As the lost revenue from the recession hits state treasuries there is a rush by several states for new legislation that makes major changes in who will actually control financially troubled local governments. It is not the citizens but an Emergency Financial Manager (EFM) that is being given unheard of power. The EFM is appointed by the Governor.
The new rules give the EFM the power to overturn negotiated contracts between unions and local units, remove elected officials from office, sell community assets, eliminate the salary and benefits of elected officials and request local millage votes to increase revenue. An EFM could dissolve a school district or local unit of government and merge it with neighboring ones. The EFM can also sell community assets.
More detailed comments on the EFM from the Detroit Free Press can be found here. The system is currently said to be applied only to communities which have repeatedly failed to solve their finance problems. It seems made to be abused. Revenue sharing is being cut drastically in many states and many communities will have problems.
Detroit has run a deficit since 2003 and is a prime target. Can substituting a dictator for a democratic process improve the situation? We will see. The economic cards for Detroit are so dire that it is doubtful. Taking the right to solve their problems through democratic procedures away from the population is a dangerous step which requires very close watching.
A nightmare scenario: Hey, Mr. Mayor, don’t worry; Even though we have drastically cut the state revenue sharing the Governor will assign an EFM to tell you what to do. Well, it’s not really a person; it’s a corporation from New York. They specialize in putting together packages of local government debt into securities that they sell on the market. Everyone is doing it.
Be very careful with the power you give an Emergency Financial Manager
Showing posts with label governors. Show all posts
Showing posts with label governors. Show all posts
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Sunday, November 07, 2010
The Reform of the Senate: Enough Honest New Faces to Begin?
The constitution allows each House in Congress freedom in determining the rules of its proceedings. Over the years members of the Senate have abused this freedom to give themselves outrageous powers and self serving privileges. This has created a pathetically inept and corrupt body that exists to serve the two political parties and their members rather than the country. This has become clear to most citizens.
It is difficult to find an American citizen that does not believe that each member of congress puts their own interests and that of their political party ahead of the country and the citizens. The congress is sadly in need of radical reform,
The current situation is much too attractive to the current members for them to initiate significant reform. In fact, much of the need for reform is related to our monopolistic two party system. Until the majority of existing office holders are replaced with honest and dedicated candidates that place the higher value on the country and it citizens reform is not going to happen.
The constitution allows for elections to replace one third of the Senate every two years. Anti-incumbency as a step toward “taking back the country” was a major battle cry for the recent mid-term elections and won the new senators their jobs. The mid-term results reflect how the citizens took advantage of this opportunity.
Of the 33 positions open for seats in the Senate the recent mid-terms elected 16 candidates who were new to the Senate. Thus, when the new Senate convenes almost half of those who were up for election will have been replaced. Thirteen of the new senators are Republicans and three are Democrats. A short resume of each of the new senators is provided by Salon in this reference. Seven of the new senators have served in the House of Representatives. We therefore have nine new senators with no vested background in the federal machine. Three are small businessmen who have had no elected experience until this election. Four have held only state government positions. Two have been state governors.
Depending upon the position for reform of the seven from the House this mix could be a reasonable group to lead a series of reforms. It will take many more similar elections and very careful watching over the next years to return our Senate into the organization the Founders intended. But we have begun.
It is difficult to find an American citizen that does not believe that each member of congress puts their own interests and that of their political party ahead of the country and the citizens. The congress is sadly in need of radical reform,
The current situation is much too attractive to the current members for them to initiate significant reform. In fact, much of the need for reform is related to our monopolistic two party system. Until the majority of existing office holders are replaced with honest and dedicated candidates that place the higher value on the country and it citizens reform is not going to happen.
The constitution allows for elections to replace one third of the Senate every two years. Anti-incumbency as a step toward “taking back the country” was a major battle cry for the recent mid-term elections and won the new senators their jobs. The mid-term results reflect how the citizens took advantage of this opportunity.
Of the 33 positions open for seats in the Senate the recent mid-terms elected 16 candidates who were new to the Senate. Thus, when the new Senate convenes almost half of those who were up for election will have been replaced. Thirteen of the new senators are Republicans and three are Democrats. A short resume of each of the new senators is provided by Salon in this reference. Seven of the new senators have served in the House of Representatives. We therefore have nine new senators with no vested background in the federal machine. Three are small businessmen who have had no elected experience until this election. Four have held only state government positions. Two have been state governors.
Depending upon the position for reform of the seven from the House this mix could be a reasonable group to lead a series of reforms. It will take many more similar elections and very careful watching over the next years to return our Senate into the organization the Founders intended. But we have begun.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)