The Blog

What's mayor mumbles up to this time? Has he experienced some kind of recent 'threat' to his health and well-being? Is he fearful of being 'arrested' in public? Has he fallen late in payments on his 'vig'? Are there any 'embarrassing' individuals out there who might show up and accuse him of being their 'baby's daddy'? Does this change have anything to do with Obama's run for president? Could it be that he's been a 'mole' for the Feds? Does he fear being the victim of a 'coup'? Why this sudden change in seeming to be 'available' to his constituents? Something's up, what's next, a slew of mayor mumbles 'doubles'?

I would have told you to kiss my mistletoe. Who do the hell do you think you are ? If you want some face time, make an appointment. This whole thing about the media being like gold and unquestioned is a bunch of poppycock.

"Who do the hell do you think you are?" Why, I'm one, of many, who pay your fucking salary, as, all propaganda to the contrary, you, mayor mumbles, work for me, one of many taxpaying-through-the-nose citizens. While it seems to be the case, this ain't no fucking Irish kingdom, you ain't no fucking Irish king and all the criminal acts in the world ain't gonna make it one.

Congrats on getting on the distribution list - good luck on getting his attention or the opportunity to ask any real questions that would those of us whom pay his salary some sort of accountability. Mabey he should just smile and ignore the press when they ask a question worth asking like that moron Gov of ours. Or better yet, why allow the local press contact him or his office at all - take a page out of Obama's book and act as though the state and and city that you are suppose to serve are the last things on your priority list. What a sad joke.

Well I can not say I am surprised by the Orwellian morass that our democracy has wrought. Yogi Berra would sum it up best with "The public don't need to know when it's uninformed." The shrinking violet of government accountability loses yet another petal and the most of the media is mystified with bubbles and shiny things. Well I am glad you got it, not that I have any idea what there is to do with it.

Given your use of the language, you should try to get an the schedule of an anger management specialist instead of badgering the Mayor with questions from your free paper that most people use to line their puppy cages. I would hardly suspect what the free weekly pays you generates enough to be taxed on, so keep your taxes, they will not be missed. But while you are at it, do not call the police or fire depts when you need help.

Orion why shouldn't the media be given free access to Daley's PUBLIC schedule? Are you afraid to see Daley stumble and stammer through tough questions? If an alderman you didn't like (e.g., Pat Dowell) did the same you'd throw a fit.

Who knew the mayor blogged? Actually, "Orion" couldn't possibly be the mayor--he's far too articulate. But he sure does have the asshole persona down. And who really wants to call the Police Dept. these days? You're likely to get beaten.

orion = articulate? I hear they've taught baboons to understand English. As in 'A thousand monkeys, at a thousand typewriters, hitting keys at random for a thousand years, might produce a single, coherent sentence.' orion's thousand years ain't up yet.

The one-per-media outlet rule is oh so typical of narrow-minded, inefficient laziness that perfectly illustrates everything that is wrong with all the hoodlums we have in power at the City. And the county. And the state. And the country. I'm moving to Canada.

au revoir. ne laissez pas la poignée de porte vous frapper où Dieu vous a dédoublé

In your case, I guess it would 2,000 monkeys 2,000 years and you still would come up short.

The Mayor has no problem dealing with the folks at channel 2,5,7,9. etc it's the alternative press like the Reader,New City, Radio Stations, Community Press and CANTV public access television that they are afraid of. These young agressive people who are trying to make their bones in the media are the real threat to this Mayor. Half of the Television and Print media in this city are in the Mayors pocket.

...could it be the burning expose on the Burge torture scandal, perhaps? naww!

Yeah, John Kass, Mark Brown, Andy Shaw, Fran Spielman, Gary Washburn, Scott Fornek, Neil Steinberg, Carol Marin, et. al. who are always blistering the Mayor and the City are REALLY in his pocket . Jeez....

