To anyone who relishes empirical verification, the belated Wisconsin union votes are particularly satisfying–not so much on their substance, however welcome that is, but because they create a very clean test: What really does the public think about government unions? The MSM has been furiously cranking out polls over the last three weeks claiming that the public opposes efforts to cut back on collective bargaining rights and benefits for public employee unions. If that is in fact the public’s view, it is deeply misinformed about the risk of government employer abuse against government workers in this age of lawsuit frenzy and a victim-hungry press. But it would be good to find out the degree of the public’s cluelessness, if it exists.
Fortunately, Walker’s bill was watered down hardly at all. So let the recall battles begin. Yes, Wisconsin has a strong left-wing union tradition, which may not make it completely representative of the country, but it also has a strong conservative streak as well—a bit like California’s schizophrenia. If Wisconsin’s Republicans, including Walker, are swept out of power because of this vote, they will have gone down for a superb cause. And they will have illustrated how much of a bubble conservatives are in, for whom the grotesque inequities between public and private sector pensions and benefits are patent. They will also have shown how effective liberal propaganda on behalf of unions has been. (See, for example, the New York Times’s hilarious pretend effort to determine whether public sector workers are overpaid that neglected to include pensions and benefits in the calculation.)
This coming empirical test may be a harbinger of the likelihood of significant cuts to entitlements. I would have thought that it would have been much easier to cut public employee benefits, since they are a finite special interest group, however powerful, than it would be to cut population-wide entitlements. If it proves impossible even to cut back on government workers’ fat benefits packages, things don’t look good for broader entitlement cuts.
I really do fear a nationalization of the California situation. An extremely polarized but relatively equal split between Republicans and Democrats. Republicans unwilling to condone any higher taxes. Democrats unwilling to condone any significant cuts. That sort of gridlock would lead to destruction.
While I think Republicans mishandled a lot of this I agree it really does provide a great test that will have ramifications over the next few years.
Walker is a national hero, a holiday should be established in his honor.
You have to understand that CA welfare handouts and silly social net spending far exceeds that of other states, and here’s the rub: for every woman/child receiving those handouts, there are parents who fear that if the handouts cease or are cut, their offspring and their offspring’s kids will be moving in with them and sponging off them forever.
Thus, while in theory many voting Californians who themselves don’t receive the largesse of the state are opposed to throwing money at certain segments of the population, in reality they realize they themselves will be the fallback position of thoe who do live off the state’s taxpayers should the state cut, cut, cut.
Unfortunately, that adds up to a heck of a lot of voters.
I likie our (Florida’s) Governor Richard Scott. I wish him the same sucesss, as Wisconsin’s Governor Walker has.
I’m old, white and well-off so I’m obviously very proud of Scott Walker’s completely partisan, non-budget related union busting bill.
What’s next? An anti-abortion bill that will somehow save Wisconsin from fiscal ruin?
Please clarify what you consider “government workers’ fat benefits package,” specifically as it applies to the affected Wisconsin public sectgor employees. I’d like to see exactly what you consider too generous when it comes to the compensation of public school teachers.
“Democrats unwilling to condone any significant cuts.”
Dems have proposed almost $20B in cuts.
The California GOP has proposed $0 in tax increases.
If that is in fact the public’s view, it is deeply misinformed about the risk of government employer abuse against government workers in this age of lawsuit frenzy and a victim-hungry press.
You are misinformed. One of the first things Walker and the GOP controlled houses did was enact tort reform, so one of the two remedies you point out is gone. I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for corporate owned media to investigate much abuse. They have gutted the unions with the false promise that this will cure the budget woes. I wish them luck.
“New York Times’s hilarious pretend effort to determine whether public sector workers are overpaid that neglected to include pensions and benefits in the calculation.”???
No actually they discuss pensions separately, so your statement seems to be misleading.
But if I worked in the public sector, I would be highly suspicious of any “pensions” I was promised down the line. A lot of states have seriously underfunded their pension plans. I would much rather have the money up front, to invest.
The Right has been so incredibly ignorant of the situation in Wisconsin. The only ones who spokwe the truth were Scott Fitzgerald and Grothman when they both acknowledged that the entire project was formulated solely to break the unions’ ability to mobilize Democrats during election cycles. All this wailing and gnashing of teeth over deficits and union compensation is fodder for the Lemmings to tune into Fox and cheer the phoney Walker, whose raging ambition will be snuffed out when the backlash washes him out of the national consciousness. If it’s anything WI detests, it’s overambitious, overreaching politicos who end up screwing them. Cheer now lemmings, instant karma is coming for ya.
