Marc Seals, a former English teacher in Georgia and now a professor of literature at the University of Wisconsin-Baraboo wrote a long and impassioned plea regarding Governor Walker’s budget balancing efforts.
He says he has become a Democrat because the Republican Party has abandoned him. Although he is strongly opposed the idea of teachers being unionized, he apparently supports the fundamental right of [public employee] unions to exist.
He complains that every year that he lived in Wisconsin [since 2004], he has not received even a cost of living increase. He said, “We accepted this because we were told that it was the only way that we could keep our benefits package.” To make matters worse, state workers were required to take furlough days that amounted to a 3% cut in pay for each of the last two years. Professor Seals adds, “The so-called Budget Repair Bill will represent a reduction in my take-home pay of somewhere between 8 and 13 percent.”
While one can be sympathetic to Professor Seals, especially since his students appear to give him high marks, we have to be careful to put his situation in context. He failed to mention what the situation is in other states vis a vis public employee compensation. When both those actively seeking employment and those who have suspended their job-seeking efforts are counted, the total unemployment rate in the U.S. is still around 17%. Contrast that with the tenure teachers enjoy and the job stability generally enjoyed by public employees.
FDR and George Meany held that unions had no place in the public sector.
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/18/the-first-blow-against-public-employees/fdr-warned-us-about-public-sector-unions
Wisconsin started that foolishness and now Wisconsin appears to be leading the way out. The problem is that government isn't management so negotiations are similar to a conspiracy where both sides decide how much to soak the taxpayer who isn't at the table. Secondly, in business the negotiation is how to split the profits. In the public sector there are no profits so guess what gets split. Yep, that's right, the taxpayer.
Union negotiations aren't usually give and take; they are how much management is willing to give. In public sector negotiations, it isn't how much management is willing to give but how much the legislature is willing to soak the taxpayer. The unions’ have a cozy arrangement with the Democrats; the unions work and donate to get them elected and the Democrats in turn give the unions a sweetheart contract. The Wisconsin legislature heretofore has been largely in the hands of the Democrats who traditionally support union demands.
The comparative statistics on compensation is another element of context that is lacking Professor Seals’ plea. I don’t have all of the facts either so I will just cite those that I recall from the various news articles on the situation in Wisconsin. The national average for teachers’ contributions to health insurance is 29%. Governor Walker’s proposal would raise the rate in Wisconsin to about 12%, well short of the national average. In Colorado, public employees contribute 31% of their health care costs. I also believe that a figure of 45% was mentioned as the differential compensation public employees enjoy over that received by private workers.
Finally, as Seals suggests, the efforts of the courageous Republicans to curb union excesses may be short-lived. That is the reason for curbing union collective bargaining rights now. Otherwise, Wisconsin will be right back in the fiscal soup as incoming Democrats give the unions everything they want. Before Wisconsin citizens vote for the Democrats again, they should insist on an understanding of the price tag on any new union demands. They also should insist on a full disclosure of Wisconsin compensation vs. the national average for comparable jobs and vs. compensation in the private sector. This must include a full valuation of tenure, job security, relative unemployment rates, retirement plans, vacation and sick leave, health care contributions, and any other benefits. I wonder if Professor Seals would be supportive of such an approach?
Monday, February 28, 2011
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott: FDR warned us about public sector unions
If you aren't aware, FDR and George Meany held that unions had no place in the public sector. Wisconsin started that foolishness and now Wisconsin appears to be leading the way out. The problem is that government isn't management so negotiations are similar to a conspiracy where both sides decide how much to soak the taxpayer who isn't at the table. Secondly, in business the negotiation is how to split the profits. In the public sector there are no profits so guess what gets split. Yep, that's right, the taxpayer. It's strange why Democrat taxpayers don't see this reality.
