Slashdot Mirror
Jerry Brown Confiscates 48,000 Cell Phones
Hugh Pickens writes "The Sacramento Bee reports that California Governor Jerry Brown, in his first executive order since taking office, has ordered the collection and return of 48,000 state government-paid cell phones — half of those now in use — by June 1. 'It is difficult for me to believe that 40 percent of all state employees must be equipped with taxpayer-funded cell phones,' says Brown in a written statement. 'Some state employees, including department and agency executives who are required to be in touch 24 hours a day and seven days a week, may need cell phones, but the current number of phones out there is astounding.' Brown's cell phone order directs state agency and department heads to retrieve the cell phones and the governor says he plans to continue reducing cell phone usage in months ahead. 'In the face of a multi-billion dollar budget deficit, a cell phone may not seem like a big expense,' adds Brown. 'But spending $20 million, and perhaps far more than that, on cell phones can't be justified.'"
First off, this was covered in every news outlet in the country, yesterday. Second, what the fuck does this have to do with anyone's rights online?
Early termination fees may be more than $20 million....
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
He runs the State of California, which owns (or is paying for) the phones. Sounds like he's saying "I want my phones back." Confiscating makes it sound like he's taking people's own property away from them.
rooooar
It's really easy to anonymously call for the destruction of bureaucracy without citing a single specific example and providing alternative, less costly solutions to the services provided.
The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
cheaper or not, taxpayers don't need to be paying for a DMV clerk's cell phone. There are a few that it makes sense for, people in upper management positions, emergency response chain members, or project leaders that need to be reached off-hours and on-site, etc, but that's a very small percentage of the crowd.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Private phones are not allowed on the system. No need for "support" on private equipment. In fact, if you touch someone's personal devices you own it forever.
I work in IT, it is simple as saying "we cannot support personal devices at work". And it requires it to be Policy. At my job, I have a personal cell phone that I get a stipend for, it is my device, I own it, I use it for work and personal. Google Voice to the rescue. I turn on DND at 5:00 PM, and off at 7:30am .Those are the hours you can contact me .. guaranteed. Anything above that requires OT and an account code to pay for it (I'm not salaried), and planning.
I'm on stipend because I don't have a regular office phone, and am fairly mobile. I'm all for cutting the perks. Just because you're "Government" doesn't mean you have rights to stuff normal people have to pay for.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
He's not a mainstream Democrat by any stretch. He's widely known for promoting zero-growth policies, which I doubt most modern Democrats would support. He was at one time something of an environmental extremist.
Above all, he seems to be, whether you like him or not, a very principled guy, who has had trouble in mainstream politics due to being honest and uncompromising. Kind of a Ron Paul of the left. I don't like him, but I believe he is at least a sincere person with some degree of integrity.
He is taking government paid for phones. More than likely they already have land lines in all offices anyway, used for everything from calls to faxes to internet in some cases.
He is just trying to put some sense back into what the government is funding, and a cell phone is a luxury in many departments. It certainly is not a requirement of someone who rarely if ever leaves their office. He is going after vehicles next which is another good step. He should also go after traveling expenses and the like, nuke any employee conventions, and similar until they get their finances in order. The hard area where he will have to play in is compensation and retirement benefits that state employees have in California. That is where the real abuse is.
Should be interesting, a hero of the left can probably do things Arnie could not. I bet if Arnie did this there would screams in every California paper out there about how mean he was, if not racist.
When you can't pay your bills you have to make cuts. Every penny counts. This is why Congress is such a mess, they seem to think its okay to ignore "this cost" and "that cost" because they are so small. Well, get enough small expenses out and it will add up.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
He bills and is listed as a democrat, but in the real world hardcore left or hardcore right is not going to get any job done. Unless that job is gridlock. I don't think for a second that Meg Whiteman (I spelled it that way for a reason, smartasses) would be able to cut the budget as well as this state's budget needs it. The way she pissed away $140+ million dollars speaks volumes for her wasteful lifestyle and lack of experience. I'm glad to have voted for Obama and for Governor "Moonbeam." THIS is exactly the type of thinking we need to keep California within its budget and an example the red states need to stop the useless political bickering and get the FUCKING JOB DONE.
More budget cuts and more openleaks/wikileaks! Obama did fail in making our government transparent. The "leakers" have fixed this. Brown also is slashing the salaries of many state agencies. More of the same is needed, and this is a step in the right direction. Stop the waste and fraud committed by both sides of the equation.
This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
Spoken as someone who probably has never had to use food stamps. Guess what? It's humilating but when I was a kid, with a mom who just had hip surgery, and a father who died while my mother was in the hospital recovering from that surgery, it kept us from going hungry.
It's a safety net, and it's very much needed.
