My name is Dennis Richardson and I'm an Oregon State Legislator. I write this newsletter for Oregonians interested in our state's condition and what can be done to improve it.
I believe Oregon's future depends on an informed citizenry.
Today's newsletter focuses on Oregon's financial status. As we look forward to the 2011 Legislative Session, it is crucial to anticipate the fiscal challenges we face.
The seriousness of Oregon's financial situation becomes apparent when we consider the following.... read more here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This informative summary of Oregon's financial situation just goes to show how creaky Oregon's financial boat has become.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad Rep. Richardson is looking for proactive solutions, but the deficits are becoming so large and so out of control, I think the tentacles of government are going to be reaching further into our wallets.
In the private sector when times are tough we take a pay cut, reduce paid work hours, reduce benefits, and pay more of our benefits out of pocket.
ReplyDeleteWe should have an across the board 10% pay cut for all state employees right now.
We much review and bring government employee retirement benefit plans in line with the private sector.
We must limit the growth of state government to not exceed the growth of our economy. It should even trail a bit so that we don't get in such a bind when there is an unexpected downturn.
Every credible financial adviser since the beginning of time has told us:
1. get out of debt.
2. live within your means.
3. save some resource for when times get tough.
Why does government universally seem to fail to understand these concepts?
I believe our representatives need to not only focus on the situation now. They, must also project where their leadership will improve this economy and get the tax base back where it should be. Only predicting demise and slamming our public employees is not the right answer. This is very poor leadership.
ReplyDeleteFinally, someone who sounds responsive to the financial health of this state! We are so utterly out of control. If our personal household budgets were this out of control, we'd all be living under bridges. I will send your newsletter to all of my friends, and ask them to send them on as well!
ReplyDeleteThank you for this eye-opening information!
from your letter--"It is time for State workers to pay their "fair share" of their retirement and health benefits"
ReplyDeletePerhaps the Representative is not totally aware that the insurance payments are part of the collective bargaining agreement. One where the employees chose to forego a pay raise in the past in order to have their entire insurance premiums paid for by the state. I do not think anyone would be suggesting we go back on our agreement with the employees. We must find a better way to deal with the crisis.
I have found your newsletters to be informative and I look forward to each publication. It is indeed dire the state and ultimately us that we find ourselves in. The budget needs to be trimmed and not in the usual way by cutting essential service as in safety and education and threatening to drop those that can not fend for themselves under the bus. Government needs to be reduced, cut non essential services and programs. The Government needs to live within its means as we are all expected to.
ReplyDeleteAs a municipal employee we do pay a portion of our health care and I do have PERS for my retirement, but you use the comparison of 30 year retirement as if all or most employees retire at that level. This is not the case. I will retire with less that 21 years and while the retirement is sufficient when combined with social security it is not exorbitant. Most of the employees I am familiar with retire at or near this level, however I do see a few that retire at the 30 + level but they are not the norm. The PERS system in the state of Oregon is something we should be proud of as it is one retirement program that is solvent and not in jeopardy of failing as have so many across the nation both public and private.
THanks for your very informative news letter. There are many things that an be done to help the budget without hurting the basic needs of the state.
ReplyDeleteFormost is to cut the pet prjects that are in the budget. It will cost some jobs but it will save more revenue that will be brought in by taxes. We need to cut, cut, cut.
Also to help education in the state, lets keep some of the revenue that has been given to the state. No, I don't meen the kicker check. That doesn't help in bad economic times because there is no surplus. But, lets have those that are using the education system, help pay for it. Get rid of the tax credits for higher education, especially when it is not needed for a sapecfic degree. Also, get rid of the child credit for every child in the family, unless they are home schooled. They should have to help pay for their childs education, and not giving that money back to them on tax time, will help fund the education system. Just designate for education.
There are many great ideas out there, if someone is willing to put the state first instead of their political career.
Thank you for time.
The first way to start saving money in this state is to stop providing health care to anyone who has no social security number. Illegal,s have better health care than citizens in this state.