Let's examine the common heat-sink. Electronic components which generate potentially harmful temperatures during their normal operation require objects known as heat-sinks to be attached to their surfaces. These objects draw excessive heat energies away from the device, thus protecting and preserving it's ability to function as designed. As all the political 'heat', generated by those reporters mentioned in 'orion's' comment, has not resulted in any harm of significance to the mayor, or to anyone he considers to be essential, ie., not expendable, it appears that it may be true that these reporters are, intentionally or not, functioning as political heat sinks for the mayor's benefit. Like the proverbial 'chinese box', every time you think you've opened the last one, there's one more inside of that one. For all the pejoratives cast on Daley and his crew, no one can say they aren't clever mother-fuckers.

Orion really is kind of a low-watt bulb, huh? None of the reporters he questioned have done more than throw a few opinion paragraphs together, the Reader is the only publication with a serious investigation behind its stories. I'd say he could be Hizzoner, but I'm guessing he's more likely an overpaid lackey on his staff. Hell, the GOP has had interns and staffer spreading disinformation on blogs for almost a decade now, so it would make sense that our backwards political machine would have just caught on.

Foi me la bouche! In other words - shut the fuck up! If all your interested in being an apologist for our corrupt and unaccountable public servants - get off line and tend to that puppy you use our press to line your litter box. Orion is more than a low-watt bulb - he/she is the reason we have such unaccomplished, corrupt, incompetent, arrogant assholes filling our governments at the city/county/state/and federal level. Get a life, or only open your pie hole when you finally have something constructive to one of the discussions. I would strongly suggest that the Reader consider editing out this moron – what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If we aren’t allowed to questions our elect public servants – screw allowing free speech and valuable time to those who justify the undemocratic actions of those assholes.

If one were to review the articles in the archive, one would find that, from time to time, orion has posted comments from both 'sides of the fence', namely, sometimes he/she criticizes politicians and sometimes she/he criticizes those who criticize politicians. The only thing 'orion' is consistent on is criticizing. And that done with little to no style, intelligence or rationality. I suspect that, whether 'orion' is a single individual, or a group of the like-minded, the nature of the content of his/her comments has been, is and will likely continue to be, of no more consequence than the buzzing of a fly. Post all the comments you wish, 'orion', just as we tolerate the occasional few flies that find there way into the house, we can all surely find it in our hearts to tolerate you and yours.

Foi me la bouche!: Yep, I am the reason that only 36% of the electorate comes out to vote. I am the reason that for all the ranting of the goo-goo good govt. people, they never put their names out there for office, only criticize those that have taken the challenge of public office. Gee, I did not know I had so much power. Thanks guys.

Electric Expert: Yeah, the Hired Truck story broken by the sun times really did no harm to the Daley political organization. and Yeah, the Duff stories uncovered by the Tribune really did no harm either. jeez...

Is that 36% of all possible, eligible voters or 36% of all currently registered voters?

I, for one, hope that those who perform the moderating duties for this site do not, in any way, censor orion's posted comments. In my professional opinion, orion exhibits a wealth of symptoms common in a manic-depressive personality and, in this type of personality disorder, the patient desperately needs a harmless outlet in which to vent his or her radically shifting emotions. For orion to be summarily denied this outlet would, no doubt, lead to his or her acting out these potentially harmful, erratically changing moods in the real world and could very well result in his or her causing harm to others and/or to him/her-self. The minimal cost to those who visit this site, of tolerating the less than lucid ramblings orion posts, is, I believe, well worth the benefits, those being a reduced potential of orion having a critical episode among others, thus risking the real possibility of harmful consequences. As the condition orion is suffering from is rarely treatable without the patient's co-operation and compliance with standard treatment regimens, something I suspect orion would not be willing to accept as in his best interest, the better alternative is to continue humor him or her and hope that, at some time in the future, he or she will recognize their abnormal condition and seek professional assistance. Both I and Oprah are willing to pay the cost of the cutting edge treatments which orion is so very much in need of.

Thank you Dr. Phil. Are your rates as same as Lucy Van Pelt's ? 5 cents ?

*sigh* I suspect it has more to do with the budget deadlock and the gambling expansion initiative. the result of which is that Daley has highly increased security needs and a lowered budget to fulfill them. Daley wants any casinos in Chicago to be government owned. That can't be making the gangsters happy with him. Personally, I think not only should they be government owned, but that gambling losses should be tax deductible. Our tax collection ratio would go WAY up.