My friend has been on both sides of the negotiating table. Union negotiations aren't give and take, they are how much is management willing to give. In public sector negotiations it isn't how much management is willing to give but how much the legislature is willing to soak the taxpayer. The unions cozy incestuous arrangement with the democrats, where the unions will work and donate to get them elected and they in turn give the unions a sweetheart contract is over and the unions haven't caught on to the new reality. I wonder why democrat voters haven't caught on yet? Those legislators are not working for the non-public-union democrat taxpayers, they are working for themselves and for the unions.
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/18/the-first-blow-against-public-employees/fdr-warned-us-about-public-sector-unions
My friend has been on both sides of the negotiating table. Union negotiations aren't give and take, they are how much is management willing to give. In public sector negotiations it isn't how much management is willing to give but how much the legislature is willing to soak the taxpayer. The unions cozy incestuous arrangement with the democrats, where the unions will work and donate to get them elected and they in turn give the unions a sweetheart contract is over and the unions haven't caught on to the new reality. I wonder why democrat voters haven't caught on yet? Those legislators are not working for the non-public-union democrat taxpayers, they are working for themselves and for the unions.
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/18/the-first-blow-against-public-employees/fdr-warned-us-about-public-sector-unions
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott Omits some Inconvenient Facts
Dee Perez-Scott Omits significant facts in her tirades against the Wisconsin governor. In her latest blog, Dee Perez-Scott states the obvious but omits important facts that don’t agree with her thesis. Indeed, unions have enabled many improvements in the pay and working conditions of American workers in the past either through strikes and collective bargaining or by exercising their political muscle to influence the Congress. As I have previously recognized, those changes were good and benefitted many workers. Unfortunately, the unions always wanted “more” making American companies non-competitive with their foreign rivals causing jobs to be exported. Their excessive demands have also brought several states to the brink of bankruptcy. It is their excesses and feather-bedding that have given them a bad name.
One of the salient facts that Dee omitted is that, a study by The Segal Co., a private benefits firm, found that state government workers paid between 20 percent and 60 percent of their premium costs for family coverage. If Wisconsin workers are paying around 6 percent, that puts them in the bottom fifth nationally among state employees, Segal’s data shows. A very small number nationally pay zero toward their premium. On health insurance, the governor wants state employees to pay at least 12.6% of the average cost of premiums which is about double what they currently pay but still well below the range of 20-60% cited above and well below the national average of 29% cited by Kaiser Premanente. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker says state employees could pay twice as much for health care premiums and still be paying less that half the national average. Politifax affirmed that the governor was right about that.
In Colorado, the state pays about 69% of health insurance costs; substantially less than the 87.4% Wisconsin will pay after the governor’s changes take place. So what is all of that bleeding-heart moaning I read in Dee’s blog?
The governor’s modest proposals also require employees who pay into the Wisconsin Retirement System to contribute 50% of their annual pension payment, an estimated 5.8% of salary; currently, employers make all pension contributions. What a deal! In Colorado, state employees contribute 10.5% of earnings towards their defined benefit retirement plans. In Wisconsin, teachers make $89,000 in salary and benefits, compared to $48,000 for all other workers in the United States. Admittedly, most teachers have college degrees and many have Masters’ degrees so this is not an entirely appropriate comparison. Nevertheless, it puts the compensation of teachers into perspective. Of course, if this compensation figure for teachers is only for 9 months of work, one could legitimately adjust it to $118,666 for a full 12 months. Perhaps because of the availability of comparative figures like these is the reason why union leaders have largely conceded the salary and pension cuts. They know the governor is right!
Falling tax revenue resulting from the recession is the greatest culprit of Wisconsin’s budget woes -- between 2008 and 2009; state tax revenues fell over 7%. Since July 2009, there has been an estimated dip in revenues of $200 million annually; the state saw little growth in tax revenues in 2010. Unemployment rose more than 4 percentage points between 2007 and 2010, forcing more Wisconsin residents on Medicaid and causing state Medicaid costs to rise. A series of tax cuts passed since 2003, most well before the current governor’s tenure, that cumulatively represent $3.7 billion and, by 2013, make up an $800 million-per-year reduction in tax revenues.