> Dems have proposed almost $20B in cuts.
> The California GOP has proposed $0 in tax increases.
Don’t you know that tax cuts always lead to revenue gains? If the Democrats were serious about fixing the budget, they’d propose $40B in tax cuts.
Heather! The workers accepted cuts. Walker insisted on eliminating their collective bargaining rights. If he compromised and went forward with cuts to pay and benefits WI would be in a very different place. Instead he felt the need to play hard ball about their collective bargaining rights. Please be honest and stop linking what is going on in WI with cuts to pay and benefits AND collective bargaining. Again, the workers and the unions were going to go along with everything Walker wanted except his demand for the end of collective bargaining. You should consider why he felt the need to remain rigid and not compromise on the collective bargaining and as you are doing so, please consider the context of the punked phone call that he thought was from his major contributor!
Don’t you know that tax cuts always lead to revenue gains? If the Democrats were serious about fixing the budget, they’d propose $40B in tax cuts
…
That was snark right?
I just don’t see any reality in that statement,because,if true,government coffers should be bulging with greenbacks.
Maybe the middle class doesn’t like its throat being slashed.
“Fat benefits package”? Well, you get what you pay for. The only way to get a strong education is to pay good teachers. If you want lousy teachers, slash their pay and benefits and the best and brightest will pursue other careers. Farmers call this “eating your seed corn”, as the next generation of American suffers from our parsimony.
The next time you want to slash teacher pay, just remember that their students will be running your nursing home when you are old. Do you want a doctor and nurses with cut rate educations taking care of you?
“I’d like to see exactly what you consider too generous when it comes to the compensation of public school teachers.”
Defined benefit plans that allow people to retire in their 50’s.
The unions agreed to the cuts only when it became obvious they were publicly indefensible. Remember all the hooey being spread about Wisconsin not having a fiscal problem? The Democrats shifted the ground to collective bargaining for benefits, but the problem is that if the GOP had given in on that, then the same budget problem would reappear a couple years later. As it is the unions are not “destroyed”. They still have the right to collectively bargain over wages.
Maybe the middle class doesn’t like its throat being slashed.
The middle class is being drained to pay outrageous benefits for teachers, and Wisconsin hasn’t gotten great results for the money. As Iowahawk demonstrated, once broken down by ethnicity, Texas (which has no collective bargaining whatsoever) does better than Wisconsin.
Dems have proposed almost $20B in cuts.
The California GOP has proposed $0 in tax increases.
California is already one of the most taxed states in the union, and it’s still going down the hole. The taxation route has already been tried, and it’s only real result is to drive out taxpayers.
It’s a dubious proposition that “the best and the brightest” go into public school teaching anyway, which is why so many public school teachers send their own kids to private or parochial shcools.
The idea that the teachers’ unions are interested in keeping the “best and the brightest” is a pile of utterlylaughable bullsh*t. They are the first ones to scream and cry about any attempt to reward merit.
There really shouldn’t be any unions in the public sector anyway. Given that the state only provides services that are deemed essential, it’s irresponsible to open such services to blackmail from self-serving unions.
Public employees should simply swear an oath of loyalty to the state which includes acceptance of what the state offers in pay and benefits. If they don’t like it, go get another job. If they really are the best and the brightest finding one shouldn’t be a big problem.
Mike, that’s a bit harsh in my opinion. While I’m not terribly sympathetic to the unions I’m also not terribly sympathetic to the people running the groups the unions represent. In business there is a bottom line that must be met that limits the unions somewhat. (Thus the practical effects of competition from other businesses on unions – the reason the auto industry was hit so hard was because for 30 years there was effectively little competition except between the Big Three)
With the public sector there’s just too much incentive for politicians to blame the public sector workers for problems that are the politician’s fault.
For instance it’s not clear to me that police forces would get the proper equipment were it left purely up to politicians.
The public sector really is a special case. I think unions have too much power and clearly their main audience is the workers and not the recipients of their work. However since the alternative appears to be letting the politicians have that power I’m not exactly sleeping better at night.