Money & Politics | Daily Report

Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman wants to chop the state's workforce by 40,000 employees, a pledge she made again this weekend at the state GOP convention. But does the nation-state of California really have such a bloated government?

Not according to the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy, an independent research group based in Palo Alto. The director, Stephen Levy, is one of the principal experts on the state's economy, and he reported in December:

"There is broad agreement that seeking efficiencies in government programs is good public policy. Yet, the data suggest that at the aggregate level California is not overstaffed relative to caseloads in the major program areas. Indeed, a stronger case can be made that public programs are being carried out with less staffing than in most other states."

In his report from last December, Levy's organization found that California – which has 38 million residents – had the third lowest number of full-time state government employees relative to the population.

California and Florida both had 103 state employees for every 10,000 residents, while Illinois had the lowest ratio at 97, the group reported. The U.S. average was 143 state employees per 10,000 residents, with California 28 percent below the national average.

But what about all the local government employees? Even adding those to the mix, California still has a comparatively small workforce, according to the employment and population numbers from 2008. The report concluded:

When state and local government employees (including education) are added together, California has the fourth lowest ratio of employees to population. California had 484 state and local full-time equivalent employees per 10,000 residents in 2008 compared to the national average of 549. Nevada was the state with the lowest ratio (440) followed by Michigan (475), Pennsylvania (478), and Utah (493). California’s ratio was 12 percent below the national average.

Levy's group also found that between March 2008 and October 2009, the number of state and local government jobs declined by approximately 70,000, while the state added approximately 600,000 residents.

Whether the government payroll is inflated or not depends a bit on your perspective, of course. Could some government services, such as running prisons or monitoring toxic waste in rivers, be performed more efficiently and effectively in the private sector? Is California simply one of the least bloated out of 50 bloated state governments?

Whitman uses state Department of Finance figures to highlight the total number of all state employees, including University of California, California State University, employees of the Legislature and state courts, the state pension system, and other departments outside of the governor's direct control and, in some cases, operating without general fund support.

That figure shows state positions have grown from 313,684 in the 2004-05 state budget to 345,288 in the current budget.

But look at the (PDF) chart Whitman links to on her Web site. Another measure of state government spending has been reduced or stayed flat, even while the number of all state employees has increased. The state of California is spending less per capita and less per $100 of personal income than it did in 2004-05.

Speaking at the state GOP convention this weekend, Whitman offered no detailed analysis on whether the state could handle a loss of 40,000 employees – longer DMV lines, fewer prison guards? – but she did promise to "spur productivity in our workforce by harnessing the power of technology."

"The next Governor must make tough decisions," Whitman said, echoing one of her recent radio ads. "And I am the only candidate in the race who has the ability and experience to stand up to the public employee unions and lay down the law: I am committed to reducing the state workforce by 40,000, back to 2004-2005 levels. And I won’t back down."