Walker's Democratic predecessor, Jim Doyle, estimated that in June of 2011, Wisconsin would still have a $10 million surplus, but Walker has said the state is facing a $137 million deficit today. Why the discrepancy? Walker made a number of adjustments to Doyle’s estimates, mainly accounting for higher-than-expected Medicaid costs. Walker also pushed through three tax cut bills in an attempt to deal with Wisconsin’s recession. The tax cut bills impacting projected tax revenues by $117 million -- the tax cuts went toward health savings accounts, deductions for relocated businesses, and exclusions for hiring new employees which all sound like highly desirable things. Yet, Dee Perez-Scott, in an even more preposterous post, characterizes these changes as “tax cuts to the rich-big business.” She didn’t spend any space writing about the tax cuts made by the previous Wisconsin administrations. I wonder what her schizoid response will be to the corporate tax cuts Obama wants to make.
However, it is not the immediate budget problem so much as the long term difficulty facing Wisconsin and other states. Wisconsin has an immediate budget shortfall of $137 million, projected to grow to $3.6 billion by mid-2013. That’s the reason why the collective bargaining arrangements have to be changed or the solution to fiscal problems will only be temporary and the state will be right back in the soup. I guess Dee Perez-Scott hasn’t thought about that or just doesn’t care. The unions can do no wrong. She wants the state and the taxpayers to give the unions whatever they want. The pension and health care data cited here shows where that kind of union power leads. It is so obvious that union power must be curbed that it is almost laughable. Yet, Dee in her unreasoned meanderings continue to demonstrate a singular disregard for any facts that don't suit her agenda, whether it be the unions or illegal aliens. She is totally lacking in perspective.
She is now chortling about the fact that someone tricked the governor into thinking he was one of the governor's supporters. What the governor said is just another way of expressing what is already in his proposal. He has to break the power of the union or everything he is able to accomplish will be for naught and Wisconsin will continue to sink into the fiscal abyss.
One of the salient facts that Dee omitted is that, a study by The Segal Co., a private benefits firm, found that state government workers paid between 20 percent and 60 percent of their premium costs for family coverage. If Wisconsin workers are paying around 6 percent, that puts them in the bottom fifth nationally among state employees, Segal’s data shows. A very small number nationally pay zero toward their premium. On health insurance, the governor wants state employees to pay at least 12.6% of the average cost of premiums which is about double what they currently pay but still well below the range of 20-60% cited above and well below the national average of 29% cited by Kaiser Premanente. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker says state employees could pay twice as much for health care premiums and still be paying less that half the national average. Politifax affirmed that the governor was right about that.
In Colorado, the state pays about 69% of health insurance costs; substantially less than the 87.4% Wisconsin will pay after the governor’s changes take place. So what is all of that bleeding-heart moaning I read in Dee’s blog?
The governor’s modest proposals also require employees who pay into the Wisconsin Retirement System to contribute 50% of their annual pension payment, an estimated 5.8% of salary; currently, employers make all pension contributions. What a deal! In Colorado, state employees contribute 10.5% of earnings towards their defined benefit retirement plans. In Wisconsin, teachers make $89,000 in salary and benefits, compared to $48,000 for all other workers in the United States. Admittedly, most teachers have college degrees and many have Masters’ degrees so this is not an entirely appropriate comparison. Nevertheless, it puts the compensation of teachers into perspective. Of course, if this compensation figure for teachers is only for 9 months of work, one could legitimately adjust it to $118,666 for a full 12 months. Perhaps because of the availability of comparative figures like these is the reason why union leaders have largely conceded the salary and pension cuts. They know the governor is right!
Falling tax revenue resulting from the recession is the greatest culprit of Wisconsin’s budget woes -- between 2008 and 2009; state tax revenues fell over 7%. Since July 2009, there has been an estimated dip in revenues of $200 million annually; the state saw little growth in tax revenues in 2010. Unemployment rose more than 4 percentage points between 2007 and 2010, forcing more Wisconsin residents on Medicaid and causing state Medicaid costs to rise. A series of tax cuts passed since 2003, most well before the current governor’s tenure, that cumulatively represent $3.7 billion and, by 2013, make up an $800 million-per-year reduction in tax revenues.
