news is, they aren't out on I-405 writing bogus tickets to make up Gov. Gregoire's massive deficit.

Posted by 6p01053690976c970c at August 04, 2009 06:09 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Sigh, government waste---and these pols have no trouble with it, whatsoever.

Posted by: Michele on August 4, 2009 11:27 PM
2. Sigh, government inefficiencies -- and foolish people have no trouble using that to support unrelated issues.

Posted by: demo kid on August 5, 2009 12:55 PM
3. Are you arguing that I-1033, which limits spending, and cases of profligate spending such as this are not related?

Posted by: 6p01053690976c970c on August 5, 2009 01:03 PM
4. I'm saying that you haven't made any case AT ALL that they are.

Posted by: demo kid on August 8, 2009 06:02 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?