EFF's Election Report ·
Gonzales Letter ·
Welfare Reform ·
Boeing Contract ·
Budget & Taxes ·
Business Climate ·
K-12 Fact Sheet ·
EFF Health Study ·
Paycheck Protection ·
Transportation ·
Unemployment Ins. ·
Receive Updates ·
Bookmark EFF ·
Contribute ·
EFF in the News ·
How Can I Help? ·
Join EFF ·
Media Center ·
|
PRESS RELEASE July 22, 2003 Number of full-time equivalent state employees continues to rise Jason Mercier | Evergreen Freedom
Foundation DOP’s numbers are based on a headcount of individuals employed by the state (anyone who has worked for any period of time). OFM tracks FTEs, reflecting the number of positions equivalent to full-time employment. The legislature budgets employment figures based on FTEs, not headcounts. When asked about recent DOP data showing a decrease in state employment, Pam Davidson, OFM Senior Budget Assistant, said, "DOP’s headcount doesn’t show how many people are working half-time. Using headcount to show full-time equivalent employment is not accurate." Davidson went on to say that state employment figures are best represented by FTE data. The state plans to add 1,526 new FTEs in the 2003-05 operating budget. Only when excluding nearly 17 percent of the operating budget (Higher Education), are budgeted FTEs expected to decrease. Press accounts last week reporting DOP’s numbers excluded higher education employment. "It is disingenuous to exclude entire agencies and programs when reporting state employment numbers," said Jason Mercier, a budget analyst for the Olympia-based Evergreen Freedom Foundation. "Taxpayers supported more state employees in 2003 than prior years, and it looks like this trend will continue." The FTE increase is present for both the state’s general fund ($23 billion) and total overall spending ($54 billion). General Fund State FTE figures
Overall FTE figures
Figures provided by OFM. K-12 employees are excluded from the education employment figures (they are counted at the local government level, not state). Contact: Jason Mercier | Budget Research Analyst | (360) 956-3482
|
1 Part Honesty; 2 Parts Arrogance At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question: "Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?" - Rep. Jim McIntire (D - 46) Despite the arrogance of some state officials, Washington's constitution is clear: "All political power is inherent in the people..." |
