Krusin' the Capitol
By Nebraska State Senator Lowen Kruse
2005
Week 10
March 11, 2005
Hi
New word. Sort of. Used ten times in one budget document: reengineering.
As in "Adjudication Reengineering." You will understand completely if I quote
a full sentence: "The Vocational Rehabilitation Reengineering project is a
fundamental and foundational requirement for our move to an electronic
environment."
Translation: they are changing from scratch paper to a computer, so their
format and office process will have to be changed. I think. It is the $300,000
price tag, plus $50,000 for annual software changes that makes me wonder if
it is a computer different from the one I use.
I guess I am a really old stick in much older mud, but I do not get it. They
purchase this whole new system, hardware, training .... and then report they
have entered every old records on it as well as the new and it all works so
very nice. WHY would anyone want to update the software if everything works so
well? I am sure I could get an upgrade on my Microsoft Office, but why would
I want to if I am doing what is needed? And if I dread the pain of changing
some data? Some of you have answers to this and be assured I would welcome
them. Answers for the state, not for me.
We overrode the governor's veto 36-11. The governor applied no pressure,
just said he would like for us to think it about it one more time. However, the
Republican party sent all of the Republican senators a letter saying that the
party and the governor have a position which they should follow. In response,
the chief Republican senator led off by saying the governor is a fine man,
but we are not voting on that; nor on outsiders opinions. We were the ones who
had debated it three times, had given the whole matter extensive thought and
who knew what is right for us. "So we now have a chance to reaffirm our vote."
Only one dropped off the earlier vote. One was absent. We picked up three
new ones. The media had a field day with hyped rhetoric, which I guess is
their job. We read, and heard on TV, the gov was hammered, defeated, slammed
down, taught on early lesson, cut back in political clout, etc. Not. He politely
pointed out his contrary opinion and we politely voted one more time. End of
story. Not a partisan fight.
The buzz on the floor was why on earth he did this. No answers. He repeated
several times that he felt each ex-felon should apply and be interviewed for
voting rights. He is part of a law and order mentality. There is law here,
but certainly no order, as our system is not working (wait ten years and apply
to the Board of Pardons for voting rights). I was struck again with the
horrible process we use. If I were an ex-felon out of prison and doing well,
would I go back to the nightmare of a court setting, to relive that trauma, and be
exceedingly humble, in order to find out if someone who does not know me
considers me to be worthwhile? I don't think any of us go looking for punishment
when we have been doing well in recovery. Half the population will not even
walk in an office to register to vote.
Can you say "Bureaucracy"? It drives me nuts. I know that when it works
well, and bureacrats want something to happen, it is the way good things happen.
A related big word is "turf." That is not something green that you step on,
especially if some bureaucrat thinks it is hers/his. One day our
Appropriations Committee spent 30 minutes with representatives of three agencies involved
in a common sense proposal, trying to help them to imagine how the proposal
could happen. Their imaginations were weak, shallow, anemic. Being the ones
who control each of their budgets, we can knock heads together. But why?
Thankfully, this is a rare occurrence. But it is real in bureaucracy.
Can you think "Big Money"? We heard from our investment counselor, who
manages all of our state account surpluses, cash funds, pension funds, health
reserves, etc. One-tenth of one percent difference in annual investment returns --
.001% -- equals $10 million. That is past my imagination.
Did you hear about the old fellow who still had a remarkable photographic
mind? Problem was he had no film.
I get the picture.
Lowen
Back to Top
Krusin the Capitol Index
Home Page
|