"Both I and Oprah are willing to pay the cost of the cutting edge treatments which orion is so very much in need of." Does this mean you're beginning to realize how ill you are?

"Daley wants any casinos in Chicago to be government owned. That can't be making the gangsters happy with him." You seem to differentiate between "government" and "the gangsters". I suspect it has more to do with the reasons why Daley has yet to be indicted, which is that he's flipped, big time, and his 'associates' have finally figured that out.

WITH CURRENT EVENTS BEING WHAT THEY ARE ,ITS SMART AND PRUDENT N--O--T TO MAKE THE MAYOR'S SCHEDULE PUBLIC. TODAY'S NEWS FROM NY PROVES WE HAVE ENEMIES AMONG US.IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE TO CRITICIZE AN OBVIOUS SECURITY DECISION.

Like any of 'our enemies' give a fuck what happens to little richie. If anything, there are hundreds of potential targets that even a 3rd rate writer of crappy cop shows could imagine, these 'enemies' you speak of are hardly likely to be interested in the whereabouts of our own, wonderful mayor mumbles. Besides the obvious public meaning of a city's mayor seeking to drastically limit the public's access to his public appearances, via limiting the public's knowledge of same, besides the fact that the mayor enjoys the protection of dozens of our finest officers, while those of us ordinary folks regularly visit and utilize the many public facilities that are much more likely to be targets of these 'enemies', without the benefits of a crew of personal bodyguards, some seem to think that everything that richie does is off limits to criticism. What is irresponsible is to criticize those who criticize. Maybe mister "DURING THESE TIMES" should catch the first fast boat to China, where he'll be more comfortable with the methods used there to suppress free speech.

Way to go Dumke, keep your eyes and pen on this Mayor.

Not really. I suspect whoever handles press contacts got their budget cut (certainly likely after the Springfield budget fights of the last few weeks, and decided that having only one contact per news outlet could let them work more efficiently. There are several reasons for not letting the public know the Mayors schedule. The terrorist Gadahn has threated a reign of terror on US cities, the Mayors stance on city ownership of gambling threatens the sort of people that tend to express their displeasure violently, and, of course there are the random nutcases that make this city so interesting. All we know is that there is a tremendous budget shortfall and the purpose of the Mayors schedule is to be visible to the public. That means that canceling the public announcements of where he is would require a specific security threat, otherwise he would have canceled the announcements a long time ago. It is not as if the number of crazies has increased significantly, lately. It could be a random nutcase, but then nobody would have known about it until he struck, which means there would not be a specific security threat. I don't think it is Gadahn, either. They hate to make it known but Chicago is one of the best at Homeland Security (they don't like it known because Chicago wants those DHS dollars for Search and Rescues teams, etc. Hard to justify that if your city is already the envy of the world, though, if we, as recently proposed, become a center of excellence for Homeland Security vendors, that might change) On the other hand, I can just see some frustrated wannabe casino boss making a casual threat and whatever police tapping his phone lines duly noting it down. When the PD's budget was also cut , they would have brought the threat up as a bargaining chip. Instead of restoring their full budget (which was impossible, there simply isn't any money available) Daley would have offered to cut the public announcements and to make their security job easier. I dunno, makes a lot more sense to me that Daley changing his accessibility this late in the game. If he was just trying to duck questions, you think he would have done it a lot earlier.

