I have to disagree with paring back in multiple stages. It destroys morale and is unnecessarily playing footsie with what needs to be done. Nobody deserves to be dangled on a string over a tank of hungry sharks for budget cycle after budget cycle.
Yes, I have seen this and yes I am bitter over it since it was so unnecessary and cruel. Just poor management.
“Yes, I have seen this and yes I am bitter over it since it was so unnecessary and cruel. Just poor management.”
That’s a good point. My thinking was that the guy at the top doesn’t really know what the job takes, nor can he trust somebody in the department to tell him. He would therefore institute some metrics to find out. The top guy doesn’t want to create allies for his target which might generate lawsuits and the involvement of the courts. He would therefore be slower about doing what needs to be done. He also has to be elected again at some point downstream and one huge cut would be characterized as “draconian” and he’d be a presented as baby killer and having no interest in whatever the liberal-issue job the department was supposed to do.
The calculation about what the cutting politician can do vs what will be acceptable to his voters is a fine one. It’s also risky, which is why so many politicians won’t make it at all. I applauded Governor Bush’s attempt, but rolled my eyes about how he went about it.