The Markell Budget: Comfort the Comfortable, Afflict the Afflicted
“…Everybody knows the fight was fixed
The poor stay poor, the rich get rich
That’s how it goes
Everybody knows”.
Leonard Cohen- “Everybody Knows”
While Leonard Cohen wasn’t talking about the choices that the Markell Administration has made in this year’s budget, he very well could have been.
As the Joint Finance Committee peels back more layers of this rancid budgetary onion, we see the priorities of this administration, and what we see is an ostensibly progressive administration time and time again comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted.
Here’s what we’ve learned so far, with more examples surely to come as the JFC continues its hearings:
The Governor:
“…followed the recommendation of DHSS and proposed cutting $4.5 million in cash assistance for a adults who are unemployable, destitute and sometimes homeless. About 3,500 single adults receive checks of about $94 each month (corrected in the N-J) through the welfare program, according to DHSS.”
The Governor, according to Judgepedia, proposed:
“a 3.6% pay raise for the state’s 19 Superior Court judges. The pay increase is scheduled for a year when nearly all of Delaware’s 17,000+ state employees are facing a pay freeze. The increase would bring the annual salaries of 18 associate justices to $174,950 and President Judge James T. Vaughn, Jr. to $185,750.
The reasoning behind the raise is an effort to correct a “mistake” made in 2004 when Chancery Court judges received a pay increase over what the Superior Court judges were earning. Prior to 2004 the two courts were compensated at the same level. Superior Courts hear criminal cases, while the Chancery Court hears cases regarding financial issues.
Those who recommended the 2004 Chancery Court pay increase however, deny that it was an error, saying that the Chancery Court handles “more complicated” cases and warrants additional compensation.
The Governor is aided and abetted in this transparent attempt to ‘comfort the comfortable’ by the out-of-touch upper crust on the News-Journal editorial board, who wrote:
Gov. Jack Markell is on solid ground here to call for the 19 Superior Court judges to be brought up to the same salary level as vice chancellors, which accounts for a 3.6 percent increase. That’s not a budget buster in a state operating statement of $3.4 billion. It’s only about $157,000.
Got it? It’s not a budget-buster, so they should get the raise. Forget about the fact that they’re already making close to $150K a year, and that virtually all other state employees will get no increase, if indeed they’re fortunate enough to keep their jobs. Besides, these self-appointed ‘leaders’ all go to the same cocktail parties and social functions, so the Editorial Board just knows how tough it is to make ends meet on $150K annually.
In the wake of our state’s continuing economic hard times and considering the dire situation many Delawareans find themselves in, it verges on policy pornography to deny the ‘unemployable, destitute and sometimes homeless’ $94 a month in Medicaid assistance while giving financially-secure judges a raise that they don’t need. Yet that’s what Jack Markell proposes.
It got even worse at the end of last week. We had read that Markell’s budget would result in the following:
“The University of Delaware, Delaware State University and Delaware Technical and Community College would share a $6.52 million reduction in their annual appropriation.”
Guess what? Now we know where some of those cuts are coming. They’re not coming out of operating budgets. Hell, the University of Delaware, which gets millions upon millions of state dollars every year, isn’t even required by law to make public how it’s spending those dollars. It’s not coming out of Lonnie George’s bloated salary as the highest-paid Delaware state employee. No, the State instead proposes to break a solemn promise that it made to students struggling to afford college. The inevitable result is that fewer students will receive $1300 per semester needed to attend school. Why? The overrun to the SEED Program is about $800,000 to $1 million over the projected $3 million annual budget. Forget about the fact that students took the state promise on faith, worked to get their grades up to the level needed to qualify, and worked to ensure that, once eligible, their grades would enable them to continue to receive the funding.
The state is breaking its promise, pure and simple. Budget Director Anne Visalli says:
“If you were to have an unlimited admission, then you would have to come up with the money to fund the program,” she told legislators on JFC. “What we’re saying is, ‘Don’t admit students above the $3 million.’ … The appropriation in the budget should match the admission.”
Of course, it’s not an ‘unlimited admission’, it is available to only those who qualify. Except that now, thanks to the Markell Administration, it won’t be available to all those who qualify.
And what does the high and mighty News-Journal Editorial Board have to say about this? The same out-of-touch self-styled opinion-makers who support raises for judges kiss off needy students thusly:
Will some potential scholarship honorees be overlooked by the schools, yes. But saving money in government operations is not always pretty. SEED and Inspire are both worthy and helpful to the future education of young Delawareans. But the money cannot be considered infinite when budgets need cutting.
First of all, no one is considering money infinite when the shortfall to fully-fund these scholarships is between $800,000 and $1 mill. That’s chump change in a $3.4 billion budget. And, second, once again, no other options are even mentioned by the News-Journal nor, for that matter, the Governor.
The News-Journal concludes by saying that “(t)hey (the General Assembly) also should pledge to restore the scholarships to all who qualify when the economy and state budget turn around.” The judges, of course, shouldn’t have to wait.
