Article 59. Real Government Reform Versus Political Maneuvering
I have tried to keep this website nonpolitical because the reforms I recommend are far reaching and generally cannot be implemented by one party without some bipartisan support. The Reforms I recommend should bring multiple benefits to the state and its employees. I am reluctant to criticize political maneuvering because it is a part of our democratic process and occurs so often that it is not worth mentioning. However misguided and damaging activities that interfere with real reform are not out of bounds.
Consider the recent California propositions touted as government reforms, which the public soundly defeated in the November 8, 2005 special election. Several of the propositions were blatant attempts to gain political advantage and had nothing to do with real government reform. The problem for Governor Shawartzenegger is that he has wasted his political capital on political maneuvering and only now is ready to join in a bipartisan effort for reform. The Governor’s proposal to consolidate purchasing for all of California’s prisons was a step in the right direction but a rather wimpy response to statewide purchasing which I recommend. Statewide purchasing through volume purchases force suppliers to adjust to aggressive competitive bidding rather than the current purchasing method which in most cases can be described as order placing. Statewide purchasing can be the largest single contributor to balancing the state’s budget. See Article 21. “Centralized Purchasing- The Best Way to Balance State Budgets”, Article 28. “Making Centralized Purchasing Work using Aggressive Negotiation” and Reader Question 6. “How do you implement a Statewide Purchasing System?”.
Prescription drugs should also be a part of statewide negotiated purchasing. Distribution of prescription drugs should be through local pharmacies.
California is large enough to have a state energy purchasing board capable of negotiating energy purchases directly from suppliers rather than placing orders through energy trading companies like Enron. Other states should ban together to form area energy boards such as in New England. It makes good sense to do this to protect the state against high-energy prices and the manipulation of energy trading companies.
Some states have formed Government Reform Commissions which I feel can be a very productive way of approaching change especially when there is opportunity for the public to participate in decisions. Missouri’s Governor Blunt has charged the Missouri commission with “looking at each state department in terms of its structure, efficiency and focused goals or duties. The effort of the unpaid members of the commission is to devise ways to make state government more effective, fiscally responsible and service oriented.” The commission’s recommendations will be submitted no later than one year from their first meeting on March 8, 2005.
