Just a quick update on the latest on Gov. Schwarzenegger’s slashing of state worker salaries.  After John Chiang refused to carry out the executive order, today Arnold sued him.

Schwarzenegger’s Department of Personnel Administration filed a lawsuit against Chiang late Monday in Sacramento County Superior Court. The suit says the state Constitution and several sections of law prohibit the state from paying full wages without approval of a budget.

“Except where payments are self-executing under the California Constitution, the state has no authority to pay state employees their full salaries where it does not have an appropriation such as in this case, where there is no budget for fiscal year 2008-2009,” the lawsuit says.

Chiang, a Democrat, has balked at making the pay cuts, saying the state has enough money to cover its needs into October.

“The governor has created a solution to a problem that does not exist…,” Chiang said in a statement after the lawsuit was filed.

This has become less about fiscal responsibility during a budget crisis and more about an authoritarian demanding his way.  As for the original intention of the order, to force a compromise on the budget, that’s, er, not happening.

Schwarzenegger met Monday with the Legislature’s Democratic leaders to try to reach a budget compromise.

“We’re still talking. We haven’t thrown anything at each other,” Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, said after emerging from the governor’s office.

Arnold Schwarzenegger didn’t just vow to keep taxes low, he ran an entire campaign in 2006 based on scaring people into believing that his opponent would raise taxes by $18 billion dollars.  None of it was true, but he hammered away at it.  In the one and only debate he chided Phil Angelides, saying “you love taxes” and other nonsense.  Dan Weintraub even remembered this spiel:

“They get into their car, they’re taxed. They go to the gas station, they’re taxed. They go for lunch, they’re taxed. This goes on all day long. Tax, tax, tax, tax, tax. Even when they go to bed, you can go to bed in fear that you are going to be taxed while you’re sleeping, that there is a sleeping tax.”

The admission of defeat, that there’s no way to balance this budget without revenue increases, is truly astonishing.  What’s more, the broad-based sales tax he’s proposing, the most regressive imaginable, really would tax Californians at virtually every point of the day.  He’s become a caricature (if he wasn’t one already).

The proposal amounts to an admission of failure. Running in 2003 as a novice politician after careers as a bodybuilder and actor, Schwarzenegger thought he could cut taxes, control spending and balance the budget, ending what he called “those crazy deficits.” But the fiscal and economic problem was more complicated than he knew, and the politics far more vexing.

Schwarzenegger did cut taxes. He campaigned on a pledge to roll back the vehicle license fee, or “car tax,” which his predecessor, Gray Davis, had tripled. And on Schwarzenegger’s first day in office, the new governor issued an executive order reducing the tax by two-thirds.

But controlling spending proved far more difficult, as, ironically, that first tax-cut order foretold. The car tax against which Schwarzenegger had railed, while controlled by the state, was actually a source of revenue for local governments. And so when Schwarzenegger reduced it, he also made good on a pledge to pay cities and counties what was then $4billion a year to make up for what they lost when he cut the car tax.

The state, however, did not have that money to spare, and the payments to cities and counties added to the deficit Schwarzenegger had vowed to eliminate. That obligation to local government has since grown to $6 billion – not coincidentally the same amount that would be raised by the sales tax increase Schwarzenegger now supports.

The VLF was the original sin here, but not the only one.  The problem is structural and the VLF would have only delayed the inevitable.  The truth is that the state is only built for success, never for a downturn like we’re currently having.  And so this results in gimmicks like slashing state employee salaries and putting them in the middle of a budget spat, or borrowing more and more to pass the deficit on to our children and grandchildren.

(The latest on the wage cuts, by the way, is that the governor is demanding that his order be followed, which John Chiang will refuse, leading to a likely lawsuit.  Chiang really is a hero in all of this, and he’s filling a leadership vacuum.  Marcus Breton has a nice profile today.)

Schwarzenegger has never concerned himself with the business of governing – he preferred slogans to policy.  And with the policy going to crap, the slogans sound more hollow – especially the one that goes “tax, tax, tax, tax, tax.”

It’s really the ultimate way for this state employee wage cut to end up – turns out that the payroll generation is so antiquated, they can’t change it to reflect the new salary structure for months.

State Controller John Chiang said Monday an antiquated state computer system makes it impossible to adjust the state payroll quickly to issue minimum-wage checks to state workers. He said it would take at least six months to make the change.

The Democratic controller has vowed to defy Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s executive order directing the state to pay workers the federal minimum wage of $6.55 per hour until a budget agreement is reached. He has previously asserted that the Republican governor’s order is based on an untested 2003 state Supreme Court legal opinion and that he will continue issuing full paychecks to state employees.