What both the Journal and the Governor willfully ignore is that the relative cost to preserve essentials like Medicaid funding to our most vulnerable and scholarships for those who would comprise the “21st Century Workforce” are relative pittances.
These and other important priorities could easily be restored if only the Governor exercised some political will and insisted that those who have flourished financially, while scores of others have floundered and fallen, actually share some of those ill-gotten gains for the public good. By eliminating the flat tax for the fortunate few, by adding maybe two or three more income brackets at the top end, say at $100K, $250K, and $500K, many truly needy and deserving Delawareans will be helped. Instead of telling qualified students that they’ll get their scholarships when and if the economy turns around, how about telling the billionaires on the hill that their obscene tax breaks will be restored when and if the economy turns around? Maybe some of the fat and happy plutocrats might even feel moved to create a job or two under that scenario.
What the Governor is proposing is inequitable. He is proposing that nobody with ample financial means should have to sacrifice at all and some, like judges, should be immune in these hard times. Rather, students, the unemployable, the indigent, and the homeless, will simply have to tighten their belts.
I hereby call on Governor Markell to either revisit these priorities and/or to at least state publicly why he expects everybody but the well-to-do to share in the sacrifice.
I expect it of the News-Journal board, I did not expect it of Governor Markell. Does he really want his legacy to be: “He comforted the comfortable and afflicted the afflicted”?
Coming tomorrow (Well, maybe not, I’m currently scouring the Delaware Code for the pertinent statutes, but they’re not where logic would dictate they should be): In taking the Governor at his word that he will consider any and all ‘good ideas’, I will propose yet another way to help the state generate revenue with absolutely no cost to anybody…well, almost anybody.
El, you posit a well-reasoned and passionate argument as to why certain aspects of Gov. Markell’s budget proposal are unfair. However, how can you be so blind to reality. The Us vs. Them Class Warfare and wealth redistribution meme is anachronistic at best.
Indeed, Chancery judges do handle enormously more complicated cases, and yes, King Orlando makes way too much money vis-a-vis his responsibilities, but punishing people for their skills, education and experience because of some progressive ideal is not the answer.
The single best way to soften our state’s budgetary cost curve is to streamline all of our agencies, its many overpaid nepotismic cronies and to follow in Chris Christies’ footsteps. Just fixing one or two of our recent crony capitalism scandals can bring enough savings to fund your so-called ‘unemployable,’ and ‘indigent’ Delawareans for dozens of years.
Nearly every state, city, town and municipality is facing budgetary woes. The best solutions are from the leaders who recognize overpromising and underdelivering does not work.
You are willfully blind if you don’t see class warfare being waged.
Cut Grant in Aid by 10% for multiple years then you look like a hero when it is left at the previous years level, when in fact with inflation factored in it will be less that 70% of the previous administration appropriation. Pedefile Priests closed St. Pauls school. Greedy state bureaucrats are stripping the poorest among us of basic human needs. We should be so proud.
Ah, the ‘class warfare’ canard. Why am I not surprised?
Is it not class warfare that those who earn under $60K a year are taxed under a progressive system that taxes those at $60 K at a higher percentage than those that earn $40K, but taxes those who earn $60,001 at the same percentage as those who earn, say, $500K a year?
The system has been skewed to disproportionately benefit the wealthy, many of whom, in Delaware at least, did nothing to earn their fortunes other than happening to be born into extremely wealthy families.
The simple fact is that class warfare has been waged by the wealthy on everybody else for years and, in Delaware, especially, quite successfully. Labeling something as ‘anachronistic’ is simply a rhetorical trick to dismiss something without actually employing your brain to consider the merits of the argument.
As to the ‘so-called ‘unemployable and indigent Delawareans’ those were not my words, but those of the Governor’s budget presentation.
As to the ‘crony capitalism scandals’, come back tomorrow for my alternative proposal.
This Governor, who I actively supported and campaigned on behalf of, has adopted what I believe to be an inequitable approach to balancing the budget. So far, his administration has been mum on this. He’s probably counting on worry trolls like you to do his dirty work for him.
If he continues to do that, I will continue to call him out.
The best illustration of the successful war waged by Delaware’s rich is the lack of a statewide property tax. It’s not hard to figure out why the situation exists considering the land-rich nature of the aristocratic oligarchy that ran the state from the banks of the Brandywine for two centuries.
We have one of the highest income tax rates in the nation, and are one of only 16 states (IIRC) with no property tax. Think of all the scions who lived off stock dividends instead of a salary and you’ll soon understand why that is.
Class warfare is far from a canard; it’s SOP for nearly all progressives.
It is only class warfare when progressives complain about it. When Republicans actually set out to weaken the middle class and punish the poor, it is good business, and not class warfare.
A typical disgusting Rethug is what Newshound is.
“ostensibly progressive administration”…someone (a Carney supporter during the gubernatorial primary) warned me that Markell was not a true progressive, that he would primarily serve the interests of the Greenville elites, that he was essentially a Carper Democrat. I had some trepidation given Markell’s close association with the DLC, but I believed the rhetoric coming from the Markell campaign. My friend was correct. Markell has been a huge disappointment.