How is it that there are some citizens who insist on asserting that our city, county and state governments, controlled by our 'duly elected representatives', (duly elected by typically less than 20% of all eligible voters), are taxing us at the least possible rate, spending said taxes in the most efficient manner, for only those things that are absolutely necessary for our benefit and welfare, all their activities conducted with the utmost honesty and integrity, not a penny of our tax dollars wasted, misused, or otherwise mishandled, yet also refer to any and all, who doubt this to be true, as 'crazies', 'random nutcases', 'goo-goo good government people', and the like? If the mayor, aldermen, county commissioners, state senators and congressmen, and all other elected, appointed, hired or contracted individuals really gave a shit about the taxpayer's burdens and the so-called budgetary 'shortfall', they'd admit that there'd be no shortfall, but for their dishonest, greed-driven activities and that this 'shortfall' could be easily covered by every city, county and state employee, whether elected, appointed, hired or contracted, voluntarily taking a 10% reduction in their 'take', (ie. salaries), voluntarily accepting an individual yearly pay cap of $52,000, (an across the board, immediate reduction to this $52,000 a year cap by those presently 'earning' one penny above it), and by making a unified pledge to present an independent, verifiable yearly audit to the public, to prove that this is being done. To have the gall to state that "there simply isn't any money available", regardless of what specific budget this statement references, is to believe that the citizens of this city, county and state are functional morons. While there may be ample, anecdotal 'evidence' that is persuasive of this opinion, I find it offensively insulting for anyone to presume that opinion = fact. Slipping these many subtle assertions into a comment purportedly about the mayor's possible reasons for limiting public knowledge of his daily whereabouts, one proposed being "that having only one contact per news outlet could let them work more efficiently.", is slick, but hardly honest. And "work more efficiently"? A city office worker that has even heard of the word 'efficient', let alone had any idea of it's meaning, would be a true, in the flesh, oxymoron. While the interests of free speech prohibit my suggesting that those who's interest's lie in posting feeble excuses and clever misdirections for the mayor and his minions be 'moderated', one would have to be quite naive to buy into this blather.

It must really suck to be you guys, seeing conspiracy behind every corner. Maybe you should just stay in your basement, if you have one, with your tin-foil helmet on.

up at dawn, ready to hit the streets, hurry up, orion, you don't want to be late for that cushy in-at-9am, out-by-1pm 'executive'. 70k-a-year city job, wouldn't want to give anyone the impression that you don't 'work' for your 'hardly-earned' swag.

"Maybe mister "DURING THESE TIMES" should catch the first fast boat to China, where he'll be more comfortable with the methods used there to suppress free speech." As opposed to Chicago's sterling silver history of tolerating political protests? Did you think it all stopped after 68?

Dont be late (or whatever you chose to call yourself nowadays: I guess I could be an anti-government slacker, sleeping in till 10:00am after an evening of smoking pot and upbraiding my city, but then all that gets you is a gig at the free/alternative weekly. No thanks,

LEFTIE,CHINA IS YOUR IDEOLIGICAL RULER NOW THAT THE SOVIET UNION COLLAPSED. I ONLY STATE THE OBVIOUS, THAT THE MAYOR OF CHICAGO MUST BE PROTECTED FROM THE DANGEROUS ENEMIES OUR NATION HAS.

"THE DANGEROUS ENEMIES OUR NATION HAS." You're referring to who, precisely? The Bush crime family? The Daley crime family? Name some names, preferably not in all capitols.

orion, Now why would you want to be anything but what you are?

how else can the fool post that denial of our being the target of Islamofascist enemies?

So, questions being posed now equal "denial"? "You're referring to who, precisely?" "Name some names, preferably not in all capitols." And the observation that our own, home-grown enemies of freedom and democracy, ie., the criminal enterprises that pass for our political 'leaders', are more harmful to our safety and security than any foreign bunch of knuckleheads, is characterized as 'bashing' America? Sounds like Hitler and McCarthy would be proud that fear-mongering is alive and well.

How soon we forget the words of Winston Churchill. In times of crisis, there will always be both those cynical, deceptive scum who will exploit any fear, and those timid, brainless rabbits and mice, who will be vulnerable to said exploitation.

It is good that you are taking an active interest in the budget, however, I should point out that I was not intending anything more than commenting that the cut in the schedule announcements were the result of the current budget crisis/deadlock and the ensuing budget cuts. That being said, while it is impossible to discuss a complicated issue like the budget in a comment, I would like to make my views clear. Illinois revenues are in great shape, but we do have some serious spending issues. The most serious of these is the unfunded pension obligation. It is really hard to believe they are cheating themselves out of their own pensions. As for cutting salaries, most of the budget proposals contain severe cutbacks in personell and agencies. I don't think they are just for show, these are publicly posted proposals that were presented for approval. Finally, we are way behind on our payments to medicare providers. The reasons for this have little to do with salaries. Frankly, salary cuts simply would not make enough of a significant difference in the shortfalls. The real problem is public services. We haven't had enough revenue growth to cover our services since 2002. We haven't had the political will to cut any services, either, unfortunately, and, this year, the capital markets have had enough of the games that they are cracking down on this practice. So, what services do we cut? If you are interested in details, the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability has a fairly balanced website (http://www.ctbaonline.org). The other alternative is economic development and here, in Westridge (50th and 40th wards) I have been trying to get some of that going, as have other in other parts of the city. The problem is, there isnt enough capital (political and economic) for the sort of speculative investment that would actually make a difference. What we need is not the government (which is barely holding things together) but private citizens to make a real effort to focus on the economic development of the city.