But in a meeting with The Bee Capitol Bureau on Monday, Chiang said that even if Schwarzenegger’s legal reasoning were sound, the state could not logistically retool its outdated payroll system in a matter of weeks, as the governor has asked. If the change were eventually made, Chiang also said it would take an additional nine to 10 months to issue checks to employees for their full back pay.

We’ve seen this in LA County with errors in paychecks to teachers, which resulted in major repayments and “treble” damages, which require the government to pay three times as much in damages to those affected.

Of course, the state could always update their payroll systems – which would require more revenue.  Or they could just throw more manpower at the problem – which would require hiring those state workers that Arnold tried to fire (which agencies are promptly not firing).

It’s really a tragicomedy over there in Sacramento.

I’m preaching to the choir here when I say that laying off all those state workers was penny-wise and pound-foolish.  Another sickening facet of all that is that Arnold and his cronies don’t even know just how pound-foolish it was.  Well, they know it was a bit fool-hardy, they just aren’t sure how much.  Because, you know, they didn’t really study that:

But state officials said Thursday that they couldn’t predict how much state services will suffer now that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has laid off an estimated 10,300 temporary workers.

***

“I think that whenever you have layoffs and you do that, it will have an impact,” Schwarzenegger said. “… In the private sector, we read every day stories where companies have to lay off. That means there is less productivity there. So we have to tighten our belt, everyone has to tighten our belt.” (SacBee 8/1/08)

Everybody has to tighten our belt, yet that doesn’t extend to the entirety of the state? Sure, we have to tighten our belts, but we can’t sacrifice the strength of our government.  There is no further “fat” to cut from the bone.  Yet, I guess we’ll just roll the dice and hope that it doesn’t burn us too bad.  Pun intended.

Great plan, Arnold.

I was on a conference call earlier with State Controller John Chiang and Rep. Hilda Solis about the Governor’s callous executive order, and both delivered predictably strong comments.  Chiang, who has told the governor he will refuse to comply with the order, blasted Schwarzenegger, saying “state workers shouldn’t be put in the middle of a political battle,” and that this was a nakedly punitive attempt against California’s state employee unions, which the whom the Governor has always held a grudge (they helped deep-six his “reform” agenda in 2005).  Rep. Solis was even more outraged, saying “let’s put him on the federal minimum wage, and get rid of the special interests paying for his hotel room across the street from the Capitol, and see how he likes it.”  She rocks.  

Chiang has made his decision, and now only litigation can force him to carry out the Governor’s order (and Chiang discouraged litigation as a “waste of time.”)  But we expect these kind of statements from Democrats.  Take a look at this one from Republican Greg Aghazarian:

“While I appreciate the Governor’s leadership on this budget crisis, I cannot support reducing the salaries of our state employees to minimum wage.

If our state workers had the power to pass a budget, then it might be appropriate to hold them accountable, but that’s not where the responsibility lies according to our State Constitution. I cannot predict when a budget will be passed, but I do know this, when it does happen it will be because we worked to achieve bipartisan solutions.

I understand what the Governor is trying to accomplish with this action, but I must respectfully disagree and urge the Governor to reconsider his executive order.”

Now, Aghazarian is talking out of both sides of his mouth.  He’s trying to win a Senate election against Lois Wolk in SD-05, and he wants to be seen as some kind of moderate when his record suggests the opposite.  But the fact that he’s gone off the reservation means that there’s a lot of pressure to come out against the Governor on this one, putting him alone on an island of his own making.  It’s important to keep pounding away and make him completely unpopular and unable to help his party in the fall as a result of this stupid, heartless action.

The Governor has set up a Web site to answer employee questions about the wage cut.  Predictably, it has no interactive function.  If he allowed comments on it the server would be down.

OK, so check this out.  Arnold signs the executive order slashing state employee salaries to $6.55 an hour, the federal minimum wage.

At the same time, he’s agreed to host a fundraiser in three weeks with Oregon Senator Gordon Smith (R).  Here’s the invite, courtesy his Democratic opponent Jeff Merkley:

The bottom of the invite says “Host and Photo Opportunities at $10,000 give/raise.”

The annual salary for a state worker under the federal, based on a 40-hour work week and a 50-week year, is $13,100.

So Arnold thinks the cost of getting a picture with him is roughly equivalent to the cost of working for an entire year running his state government.

Priceless.

As we brace for the Governor’s executive order slashing state employee salaries, the Senate Governmental Organization committee wants some answers.

Anticipating that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today will sign an executive order to cut state worker pay and terminate about 22,000 temporary, part-time and contract jobs, the Senate’s Governmental Organization committee has called on Schwarzenegger to explain his rationale. The committee, chaired by Senator Dean Florez (D-Schafter), has scheduled the hearing for Monday at 10 a.m. Schwarzenegger is invited. Controller John Chiang and leaders of state worker unions will testify, according to a press advisory.

