It seems the reality of the economy is hitting home for local government employees.
The Kosciusko County Council this week moved to cut salaries by 7 percent across the board. Non-profit organizations get 10 percent less.
Earlier in the week, the Warsaw City Council announced a hiring freeze, well, kind of. They'll still fill vacant positions, but they'll take a harder look at them. They also decided not to give raises.
I truly have empathy for public employees. It can be a pretty thankless job working for the public sometimes. And it's not like anybody's going to get rich working for the highway department or the street department.
Cops are paid better, but I don't think anyone would argue it's easy being a cop.
Warsaw school employees, on the other hand, got raises this year, and will get raises next year, but I think 2011 may bring a little different scenario for them. I realize there are contracts and obligations, but I thought giving raises in this economic climate was a little over the top.
I wish public employees didn't have to suffer through pay cuts, but, unfortunately, it's a sign of the times.
It's not like everybody in the private sector is all flush with cash. Unemployment is high. Companies are cutting back. Hours are being cut. Workers are being laid off. Positions are being allowed to fall to attrition.
But in the federal government - especially this year - it hasn't played out that way at all. In 2009, federal hiring is up 17 percent. The average federal employee makes 36 percent more than the average private-sector employee.
That just seems wrong to me.
If all this woe has befallen the private sector, why should government be immune? After all, it's the private sector workers who are paying the taxes that support the government.
I think the federal government needs to start laying people off and cutting salaries, too.Speaking To Kids
I read President Barack Obama's speech - the one that was streamed to student across the US.
I can honestly say I saw absolutely nothing wrong with it. Actually, I thought it was a really good speech.
It was uplifting, motivating. I liked what he said.
I thought the whole lesson plan thing was a little over the top. I don't think it's the prerogative of the federal government's eduction department to swoop into our schools with lesson plans - regardless of message or ideology.
But the speech was just fine. Some people thought it was like some sort of attempt at indoctrination. I saw no evidence of that and defy anyone to show me the parts of the speech that were inappropriate.
And I concur with Democrats who are rightfully indignant over all the right-wing uproar over the President's very appropriate message to students.
So let's consider this quote.
"The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students ... And the president should be doing more about education than saying, 'Lights, camera, action.'"
Some nutty right-wing zealot, right?
Not so much.
That was then House Majority leader Richard Gephardt - a Democrat - back in 1991.
You see, President George H. W. Bush spoke to school kids on Oct. 1, 1991. He gave much the same kind of speech. All very positive and uplifting. Completely appropriate.
Now, as far as I can tell, President Obama's speech has now slipped under the radar. All the hoopla, wailing and gnashing of teeth has stopped because, after all, the speech is over.
Well, that wasn't the case in 1991. The Democrats didn't just make a few comments critical of then-President Bush.
Rep. William Ford, a Democrat and chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, ordered an investigation by the General Accounting Office.
He asked the GAO to look into the cost and legality of the President's speech. Ford actually scheduled a hearing and called then-Secretary of Education Lamar Alexander and a few other Bush administration officials to testify
"The hearing this morning is to really examine the expenditure of $26,750 of the Department of Education funds to produce and televise an appearance by President Bush at Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington, DC. ... As the chairman of the committee charged with the authorization and implementation of education programs, I am very much interested in the justification, rationale for giving the White House scarce education funds to produce a media event," Ford blathered on at the hearing.
Long story short, the GAO concluded the education department's use of funds were legal and the speech didn't violate any restrictions on the use of "appropriations for publicity and propaganda."
Nonetheless, the National Education Association, longtime friend of Democrats, came out with a strong denunciation of the speech, saying it "cannot endorse a president who spends $26,000 of taxpayer's money on a staged media event ... ." You get the picture, here.
Lucky for us, the Republicans don't have the majority, or there'd be hearings on President Obama's speech.
My guess is, back in 1991, they blew more money on the hearings than the President did on his speech.
