A new state audit gives fuel to Republicans’ contention that Gov. Kathleen Sebelius’ reputation as a waste cutter is overblown. When she disbanded the state motor pool in 2003, put a two-year moratorium on new car purchases and sold off 800 vehicles, the state did save $24.5 million. But thanks to car rentals and costly gas, the state now spends nearly as much on vehicles — $37.3 million last year — as it did before her carganza, $37.5 million in 2003.
“Renting is the least affordable option. We sold off the assets, took the cash, and now we’re paying for it,” state Sen. Les Donovan, R-Wichita, told the Kansas City Star.
But Sebelius said again this week that her car cutback was “one of the cornerstones of our cost savings effort.” And at the time, the state really needed the money.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
25 Comments
And when will the Kansas press find pictures of the ONE BILLION in savings Sebelius bragged about during the campaign? Did paperclips really cost a billion bucks?
http://www.ksgovernor.com/Advertisements
There could be some negligible differences in savings, but Donovan might be peeved his cars aren’t being bought as much or leased.
At the time is an important consideration.
Some Republicans hate Sebelius just because. Surely vote fraud happened her getting elected.
That’s the way they feel about elections in other states where Prosecutors were fired.
Two Republican parties exist in Kansas so some hate her and others don’t.
Bush doesn’t like being called out by her on the National Guard. Rove will catalog the information in his files about her.
Hey Les, you still SELL cars, right? Andthere in the Kansas legilature, you do look after those car dealers, true? So, renting would be like ….bad? Hummn.
The funny thing? Voters in kansas fall for her schtick every time.
This car rental option was tried in the U.S. Air Force when I was on active duty. Not only did costs go up, but people had to file reimbursement because they had to utilize their own vehicles for government business.
It’s generally a bad idea to deplete assets and substitute rentals or travel reimbursements.
It ends up costing more.
This lesson was learned many years ago, evidently no one has told Sebelius about it.
“evidently no one has told Sebelius about it.”
Obviously, no one told the voters either…
How dare you say anything bad about our governor. She gets a pass on everything!
Republican–
So why did Bush “deplete assests” and outsource 40 percent of the costs in Iraq?
I, for one, have a difficult time believing our governor did anything that produced less than a perfect outcome. Time Magazine, after all, named her one of our country’s five best governors.
With gasoline costs up 50% and other inflationary pressures I would say that just being able to hold the line on costs over a 4-year period is pretty good.
Part of Klepper’s analysis doesn’t make sense. I get that employees are reimbursed for mileage, which covers gasoline and vehicle maintenance costs. But on the cost of maintaining the state vehicle pool – was the cost of the gas figured into that?
Capn,
Part of the downsized Military from the 1990s was to use more contractors to do jobs to free the military up to do more combat related jobs.
This included cooks, special services and other amenities.
Problem with that plan, as you can see now is that in order for contractors to work in a combat zone they can ask and usually receive several times the amount of pay that a GI would get doing the same job.
Thank the Congress for that brainstorm, don’t blame Bush.
Ok. That would be the republican controlled congress, correct?
Donovans just pissed he’s selling less cars to the state?
That’s correct ksfarmgrrl, Newt and his boys screwed it up. I never did like Newt’s role in government. I love to hear him speak. It’s what Newt should stick to – “speaking engagements” and stay out of government.
Also, Clinton did sign these bills in order to balance the budget by slashing the military budget. So, I point the finger at him too.
There is no easy way out in establishing viable defense of our country. One cuts the budget on something, sooner or later an unworthy substitute will rear its ugly head – contractors.
Bush 41 cut the military budget more than Clinton dreamed of. I posted those figures a couple of weeks ago.
The problem with your analysis Tom is that when Bush 41 cut the military, he was cutting post Gulf War and Cold War. The military was already balanced and ready to do the job.
The mistake that the Ginrich Congress and Clinton made was to cut the balanced military down even more, into a non-functioning entity.
The military was already reduced sufficiently by Bush I. Clinton and Ginrich nearly destroyed it with their cuts.
Republican,
Bush cut the number of uniforms by over 20%. Clinton didn’t even come close. Those are facts.
Spin on, Republican, spin on.
Any time the government, whether State or Federal starts touting “privatization to save money,” tell them NO. Every single time it’s been done, it costs more. Why? The first year it appears to “save” money as the private co. will underbid to get the contract. Then, in subsequent years, they will pass the full amount of costs to the government, who is now stuck with the contract. This happened when the State privatized adoption and foster care services; so why is everyone so “surprised” it happened with state motor pool costs? Wake up people, having goverment employees handle the costs instead of private companies is the only way to keep better control of things. Don’t be dazzled with “initial savings.”
That’s right Tom, Bush 1 cut the military to the correct size where it could perform all of its missions.
Clinton cut now only equipment and men, but reduced mission capability by a huge amount. Clinton also slashed the CIA and other intelligence agencies so he could look good in the news Polls.
Republican,
Show me the numbers. Compare them to the Bush 41 cuts.
It’s not about comparing percentages to percentages it’s the non pro rata cuts that were made.
20 percent subtracted from 100 will leave you 80.
20 percent subtracted the 80 left will leave you 64.
The latter is what Clinton did and it terribly crippled our military.
Republican,
What’s your source for Clinton’s 20% cut? Please provide the link, as I did for Bush 41’s cuts.
http://www.afa.org/magazine/Oct2000/1000budget.aspAir Force Association (has graphs and charts)
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/0
9/27/joint.chiefs/index.htmlCNN report on the Congressional Hearing where theJoint Chiefs of Staff Testified
“Testifying before the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, [Clinton's] Joint Chiefs ofStaff presented a unified front, saying budget cuts in the mid 1990s ‘mortgaged the future’ ofthe military.”
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/weinberg.htmWeinberger’s Comments on the Clinton Cuts:
“Just the Army alone that won the Gulf War along with 31 very fine coalition partners was over900,000,” he told WABC Radio’s Sean Hannity. “And now it’s under 400,000 – just about 400,000, which is a tremendous drop. And that’s just one service.”
“We also lost air and sea lift (capacity). We don’t have forward position troops anymore. We hada procurement holiday for two or three years in which we didn’t acquire anything.”
=============http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/4/10/223653.shtml”During the Clinton years, the U.S. military had to cut valuable training, live-fire exercises andflight hours in order to meet demanding deployment funding spent in Haiti and Kosovo.
In fact, the U.S. Air Force had to turn to the United Arab Emirates in order to upgrade the F-16Fighting Falcon. The UAE agreed to purchase advanced versions of the F-16 that the USAF could not afford. ”
===========Army Corp of Engineer Cuts – New Orleans”10 years ago, the Clinton administration cut 98 flood control projects, including one in New Orleans, saying such efforts should be local projects, not national. A $120 million hurricaneproject, approved and financed annually from 1965 was killed by the Clinton administration afterbeing approved by the Army Corps of Engineers. It was designed to protect more than 140,000 WestBank residents east of the Harvey Canal. Then Clinton administration agreed to spend only $47 million on New Orleans area hurricane flood control projects – half of what local officials had requested.”
Way to spin the truth. I love it when people who have a political agenda just make it up as they go along.
From the article.
The decision gave the state a one-time savings of $24.5 million. But four years later, the state is spending almost exactly the amount on vehicles as it did before the change, thanks to vehicle rentals and increases in gas prices.
So, the State saved money and got $24.5M back.Magically not mentioned, that $24.5M in the bank actually means something.
What was gas selling for in 2003?Did prices of vehicles drop from 2003 to 2006?
Next time, try not to be so transparent with the distortion and spin.
Have a nice day.