Florez, who sought the advisory opinion from the legislative counsel about this move (which showed that John Chiang has more than enough constitutional authority to deny the wage cut from going through), said in his press statement: “I think the Governor owes the public a full explanation as to why he has singled out the state’s workforce with his executive order to cut their salaries.”

Right on.  Which is why you should keep calling Arnold and ruin his birthday by demanding an explanation of your own.

This is a good move by Florez, both from the standpoint of policy and politics.

The CDP sent out a message from Controller John Chiang about the proposed wage cut to state workers:

When I received word that Gov. Schwarzenegger was proposing to use California’s state workers as pawns in the budget battle by cutting their pay to the federal minimum wage of $6.55, I said civil servants should not bear the brunt of the budget stalemate.

Since then, thousands of Californians have joined with me to protest the Governor’s proposed — and needless — order to slash the pay of California’s public servants. I want you to know I will stand strong against the Governor’s threats.

Show Gov. Schwarzenegger that you stand with me by signing the California Democratic Party’s petition at www.cadem.org/supportcaliforniaworkers.

Forcing public servants to involuntarily loan the State cash by foregoing their hard-earned paychecks puts an untenable burden on our teachers, health care workers and those who provide critical public services.  That is just wrong.

Excellent.  Chiang is really coming out like a hero in this.

Taking another tack, Lt. Governor John Garamendi sent a letter to the Governor (via the SacBee’s new state worker blog:

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:

I write to you today regarding the proposed executive order to reduce the minimum wage of 200,000 of California’s state workers to the federal minimum wage of $6.55 an hour.

As you contemplate signing this executive order, please ask yourself – how would you feed and care for your family on $262 per week ($1,048 per month)?  How would your hardworking staff fare on these minimal earnings?  Could you and your family do it for one week?

It is our duty, as elected officials of this great State, to find solutions to the many challenging problems that face California, such as the state budget.  Those solutions should always look to improve the quality of life for all Californians, not impede it.

Please walk a week in a state worker’s shoes before you sign this executive order and imagine yourself and your family surviving on $262 per week.

This is reminiscent of the SEIU’s “Walk A Day in My Shoes” program, as well as the challenge taken by members of Congress earlier this year to live on a food stamp budget for a week.  It gets replicated because it works.  Garamendi is taking the right approach to humanize the budget crisis.

It does appear that our state Controller has basically said “No Dice” to the governor’s plan to punish state workers for his own leadership failures.

While the governor is poised to order the cuts on Monday, state Controller John Chiang, who is responsible for disbursing state workers’ paychecks, said Thursday that he will refuse to go along with the governor, setting up a political standoff and a possible legal fight.

“The authority to issue people’s paychecks is mine. I have both constitutional and statutory authority,” said Chiang, a Democrat. “Frankly, (the governor) is just trying to make me do something that’s improper and illegal.”

The same exact thing happened in 2003, with Steve Westly refusing to cut salaries as then-Gov. Gray Davis requested.  And Westly got his way until the budget was eventually signed on August 2.  This basically throws the whole issue into the courts and delays the implementation of any salary cut.  And that’s a legal fight I relish having.  For too long the chief executive of the state – and in some cases, the legislature – has absolutely overstepped their authority with regard to fiscal matters.  The most egregious example is their raiding municipal government and transit funds to fill in the cracks of the budget deficit, which leads to ridiculous outcomes like cutting bus service at a time when mass transit should be expanding.

But Chiang standing with workers and holding on to his authority as a statewide elected official is just as important.  We elect a governor, not a king, and this encroachment on the jurisdiction of other constitutional officers is illegal and increasingly dangerous.  State workers who are rallying against the proposed cuts should understand that they have a champion in John Chiang, and that his decision deserves their support.  The California Democratic Party has a petition you can sign to stand with the Controller in this effort.

UPDATE: As informed by the CDP, State Sen. Dean Florez asked the Legislative Counsel for an opinion on Schwarzenegger’s authority to slash wages, and the Counsel agreed that he didn’t have it:

SACRAMENTO – Senator Dean Florez, D-Shafter, sought to alleviate the fears of state workers contemplating how to pay their bills on the federal minimum wage, while heading off a potential lawsuit between the Governor and Controller at a time the state can least afford it, by releasing a Legislative Counsel opinion stating that the Governor does not have the power to order such a cut to workers’ salaries.

“If the Governor really intended this as more than a ‘motivational’ gimmick, he clearly did not do his homework,” said Florez.  “He is making reckless and false threats against the people who keep our state running, causing undue grief to innocent people — many of whom are already struggling to get by – and I really believe he owes them an apology.”