"Frankly, salary cuts simply would not make enough of a significant difference in the shortfalls." That depends on what you define as significant. ANY reduction in the 'shortfall' is significant to the taxpayers. Additionally, the statement, that across-the-board pay cuts and a $52,000 cap on ALL yearly salaries would make to the taxpayers/voters, would be worth it's weight in gold, would show the citizens that their 'public servants' are willing to share the economic pains which have been caused by the 'policies' and 'practices' created by same and just might delay the impending 'house cleaning' that the developing 'HAVE NO DOUBT, VOTE INCUMBENTS OUT' movement is encouraging. Your comment fails to include any mention of the fraudulent, criminally abusive, mismanaged, misused and wasted taxpayer dollars, so I must assume you either naively believe that there is no significant amount involved, or that you approve and/or benefit from same. Your implied assumption, that all 'services' are equally beneficial to our fellow citizens, and, thus, no services can be cut without harmfully affecting same, by your asking "So, what services do we cut?", is another veiled threat, unworthy of someone of your apparent intelligence. The idiot poster 'orion' has been less subtle, in his "...so keep your taxes, they will not be missed." and "....do not call the police or fire depts when you need help." statements. Finally, what we really need is for our governments, city, county, state and federal, to reduce the amount of money they 'take' from us, so we will have the means to "make a real effort to focus on the economic development of the city." P.S. "It is really hard to believe they are cheating themselves out of their own pensions." They're not, only using this as a threat to 'fire up' those many city, county and state employees that have been making grumbling noises objecting to all the time they expect they'll have to put in 'working the phones', 'canvassing the neighborhoods', 'getting out the votes', etc., during the upcoming national elections. That's quite a leverage tool, don't you think?

I really wish it were that simple. Let me give an analogy. It is easy enough to turn a canoe around, its a lot harder to turn an ocean liner. And a canoe the size of an ocean line has the problems of an ocean liner, not a big canoe. Reforming our ship of state isn't as simple as saying "get rid of all the waste and unfair lobbying" (which, incidentally, actually was an executive order earlier this year. ) In most cases, you can't tell what is waste without understanding the situation fully. For example, We often stockpile salt that we never use. Thats a waste...until the first ice storm, when there is no time to have it delivered. For four years now, we have been avoiding cutting services. We have been doing that by borrowing everything we could, failing to pay our debts, and selling off assets. And here and now, there is precious little left. Little we can sell, no credit, and our debts are ridiculous. We are living WAY beyond our means. We are going to have to cut services, we can't pay for them, and the federal government reserves the right to print money to itself. So I repeat again, what do we cut? You say that some services are less important than others. Great. Tell me what they are, and if the majority of Illinois citizens agree with you. we can make it happen. It is a democracy, after all, and it's their money also. Which, of course, is the trick. Just think about how much we could save by eliminating, say, environmental protections or traffic laws... Wanna try and get that one passed? And I agree, the government should take less from all of us. How exactly do you propose to do that? The governors tax fairness plan is his idea of how to do that. The Illinois budget is 488 pages long. The Tax Fairness plan isn't just some soundbites, its a long and involved negotiation lasting for at least until July. Why? Because there are other stakeholders, with their own ideas how to "take less from us" and cut services, and they have compelling arguments of their own and just as much right as the governor to present their ideas. As do you. All 488 pages of the budget are available as a PDF, online. http://www.state.il.us/budget/ What particular items would you cut and how would you justify it? P.S. As an aside, they aren't threatening to cut the pensions, the Illinois pension fund is funded at the lowest level of any state, because contributions to the fund from the budget have been delayed for years as those funds were diverted to pay for services.

