DiscussMormonism.com

KG wrote:The fact is employment in the private sector has been on the rise for something like 24 months straight, and the Republican states have cut nearly a million jobs in the public sector. This in and of itself would lower the unemployment rate roughly two points!

Red states versus blue states: Who’s laying off more government workers?

...

When President Obama touts his record on creating jobs, he usually focuses on private-sector job growth. That’s no accident, because government jobs have been in a steep decline, especially at the state and local level, as many governors have slashed jobs (especially for teachers) to meet requirements that they keep their budgets balanced.

The decline in government jobs, which started in earnest when Obama’s federal stimulus funds ran low, has been a major factor in the anemic job creation during Obama’s tenure. But how much is a president to blame for that?

As readers of this column know, we frown on the journalistic and political artifice of pretending that a president, as soon as he takes the oath of office, is responsible for every facet of the economy. The relationship between a president and state and local government jobs is even more tenuous, because those jobs are dependent on the decisions of other elected officials — governors and state legislators. The overall state of the national economy certainly plays a role in those decisions, but those other officials may have different agendas than the president.

Indeed, some have argued that Republican takeovers at the state level in 2010 elections have led to severe cutbacks in public workforces.

When a reader asked us whether “Red” (Republican) states accounted for more job losses than “Blue” (Democratic) states during Obama’s presidency, we decided to investigate. We used Bureau of Labor Statistics data and the help of the incomparable Lori Williams at Tableau Software. We make no judgment about whether reductions in state and local government jobs are justified--some readers might believe state budgets are bloated--but simply want to explore what has happened in the past three years.


The Facts

The question is actually a difficult one to answer. There are few pure Red or Blue states. There are states led by Democratic governors, with Republican legislatures, or visa versa. There are state legislatures split between Democrats and Republicans. Moreover, there are data on state government jobs and on local (city and county) government jobs, which of course are heavily influenced by state budget funds.

While some states, such as North Dakota with its newfound oil riches, have added government jobs, the data demonstrate the grim budget picture that most states have faced. An analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has found that as stimulus funds dried up, many states responded with spending cuts, not revenue increases, to close the gap.

The visual below starts with the first month of Obama’s presidency — January 2009. To keep things simple, we labeled a state as Democrat or Republican based on current affiliation, though obviously there have been some party shifts, because most of the losses have occurred more recently.

We show the results in percentages because raw numbers are often misleading (using raw numbers, Democratic-led California by itself accounts for a large chunk of the overall job losses.)

The visual below reveals that:

1. Democratic governors and legislatures had a much better record on state government jobs, cutting them by a smaller percentage than their Republican counterparts.

2. Republican governors and legislatures, by contrast, did much better on local government jobs.

3. Legislatures that are split between the parties had the best performance of all.

4. There is virtually no difference between Republicans and Democrats when the state and local jobs are combined.

...

I know that California, which is certainly Not a “Republican” State, has been laying off a lot of Government workers over the last couple of years.

Editorial: Fewer, but very well-paid, state workers

California has fewer state workers per capita than most states; their salaries are highest.

THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER

California has the highest-paid state employees among the 50 states, but close to the lowest number of state employees per capita. The numbers come from a new analysis by Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy, an independent think tank based in Palo Alto. The analysis used 2011 data from the U.S. Census Bureau.
The average salary for California state employees was $70,777. That was ahead of salaries in four liberal Northeastern states: New Jersey, $69,302; Connecticut, $67,828; New York, $67,250; and Rhode Island, $63,678. It's also nearly 40 percent higher than salaries in our Western competitor Texas, at $51,449.
Those numbers were just for state employees. When state and local employees are combined, California still is tops with $67,524 average salaries, compared to $65,188 for No. 2 New Jersey, and just $45,022 for Texas.
That's worth keeping in mind when Gov. Jerry Brown and others insist we need to raise taxes, via Propositions 30 and 38, to avoid deeper cuts in state services and classroom teaching.
When ranking states based on ratio of state employees to population, California in 2011 ranked fifth-lowest, at 467 per 10,000 residents. Nevada was lowest, at 420 per 10,000, followed by Arizona, 433; Mississippi, 462; and Pennsylvania, 465.
"A lot of government workers prefer it this way," Assemblyman Chris Norby, R-Fullerton, told us. "But I would rather have more and pay them less." However, Mr. Norby, a former public school teacher, cautioned that, in some areas, such as teaching, the best mix seems to be higher-paid, excellent teachers teaching large classes.
The problem, alas, is that teacher tenure and other rules promote compensation based more on longevity than teacher effectiveness. Mr. Norby also noted that, in public education in California, "more than half the money is going to teacher salaries." The rest is going to administration.
The result is shown in state test scores, in which California students routinely finish near the bottom of the states.
We also have noted in previous editorials that both the University of California and California State University systems now employ more administrators than professors. The administrators commonly make more, on average, than the professors.
University professors "also have a lower teaching load than 20 years ago," Mr. Norby said. "The universities are administratively top-heavy. They have to spend a lot on mandatory programs. Mandatory K-12 programs also add to costs. Look at whom they are serving: The people or the mandates?"
The mandates have come from federal programs with strings attached to the funding. But they also have come from state mandates written by the Legislature that have bulked up the California Education Code to 12 volumes.
As the past 20 years have shown, the bureaucracy and public-employee unions make reforms all but impossible. But at least when they come asking for more tax money, we can point out that they already make more than any other state employees in the nation.