(XPosted 2/29/2008 6:14 PM PST on MyDesert.com)

The Children’s Defense Fund’s (CDF) Leave No Child Behind® mission is to ensure every child a Healthy Start, a Head Start, a Fair Start, a Safe Start, and a Moral Start in life and successful passage to adulthood with the help of caring families and communities.  CDF began in 1973 and is a private, nonprofit organization supported by foundation and corporate grants and individual donations.  CDF has never taken government funds.

Annually, the CDF Action Council compiles a Nonpartisan Congressional Scorecard for U.S. Senators and Representatives.  In the Scorecard, 100% represents an excellent voting record on children’s issues while 0% represents a terrible record in the estimation of CDF.  Sen. John McCain ‘achieved’ a score of 10%, the lowest of any U.S. Senator.  McCain supported only one CDF position, opposed one other CDF position, and voted ‘Not Voting’ on the other eight bills.  Either McCain is anti-children or is yet another absentee Republican leader when it comes to important issues.

More below the flip…

In 2007, U.S. Senators were graded on their votes on ten different issues that CDF supported:

(1) 2008 Budget Resolution (Measure was Agreed To)

(2) Extend Health Coverage to 3.1 Million More Uninsured Children (Agreed To)

(3) Extend Health Coverage to 3.2 Million More Uninsured Children (Passed)

(4) Fund Child Health and Education (Agreed To)

(5) Give Children a Head Start (Agreed To)

(6) Help Youth Pay for College (Agreed To)

(7) Increase Funding for Education for Children with Disabilities (Failed)

(8) Increase the Minimum Wage (Passed)

(9) Protect Children from Unsafe Medications (Passed)

(10) Support Education for Children of Immigrants (Failed).

In 2007, 50 U.S. Senators, including 44 Democrats, 4 Republicans, and 2 Independents had excellent scorecards, that is, 80% or higher.  The following Senators had excellent records: Blanche Lincoln D-AR (80%), Mark Pryor D-AR (90%), Barbara Boxer D-CA (90%), Dianne Feinstein D-CA (100%), Ken Salazar D-CO (90%), Joseph LIeberman I-CT (100%), Tom Carper D-DE (100%), Bill Nelson D-FL (90%), Daniel Akaka D-HI (100%), Daniel Inouye D-HI (100%), Tom Harkin D-IA (100%), Richard Durbin D-IL (100%), Evan Bayh D-IN (100%), Richard Lugar R-IN (80%), Mary Landrieu D-LA (80%), Edward Kennedy D-MA (90%), John Kerry D-MA (90%), Benjamin Cardin D-MD (100%), Barbara Mikulski D-MD (100%), Susan Collins R-ME (90%), Olympia Snowe R-ME (90%), Carl Levin D-MI (100%), Deborah Stabenow D-MI (100%), Norm Coleman R-MN (80%), Amy Klobuchar D-MN (100%), Claire McCaskill D-MO (80%), Max Baucus D-MT (80%), Jon Tester D-MT (80%), Kent Conrad D-ND (90%), Byron Dorgan D-ND (90%), Ben Nelson D-NE (90%), Frank Lautenburg D-NJ (100%), Robert Menendez D-NJ (100%), Jeff Bingaman D-NM (100%), Harry Reid D-NV (100%), Charles Schumer D-NY (90%), Sherrod Brown D-OH (100%), Ron Wyden D-OR (90%), Bob Casey D-PA (100%), Jack Reed D-RI (100%), Sheldon Whitehouse D-RI (100%), James Webb D-VA (90%), Patrick Leahy D-VT (100%), Bernard Sanders I-VT (90%), Maria Cantwell D-WA (90%), Patty Murray D-WA (100%), Russell Feingold D-WI (100%), Herb Kohl D-WI (100%), Robert Byrd D-WV (90%), and Jay Rockefeller D-WV (100%).

Five of 100 U.S. Senators had failing grades, that is, 20% or lower:  Jim DeMint R-SC (20%), James Inhofe R-OK (20%), Tom Coburn R-OK (20%), David Vitter (20%), and John McCain R-AZ (10%).

Yes, out of 100 U.S. Senators, McCain ranked the lowest of any on the CDF scorecard, lower than any Democrat and lower than any other Republican.  McCain voted ‘nay’ to Extend Health Coverage to 3.2 Million More Uninsured Children, a measure that passed in the Senate.  McCain voted ‘not voting’ on all of the other bills except for Increase the Minimum Wage where he voted ‘yea’ on a measure that passed.

In comparison, Sen. Hillary Clinton D-NY obtained a 70% rating while Sen. Barack Obama obtained a 60% rating.

You be the judge.