Where to begin...... "Your comment fails to include any mention of the fraudulent, criminally abusive, mismanaged, misused and wasted taxpayer dollars, so I must assume you either naively believe that there is no significant amount involved, or that you approve and/or benefit from same." Let's start with all those city, county and state workers, retired workers and those personal favorites of mine, the 'discretionary hires'. If all of the above truly entered 'public service' work to serve the public, then they would all, to the last man and woman, voluntarily accept cuts in their pay and pensions of at least 10%, effective immediately. If those esteemed elected officials were truly committed to acting in the best interests of the citizens of our once-great state, they would voluntarily accept an immediate reduction of their salaries to a maximum of $52,000, (all salaries currently at or below being reduced by 10%). I doubt the above actions would have "Frankly, salary cuts simply would not make enough of a significant difference in the shortfalls.", ie., once again, every taxpayer dollar not spent will reduce the 'shortfall' and, I guarantee that the voters who DO NOT have government jobs or are NOT retired from government jobs will agree. If you think that the above cuts would not make much of a difference, than, by all means, make the cuts 20% across the board. Several times in my long lifetime I've had to make due with much greater reductions to my income, if you're not a spoiled clout monkey, you'll find a way to survive. Your example of the 'appearance' of 'waste' is absurd; the stockpiling of salt, purchased at today's prices, would only be a bad move if salt prices were to have dropped in the future; preparing for a rainy day isn't the waste I spoke of. Now, if a 'significant' amount of that stock-piled salt were to find it's way into the possession of, say, several companies and/or contractors, who 'happened' to have made 'significant' contributions to political campaigns, now, that WOULD BE waste, even criminal theft. As for what constitutes a criminal act, well, for an act to be considered a crime, it must violate a specific law. When those who make the law do so with the intent to permit acts to occur, free from specific criminality by law, but still crimes as seen by the average citizen, ie., acts that an honest, honorable man or woman would be ashamed to commit, this constitutes corruption at it's most accomplished. The argument against cutting the pay of elected officials that I've heard the most often goes something like this: You get what you pay for and, if government, (taxpayers), doesn't pay good wages, then government won't be able to attract good people to work for the public good. Yeah, and ducks wear boots. (I heard that one on 'Judge Mathis'.) The definition of good people seeking to enter public service are people choosing to do good by serving their fellow citizens, not by serving themselves. I much prefer having an honest man or woman of 'average' intelligence working for me than a smart man or woman; the smart ones are usually capable of much harm, should they be less than honest. You say "We are living WAY beyond our means". Who does "We" refer to? Our overpaid elected officials? Their overpaid 'discretionary' hires? The excessive 'political-indentured-servants' hires padding every government payroll, from the city up to the state level? All the sweetheart wheeler-dealers who get no-bid or fixed-bid contracts? Or, once again, are you one of those guys who only believes that corruption exists where and when it is exposed and prosecuted? "Just think about how much we could save by eliminating, say, environmental protections or traffic laws... Wanna try and get that one passed?" Another disappointing attempt at using the old, tired, 'stop complaining, taxpayers, or we'll let your house burn to the ground' threat. Please try to rise above the scum. As far as your 'Titanic' analogy, the Titanic had a captain who did his best, with no way to avoid the iceberg, short of possessing psychic powers; our several 'captains' deliberately overload the ship-of-state, ship-of-county and ship-of-city with bloated, no-show and slow-mo 'workers', crates filled with insider contracts, (they've sold the lifeboats for scrap years ago), and don't know how to read a compass, let alone a sextant. We, the people, didn't directly create our problems, but we did enable those who did. And we continue to do so. Perhaps we all deserve to go down with the ship.

Notice that this last comment stopped randy's posting? Randy's not gonna attempt to get involved in any serious, specific conversation, budy, he don't make out so well when he's put on the spot of having to be truthful, he much prefers to prepare and feed baby food to his audience, than to get down to the dirty business of answering the tough questions truthfully. Making feeble excuses, couched in seemingly reasonable syntax is more his style and forte. Like an accomplished used car salesman, he tries to get you to believe that the piece of junk he's touting is really a well-running classic, just sign here and drive your 'new' baby home to mama. Don't hold your breath waiting for randy to respond to your frankness in kind.