ReplyDeleteAlso start growing HEMP for biofuels. If we produced and refined biofuels we would create jobs and reduce our dependency. Of course this would require common sense in our legislature. Something we are sorely lacking. You go ahead and give it a try tho. We'll be watching.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteAl Jesse and Vince need to get a private sector job...if they could find one! Sorry for that, your arguments are so pathetic its hard to even read your posts. A representative that gives an honest analysis of our current fiscal condition is poor leadership? Sometimes leadership involves making tough decisions even if they arent popular. And Vince...there are over 150,000 unemployed Oregonians who would love to help pay for their benefits...if they had any...agreement or not!
ReplyDeleteInteresting news letter. I wish while talking about PERS, Rep. Richardson would mention, that PERS was frozen in January 2004. No money is going into PERS from employers or Employees. Currently all PERS accounts just sit and earn interest from investments. Tier one members are guaranteed 8% return on their fixed accounts; these are members that were hired before 1986. Since 2004 the retirement system is the OPSRP. It has no guaranteed returns; every member started at zero, and it was developed by our legislature. I don’t understand how PERS is costing tax payers money? YES, the employer pays into OPSRP with money that was not taken in wages, to guarantee all state workers a retirement. I guess it would be all right if they want to put that money back into wages, but wouldn’t that cause more people to be in dire straits at retirement?
ReplyDeleteIf more of our Government was as unselfish as Representative Richardson, we'd be a stronger and happier State and Nation.
ReplyDeleteTo the person who replied before me, since when should anyone receive an 8% guarantee when the rest of us have no guarantees.
8% is wildly unrealistic and unsustainable. These types of guarantees "negotiated" by State Employee Unions are bankrupting our States. These kinds of returns force them to invest in risky assets that often go broke. The demand for these risky assets makes its way to Wall Street. Wall Street like any other free enterprise business seeks ways to satisfy its clients then when it all crashes you have a problem and blame Wall Street.
If you want more information about how unions are causing this mess, see Time Magazine, June 28, 2010, "The Broken States of America".
Thanks Dennis for outlining the details for us. Your honesty and integrity are greatly appreciated. The only thing I might add to your list of cut-backs is discontinuing to allow non-citizens to feed on our social services,ie: food stamps, un-employment, low income housing, etc. These illegals are crippling our economy, and taking the few jobs that are left.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I feel that as a community, the children and the elderly have NO VOICE, and the government should never cut from these areas!!
There are many gov't employees who bring in $100,050 pay checks annually who can easily take a cut - I thought gov't was supposed to serve the people, not the other way around!
I am sick of hearing about the "Budget". The "Budget" is simply a smoke screen for "we don't want to spend money on that". The State of Oregon has enough money to operate, at current service levels, for five years if it didn't collect another dime in revenue according to an independent outsider's audit.
ReplyDeleteSo who's kidding who? Instead of targeting state workers who you acknowledge are hard working, and a large percentage of which are engaged in "public safety" positions, why not just get into the "slush fund" of non-budget money to carry us through? Oh, sorry, I forgot, that wouldn't allow government to continue to line the pockets of its "friends" and fund things not included in the "Budget".
Unemployed former state worker due to "Budget cuts".
OK...take a closer look at Building Codes Division! I know they say they are saving babies from evil contractors....(you've heard all the other excuses for not touching a department of government)The facts are ...I worked there in 97'. I left on very good terms and there are some very nice people working there. I feel sorry for saying this but the services they provide we can get free, cheaper elsewhere or is just flat not needed. Good luck clean up this run away government..you'll need it but it must be done. Look..BCD and other parts of government are going to scream that they are needed or Oregon will fall off into the ocean..don't fall for it!!!! I'd be happy to help!
ReplyDeleteHere's a lecture on supply side economics that discusses opposing points of view.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.polyconomics.com/ssu/ssu-050211.htm
In times of financial crisis, governments are usually tempted to spend more money on the theory that will jump start the economy.
Another theory is that government should reduce taxes and reduce services during times of financial crisis. While that seems, to some people, absurd since during times of financial crisis is when people need services the most. The lecture describes that what the government does to pay for services eventually proves to be unsustainable.
Either way, read the lecture and compare it with Rep. Richardson's notes on our current financial crisis and see if you can come up with some comparisons of what has happened historically and what is happening today.