But can they find a job?
Are there jobs available for them to do?
1. Rehab is cheaper than jail or paying for a junkies ER trips
2. Poor kids really do need to eat.
3. We need someone who can think more rationally than you.
The problem with "real meat" in most budgets is that it means cutting service. Someone is going to have to do without something in order to put all the ducks back in a row and that someone is probably going to bitch and moan about it.
For Jerry to do what he needs to do to really turn things around he'll never have a snowballs chance in hell for re-election to the post. Reform looks good on paper but in action it's an ugly thing.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
but perhaps the 8 working hours they do each day, are they going to have to use their personal cell phone? Are you going to cover those minutes? Would it be cheaper?
Well, let's try a thought experiment...
The LA Times reports that the average phone bill for government employees is $36 per month. I pay $40 per month for 450 minutes, or about 9 cents per minute. So if the government has to reimburse me more than 400 minutes in a month, it's worth it for them to give me a cell phone.
Remember that forty percent of government employees have taxpayer funded cell phones. I have a really hard time believing that 40% of employees of the state of California need to be on call 24/7 or are out of the office that often.
I use my personal cell phone for work. I give my employer a copy of the bill and highlight the calls that were work related and they write me a check. Even with personal calls, though, I have never gone over my 450 minutes of talk time even with company minutes added in. So in my case, it's definitely cheaper for my employer to compensate me for the time rather than pay for a cell phone.
The phones are already paid for if they were in use by the employees. You couldn't have just put in an order to NOT get new cell phones?
I'll agree that doing this is grandstanding. The deadline for this is actually in six months, when a new cellphone contract is to be set up, so it's not like Jerry Brown is walking through offices today and saying, "You! Give me that cellphone!" But, come June, 48,000 people who had government cellphones will be losing them.
who has had trouble in mainstream politics due to being honest and uncompromising
That would certainly explain his previous two terms as governor, plus his term as State Attorney General, plus his time as Mayor of Oakland. Yep, just a perennial loser in politics.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
How about they legalize pot, release all of the non-violent drug and sex offenders (I'm thinking of prostitutes and johns in that last group, not molesters and the like), then close up some of the state's prisons and lay off/fire the security guards in those prisons? That would be a huge first step, and by itself would almost certainly balance the budget.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
Except there's no evidence that hiring contractors actually saves money. Why not just outsource every US job, too? Take a look at our military budget to see how well "hiring contractors" has worked out.
Here's an idea, instead of having to pay American military personnel, and then give them pensions and health care and other veterans' benefits, why not just hire Indians to fight our wars?
And regarding the teachers' union: there really isn't any evidence that privatizing education has any benefit. And instead of being pissed about the fact that teachers and cops and firemen get pensions, why not get pissed about why you're not getting a pension from the company you work for. Typical American shortsightedness circa 2010.
You are welcome on my lawn.
48,000 * 70 = 3,360,000 (3.36mil/mo).
.04% of the budget.
3,360,000 * 12 = 40,320,000, or $40.3mil/yr.
Or average the two (20,70) you get 45...
48,000 * 45 = 2,160,000 (2.1mil/mo).
2,160,000 * 12 = 25,920,000, or 25.9mil/yr.
So it's 0.2% of the deficit, or
That's why he's fixing the $27B budget deficit by cutting $20M worth of cell phone bills.
Ah, so you've missed the budget that he proposed which has much bigger changes than the cell phone takeback. The cellphone takeback is one of those small changes in the executive branch (there are lots of others) that can be done by the Governor by fiat rather than requiring legislative action and/or special approval of the voters.
A libertarian would have the state declare bankruptcy and nullify the state employee union's contract and pensions.
I'm not sure how placing the entire State government under the supervision of a federal bankruptcy court would be "libertarian".
That would fix the budget problem in one fell swoop
No, it wouldn't. Someone -- whether its the State government or the bankruptcy receiver -- still has to determine the actual specific cuts and/or the specific revenue generating measures to adopt. Bankruptcy might loosen some obligations and create more freedom to take certain choices among those options, but it wouldn't automatically choose among them (and it would instantly produce an enormous storm of litigation.)
There aren't magic bullets.
You are saying this like there is some government office out there that does not have landlines and everybody 100% relies on cell phones. Come on now, even you know better than that. They are basically taking cell phones from employees that do not specifically need them for their job. Also, why is everybody associating this with just IT (well, it is /. but even still). What about the entry level accountants? Should they have government paid cell phones? Listen, if you want to pay another person's cell phone bill through your taxes when that person does not need the cell phone at all, you go right ahead. For me, and I have lived in Cali for multiple years, I would rather my tax money going to something other than paying for some person's cell phone bill.