Randy Gordon is a tool of the machine. Lets blame the budget mess in Springfield for all the mismanagement, but understand that your very well paid part-time elected representatives at all levels of government have a hard job and shouldn't be held accountable for their lack of leadership...blah blah blah! He's a tool.

Actually, I had forgot about this thread. It really wasn't that important to me. As far as serious, specific conversation, I am very interested in what line items in the budget you would suggest cutting. It is easy enough to rail against waste, and suggest generalities, but, at the end of the day, the budget is what has to be cut. So I ask again. What specific lines items would you cut, and what is your rationale for cutting those items as opposed to the other items in the budget? That is the real tough question that needs answering.

What was confusing about "Let's start with all those city, county and state workers, retired workers and those personal favorites of mine, the 'discretionary hires'. If all of the above truly entered 'public service' work to serve the public, then they would all, to the last man and woman, voluntarily accept cuts in their pay and pensions of at least 10%, effective immediately. If those esteemed elected officials were truly committed to acting in the best interests of the citizens of our once-great state, they would voluntarily accept an immediate reduction of their salaries to a maximum of $52,000, (all salaries currently at or below being reduced by 10%). I doubt the above actions would have "Frankly, salary cuts simply would not make enough of a significant difference in the shortfalls.", ie., once again, every taxpayer dollar not spent will reduce the 'shortfall' and, I guarantee that the voters who DO NOT have government jobs or are NOT retired from government jobs will agree. If you think that the above cuts would not make much of a difference, than, by all means, make the cuts 20% across the board."???? Go ahead, randy, tell us all how 10% to 20% pay cuts ACROSS THE BOARD, ie., ALL city, county and state employees and ALL those now retired, would be an 'insignificant' amount. Present the hundreds of thousands of government employees with the options commonly experienced by those in the private sector, ie., keep the workforce the same, at reduced compensation, or reduce the workforce, with the pay of those still employed remaining the same. As to your obsession with cutting specific items, there's no need to cut items, only to reduce the amounts paid for same. Again, 10% to 20% reductions ACROSS THE BOARD, meaning, as the rule, ALL LINE ITEMS, dealing with all legal, contractual obstacles on a case by case basis. If you have any knowledge of the actual workings of the law, you will understand the leverage embodied in the phrase, 'it's always better to settle than to litigate'. What's so tough about that?

It seems like randy has no answer to your question, maybe he's not honest enough to admit that cost-cutting, to reduce taxes, is not that complicated, doesn't require the total elimination or catastrophic slashing of specific government programs and services, only the equal sharing of reduced budgets and expenditures. Every private sector business faced with red ink does this all the time, it's called being efficient and surviving tough times. Apparently, randy doesn't think times are tough enough, for the taxpayers, that is, to warrant the cost cutting measures suggested in your posting. Or is it that he just doesn't care?

No, actually, it is just that this isn't really my primary occupation, so I don't revisit this unless I have a few extra minutes. A salary cut across the board? Interesting idea. Lets examine some of the results of that action. First of all, how would you implement it? Departments have budgets, not salaries. How much of their budget goes to salaries is their decision, so long as they fufill their charters. So lets assume we just order them to freeze hiring (otherwise they could avoid it by just rehiring at a higher rate) and cut everyones salary by the amount you suggest If any department fails to fulfill their charter (whether or not a work slowdown occurs, as it has in the past), the department will just claim they didn't have enough resources to fulfill their chartered responsibilities. SO, perhaps the response would be to fire the managers. All that churn is not going to help the department fulfill its charter any better. More importantly, what about those departments that are on bare minimum budget already? You really want to screw up some poor ghetto kids education and future opportunities because his school has higher expenses that some of the schools frequented by wealthier students that can afford to purchase their own supplies? How avbout attrition (you havet o have a hiring freeze in ordert ot make this work). How do you tell what is a needed job or not since noone outside the department has intimate knowledge of what it needs to execute it's responsibilities. THats why I asked for specific budget cuts. A city or state government is not like a potato, you can't just trimm off a portion. It is more like a body, where you can loose an appendix, or 20% of your spleen without serious consequence, but losing 10% of your heart or brain function would severely limit your future. The state and city knows it has a serious shortfall of revenues, and every budget proposal has included many cuts in specific programs. However, cutting across the board simply is not an option, some services are more vital than others. What we need to decide (and are not doing so) is a prioritization of services, so we can understand what budgets we can cut. Everyone has a different idea of what services to prioritize, and so, I ask you for a third time, what services would you cut, and why?

