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 ·
|
NEWS ADVISORY August 6, 2003 State to hold forum on competitive contracting OLYMPIA—Washington’s Department of General Administration (GA) will hold an initial rule-making session on competitive contracting reform on August 11 from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. in the General Administration Auditorium (Capitol campus). In 2002, the Washington State Legislature passed the Personnel System Reform Act. The Act removed a prohibition on contracting out state services that are "traditionally and historically provided by state employees." This means Washington can competitively bid any state service "except those that focus on policy setting, have legal restrictions or are too small for consideration." By utilizing a "yellow pages test," services the state provides that are also currently available in the private sector will be eligible for competitive bid. As a result of the state's new collective bargaining rules, state employee unions may try to negotiate a contract that excludes public employee services from competitive bidding. Such a move would likely be opposed by state business groups. GA’s public notice states that the purpose of the August 11 session "is to provide information on the opportunities available for participation in the rulemaking process. . ." The potential for savings from competitive bidding is significant. A recent Heritage Foundation report noted that since 1978, the Department of Defense "has conducted 2,300 formal competitions involving 81,000 civilian and military positions . . . with an average savings of 33 percent." More information: 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..." |