Dana,
You took advice from a Carney supporter to make a decision on Markell? I mean, who ever thought Markell was a progressive? Ever?
No politician or campaign governs like their rhetoric. It’s typical pandering. One can only make the best choice possible given the information, the circumstances and the party choices.
“Class warfare is far from a canard; it’s SOP for nearly all progressives.”
Just as kissing the upper class’s asses is SOP for nearly all conservatives. The form it generally takes is terming calls for greater sacrifice by the richest “class warfare.”
Watching this from a third party standpoint is fairly amusing. Markell and the Delaware Democratic party captured the center by enacting a non-fringe left agenda. This drove the Republican party so far to the right that it only encapsulates the God, Guns, and Glory crowd. The strategy proved successful as it turned the Delaware Democratic party into one lean, mean political machine.
But there is a tradeoff. To capture the center, the party lost a few of its agenda items the far left want.
So what do you all want to do? Become the O’Donnells of the left and launch destructive primaries that cede the middle ground to the other side and lose elections. Or do you all want to win elections, but not get everything you want?
Very good point Del Libertarian.
I don’t see how that’s such a good point. It presumes that an approach to balancing the budget (or making budget cuts) that asks more from those least able to afford it is some *far left* agenda. Helping to redefine the center rightward isn’t especially helpful….
While the costs of the necessities of life, food and fuel, increase, a Democratic governor proposes cuts in programs that aid the poor and wage and benefit policies for state employees that will diminish their standards of living. Instead of, at least, calling for shared sacrifice that would include some tax increases at the upper income levels, the poor and working people will suffer more. These policies deserve severe criticism. How much can those of us who affirm the legacy of the Democratic Party and progressive values stand? What actions can be taken to bring some semblance of justice into policy debates?
My intent in writing this piece is not to gin up a primary challenge to Jack Markell. Rather, I’m writing it now while the Joint Finance Committee is meeting to seek alternatives to the Governor’s proposals. Alternatives that can be embraced by the JFC, the public and hopefully the Governor. Oh, and enacted into law by June 30.
For example, if the JFC keeps the full Medicaid funding instead of cutting it $94/month/certain recipients, if JFC keeps full SEED/INSPIRE scholarship funding in the budget, etc., some means will have to be found to balance the budget.
I write this in hopes that the JFC will insist on funding some of these key programs and that the Governor and the General Assembly will find some equitable means to balance the budget. I’m laying out my proposals to do so.
For those who say that John Carney would have done better, I can only refer you to the ‘kicking the can down the road’ methods employed by his boss, Ruth Ann Minner. And that was in an administration where Carney could have flexed his green eyeshade muscles. And it’s John’s father-in-law, Bill Quillen, who is quoted in the paper pushing for the judicial increases, so I don’t think he’d have a different perspective.
So, DELibertarian, this is a long way away from calling to primary Jack Markell for failure to live up to some ideal of ideological purity. It’s a call for fairness and equity to prevail in the budgetary process. And it’s about creating a road map to do so. I DO hope that Jack supporters who read our blog let the Governor know how they feel about this as well.
Yeah, it is quite wrong to say criticism of a budget proposal or any policy equals the desire for a primary challenge.
And just because one voted for him in 2008 doesn’t mean one can’t criticize him in 2011.
It raises an interesting question. How can a citizenry exert leverage on politicians outside of the election/primary process?
I think the answer is to let them know you’re watching, let them know that you will hold them accountable, use any and every legitimate means to let as many other people know what’s going on (like, for example, blogging), try to mobilize grassroots action to ensure that elected officials are aware that they will be held accountable, seek to develop proposals instead of just expressing opposition or merely seeking to score political points…
More than anything, I suggest contacting the Governor, your legislators, and members of the Joint Finance Committee if you have concern about what’s going on in Dover. Frankly, that’s why I write the Legislative Wrap-Ups in the first place.
What else do people suggest?
What else do people suggest?
Same thing we did when Obama cut taxes for the rich and proposed benefit cuts:
Declare victory!
Perhaps they should up the SEED GPA requirements from 2.5 to 3.0. I honestly think we are hearing mixed messages. We hear all this talk about investing in education and global competitiveness but yet we are reducing state funding to our schools.
Setting a limit as to the number of SEED scholarships is us fair.
Do make note all students applying for SEED must complete FAFSA form and SEED will only pay the difference between federal grants /loans.
The federal government aka USDOE needs to up student grants for those attending community colleges.
Many students are working hard and staying out of trouble to be eligible for SEED. I think at best the cuts or limitation should take effect for at least two more years. Or perhaps reduce scholarship to $1000.00 max.
If one’s class is perceived to be under attack, might class war not be a reasonable response?
Perhaps before he doles out that pay raise, Governor Markell could examine how the judges do their job, which is to determine the actual punishment to be served by those criminals who stand before them. Delaware has the some of the most complex sentencing guidelines in the country, and our judges rely on clerks and low-paid analysts (yeah, the ones who haven’t had a raise in years) to make sure their decisions are within the law.
Maybe if I got a 3.6% raise, I could afford to buy my kid some Christmas presents next year.