Big government

Published January 27, 2015

by Gary Pearce, Talking About Politics, January 26, 2015.

The government is too big, Republicans say. Too much bureaucracy, too much waste, too many overpaid, do-nothing chair-sitters mooching off hard-working taxpayers.

 

Presumably, House Speaker Tim Moore agrees. He’s as eager as any other hard-nosed Republican to cut out the deadwood.

 

But first he has to hire a staff. Here, thanks to Under the Dome, are some of the positions on the Speaker’s staff:

 

-          A Chief of Staff 

-          A Deputy Chief of Staff

-          A Communications Director 

-          A senior policy adviser

-          A policy advisor on agriculture and education

-          The director of House caucuses/policy analyst

-          A senior policy advisor for health issues

-          A director of boards, commissions and constituent services

-          A policy advisor on transportation and public safety

-          An executive assistant/director of administration

-          Another policy analyst

-          An administrative assistant

 

Once upon a time, House Speakers in North Carolina got by with a couple of administrative assistants and a legislative counsel or two, some of them part-time.

 

Now, apparently, it takes a lot of staff to cut down the size of government.

Read More NC SPIN >>

January 27, 2015 at 9:36 am
Norm Kelly says:

How does Tim's staff compare to staff of other Speakers over the past 2 decades?

Without proper research on where to cut, how to cut, how much to cut, we know pols are incapable of getting it right. Even with proper research we know that pols often get it wrong anyway.

I'm not trying to support Tim's staff size, the number, the qualifications, or anything else.

I just wonder if there is ANYTHING Republicans in our Legislature can do that Gary won't whine about. Is it possible for Gary, lib N&D editorial writers, or other libs inside or outside of politics, to provide an example of something Republicans are doing, have done, or proposed to do that they agree with. Is there not ANYTHING in the state budget that should be cut, that could be eliminated, that is considered waste? How much is it right for government to steal from citizens before libs say 'enough'? I know, they have already answered that question. There is no limit to what they think they own, but it's somewhat of a rhetorical question. At some point I'm hoping that even die-hard libs, those that border on socialists, see a point where it becomes immoral. I won't hold my breath as I don't look good in blue and I don't trust pols! But why has no one seriously asked a pol, put them on the spot, for a number or rate that is considered enough? Which lib has provided any sort of number that would satisfy them?