The world is how you make it
"Come to think of it there are a lot of state LEOs that carry cellphones so they can discuss matters not suitable for regular 2-way radio...."
And that is bullshit. Most states are now on APCO-25, which supports encryption up to AES-256 (it also supports encryption beyond that, if you get the appropriate crypto modules from No Such Agency). The only reason anybody would use a non-secure cellphone vs a secure radio is that the secure radio is recorded at the dispatch center, making it somewhat difficult to discuss how best to "accidentally" allow the suspect to fall on his face, repeatedly.
www.eFax.com are spammers
Listening to him debate Meg Whitman, I was relieved that I felt both candidates would take the job seriously. I didn't think either would do a poor job, though there were some platform stances that I liked less from Jerry Brown. It was refreshing to feel that both candidates would be both driven and competent.
Personally I felt like Whitman was reading from a script or a memorised list of talking points, whereas Brown was thinking on his feet and actually understood what he was talking about. I've heard that from people who have actually questioned the candidates too, they said that Whitman would respond to questions from left field with a pre-prepared answer that just barely dealt with the gist of the question and then refused to take any follow up questions. Brown could deal with anything. The better man won.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Also, if you choose a profession that you know you will be underpaid in for 20 years or so just so you can make a difference (teaching), then I think you should get a little security at the back end for that choice.
Really?
I don't live in California but I do live in another large state.
I have been unemployed for a year and 5 weeks. I count the weeks not because it is something I enjoy doing but because each week it is another failed week at finding a job to pay for the things that I once used to enjoy. Such as going out to eat 2 times a week. Or the nice house I used to live in. Or buying tires for my car.
The state pays me jack when it comes down to it. The company I worked for years laid me off. For all the years I was working I paid a tax to go to the state government insuring that if I lose my job through no fault of my own that I would be able to collect some money until I found a replacement job. So no the Government isn't a job program but it is in fact there to protect me if I may for the protection.
The state requires me to make 3 job contacts a week. I do about 5 a day so that's 25 M-F and not counting the about 10 or so I may do on a Saturday and Sunday. I don't care if you believe me or not but I don't like having to tell people that I am unemployed when I go into job interviews and they ask me why I haven't worked in the last year. I don't like having to explain to friends that I can't go out and meet them tonight because I don't have the money to pay for drinks or food. I actually don't like the fact that for another Christmas this year all I was able to get someone was a 10.00 Starbucks gift card. So please tell me that the handout I am getting means I am not really trying. Then be lucky you and the GP got a job. Because some of us would love to earn that money and no have to have a taxpayer to fund my paying of bills.
So very THIS. Look at what it takes to become a teacher today.
... are 27 years old
... are $180,000 in the hole in debt (hoping for *some* kind of debt-forgiveness without having to teach in Compton)
... have moved at least 3 times (expecting to move yet again to whichever district will hire you)
... are without any investments
... are without any retirement
... are in a market where there are so many cutbacks that you'll be lucky to get a 75% appointment
... are looking at $25,000 take-home for your first three years and a final salary of ~$50,000 take home 15 years later if you're teaching the right classes
... paying out of pocket for student supplies
... lowered pay
... the imminent end of tenure
... severely reduced benefits
... severely reduced pension
... pressure to leave teaching so they can hire someone younger and cheaper
... proxy anti-union hate
... evaluations based on numbers that aren't directly related to your own performance
... 10-hour days and the myth of the "free" summer during which you're taking classes and/or training
Cost of public 4-year education from a UC = $120,000
Cost of graduate program in education = $40,000
Cost of teaching credential program and follow-up clear-credentialing = $15,000
Cost of all tests and college/program applications from SAT to the end of credentialing = $2,500
By the time you're fully competent and qualified to teach in California, you...
And this isn't artificial "you don't really need that..." stuff. California wants "highly qualified" teachers. That's been interpreted to means 4-year degree, "majored in the subject they teach" and/or "proving equivalent competence", and credentialing. If you actually want to be a GOOD teacher (not just qualified) from day 1, you're likely to seek out an MA, too.
After all that... here's what you can look forward to...
People who shoot their mouths off about "over-paid" teachers, evil unions, and the need to privatize are just stroking their own ignorance. It blows me away how people are still trying to become teachers in this climate... I just recently gave up. It just costs too much money and time. I'd never have the chance to own a home. I continue to work in education, but my hopes at actually becoming a teacher have been shot.
How do you get around the simple fact that abstinence works 100% every time it is used?
It didn't work for Joe and Mary Christ,* two Jews living in Nazareth back in the single digits BC. Before Mary lost her virginity, they had a boy named Josh, who became known to the Greeks and Romans as Jesus. But on second thought, considering significant figures, you're probably right.
* Changed for comic effect.