Thanks for falling back on the usual technique of threatening to hurt the most vulnerable, it shows us your true colors on this issue. "Present the hundreds of thousands of government employees with the options commonly experienced by those in the private sector, ie., keep the workforce the same, at reduced compensation, or reduce the workforce, with the pay of those still employed remaining the same." Should those currently enjoying the benefits and security of having a government job find that they don't want to remain in public service, there are literally hundreds of thousands of people ready and willing to replace them. and "As to your obsession with cutting specific items, there's no need to cut items, only to reduce the amounts paid for same. Again, 10% to 20% reductions ACROSS THE BOARD, meaning, as the rule, ALL LINE ITEMS, dealing with all legal, contractual obstacles on a case by case basis. If you have any knowledge of the actual workings of the law, you will understand the leverage embodied in the phrase, 'it's always better to settle than to litigate'." If there was, on the part of those who control our governmental budgets, the will and desire to spend the taxpayers dollars efficiently and wisely, we wouldn't have anything to discuss, our total tax burdens would be less than half of what they are, our government services would be actually effective and helpful to those in need, and we'd all be more supportive and less critical of our elected officials and their chosen activities. It's the lack of effective accountability, both in what they do and what they tell us about what they do, that has resulted in our long-standing economic and tax burdens. Those in power don't want to solve problems, they merely want to prolong problems, to have something to use as the reason why we should keep reelecting them.

Randy's 'spin machine' strikes again. "First of all, how would you implement it? Departments have budgets, not salaries. How much of their budget goes to salaries is their decision, so long as they fufill their charters. So lets assume we just order them to freeze hiring (otherwise they could avoid it by just rehiring at a higher rate) and cut everyones salary by the amount you suggest If any department fails to fulfill their charter (whether or not a work slowdown occurs, as it has in the past), the department will just claim they didn't have enough resources to fulfill their chartered responsibilities. SO, perhaps the response would be to fire the managers. All that churn is not going to help the department fulfill its charter any better." First off, your premises are faulty. All costs incurred by every governmental 'department' come solely from the pockets of the taxpayers, the same taxpayers who have virtually no say in anything. All departments have a stated purpose and an actual purpose. The stated purpose is for the benefit of the public. The actual purpose is, directly or indirectly, for the benefit of the many political hacks. Governmental departments are primarily run with the latter concerns in mind, not the former. Fire all the managers? And keep all the 'workers' who participated in a 'work slowdown'? How much slower does randy think government workers can 'work', they're already 'working' as slowly as is humanly possible, without turning into pillars of stone. That's the one's that have to show up. How about paying attention to the important point being made, ie., if you can't, or won't, do the work required, there's the door, seek employment elsewhere and we'll see how well your replacements appreciate having a government job. "More importantly, what about those departments that are on bare minimum budget already?" You mean like the mayor's office? The city council's offices? The myriad of neighborhood 'programs', contracted or not, that supposedly 'serve' the citizens? The departments of Streets and Sans? Water & Sewers? Building & Planning? The City Colleges? All these departments, with charters they've got to fulfill, working heroically on those bare-bones budgets, you bring tears to my eyes, for all those clout monkeys who've been forced out onto the streets by the wholesale layoffs we've seen lately.... Oh, that's right, there ain't been no layoffs, no significant cut-backs, no reductions in top salaries and padded payrolls, no end to the sweetheart contracts being doled out, just the same old bait-and-switch games, played by the same old players, which we can count on good old randy to 'apologize' for. You forgot to include a long, drawn-out history lesson in your post.