If Government Did It’s Job It Wouldn’t Cost This Much
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
Efficiency is based on doing your job well, with little waste and maximum concentrated effort. Effectiveness is based on doing the right things. As we look forward to figuring out how to deal with serious government financial challenges it would be a great idea to give effectiveness as much attention as efficiency.
During the 2009 Nevada Legislature we were told that the Governor’s budget proposal was a piece of crap and most of the session lawmakers took turns using the proposal as a piñata (and not wearing a blindfold while they were swinging at it). Reductions in spending and avoiding tax increases were not on the list of the majority party’s agenda. Growing government and having additional funds to pay for the expansion has been and continues to be their top priorities.
We were also told that the plan was to make sure that “essential government services” got the necessary funding levels. As the budget process unfolded there didn’t seem to be anything that wasn’t “essential”…probably why when all the “cutting” was finished the actual amount planned for spending was a higher number than the level of spending for the previous budget cycle. Oops, just listen to what you were told – “we cut spending” – don’t pay any attention to the fact that the numbers are bigger…
Now the Interim Finance Subcommittee is working to carry out the project of preparing the way for greater tax burdens to be approved in the 2011 session. The Nevada Vision Stakeholders Group will be meeting for the first time on Friday (January 8th) to start their process of preparing recommendations on a list of quality-of-life components:
If your argument for tax increases is “we need more to spend” and there aren’t any limits on what you’re going to spend it on…you’ll never run out of excuses for needing more to spend.
Efficiency is based on doing your job well, with little waste and maximum concentrated effort. Effectiveness is based on doing the right things. As we look forward to figuring out how to deal with serious government financial challenges it would be a great idea to give effectiveness as much attention as efficiency.
During the 2009 Nevada Legislature we were told that the Governor’s budget proposal was a piece of crap and most of the session lawmakers took turns using the proposal as a piñata (and not wearing a blindfold while they were swinging at it). Reductions in spending and avoiding tax increases were not on the list of the majority party’s agenda. Growing government and having additional funds to pay for the expansion has been and continues to be their top priorities.
We were also told that the plan was to make sure that “essential government services” got the necessary funding levels. As the budget process unfolded there didn’t seem to be anything that wasn’t “essential”…probably why when all the “cutting” was finished the actual amount planned for spending was a higher number than the level of spending for the previous budget cycle. Oops, just listen to what you were told – “we cut spending” – don’t pay any attention to the fact that the numbers are bigger…
Now the Interim Finance Subcommittee is working to carry out the project of preparing the way for greater tax burdens to be approved in the 2011 session. The Nevada Vision Stakeholders Group will be meeting for the first time on Friday (January 8th) to start their process of preparing recommendations on a list of quality-of-life components:
- Economic Diversification
- Education
- Energy Use
- Health and Human Services
- Job Creation
- Public Transit and Transportation
- Public Safety
If your argument for tax increases is “we need more to spend” and there aren’t any limits on what you’re going to spend it on…you’ll never run out of excuses for needing more to spend.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 1/5/2010 5:31 AM 
Categories: Nevada Vision Project
Tags: Nevada Vision Stakeholders Nevada Government Spending
Categories: Nevada Vision Project
Tags: Nevada Vision Stakeholders Nevada Government Spending
Comments