Walker's Democratic predecessor, Jim Doyle, estimated that in June of 2011, Wisconsin would still have a $10 million surplus, but Walker has said the state is facing a $137 million deficit today. Why the discrepancy? Walker made a number of adjustments to Doyle’s estimates, mainly accounting for higher-than-expected Medicaid costs. Walker also pushed through three tax cut bills in an attempt to deal with Wisconsin’s recession. The tax cut bills impacting projected tax revenues by $117 million -- the tax cuts went toward health savings accounts, deductions for relocated businesses, and exclusions for hiring new employees which all sound like highly desirable things. Yet, Dee Perez-Scott, in an even more preposterous post, characterizes these changes as “tax cuts to the rich-big business.” She didn’t spend any space writing about the tax cuts made by the previous Wisconsin administrations. I wonder what her schizoid response will be to the corporate tax cuts Obama wants to make.
However, it is not the immediate budget problem so much as the long term difficulty facing Wisconsin and other states. Wisconsin has an immediate budget shortfall of $137 million, projected to grow to $3.6 billion by mid-2013. That’s the reason why the collective bargaining arrangements have to be changed or the solution to fiscal problems will only be temporary and the state will be right back in the soup. I guess Dee Perez-Scott hasn’t thought about that or just doesn’t care. The unions can do no wrong. She wants the state and the taxpayers to give the unions whatever they want. The pension and health care data cited here shows where that kind of union power leads. It is so obvious that union power must be curbed that it is almost laughable. Yet, Dee in her unreasoned meanderings continue to demonstrate a singular disregard for any facts that don't suit her agenda, whether it be the unions or illegal aliens. She is totally lacking in perspective.
She is now chortling about the fact that someone tricked the governor into thinking he was one of the governor's supporters. What the governor said is just another way of expressing what is already in his proposal. He has to break the power of the union or everything he is able to accomplish will be for naught and Wisconsin will continue to sink into the fiscal abyss.
Dee Perez-Scott Breaks Wind
Dee Perez-Scott is continuing her campaign to call everything with which she disagrees evidnece of "hate". Her latest flatulence pollutes the internet with a unilateral declaration that murderer Shawna Forde committed a "hate" crime. She recognizes no difference between a drug money-related murder and a "hate" crime. It's sad that her vocabulary is so limited that she is reduced to using monosyllabic words for everything when the truth is always more nuanced. Here's her reaction to the Shawna Forde death sentence.
"Hopefully, this harsh sentence will deter others from even contemplating the thought of such vicious, vicious HATE Crimes!
We never want to see such HATE Crimes happen again!"
Sounds like hysteria, doesn't? If anglos were the victims, you can be sure her reaction, if any, would be muted. Reading her blog you would never guess that anyone other than Mexicans have been victimized by murders, mayhem or robbery. When was the last time she gave so much detailed attention and space to crimes committed by Mexican illegals? The answer is: it has never happened!
"Hopefully, this harsh sentence will deter others from even contemplating the thought of such vicious, vicious HATE Crimes!
We never want to see such HATE Crimes happen again!"
Sounds like hysteria, doesn't? If anglos were the victims, you can be sure her reaction, if any, would be muted. Reading her blog you would never guess that anyone other than Mexicans have been victimized by murders, mayhem or robbery. When was the last time she gave so much detailed attention and space to crimes committed by Mexican illegals? The answer is: it has never happened!
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott Unhinged
Dee Perez-Scott ignores the realities of state budgets. Over the last several days, tens of thousands of teachers, nurses, firefighters and other public sector workers have camped out at the Wisconsin State Capitol. She sees everything through a dark glass so it is not unexpected that she believes Republican Gov. Scott Walker wants to break the unions. It is true that he wants to break the unions’ iron grip on the legislature and its ability to dictate its own terms of employment and compensation. The governor’s plan does include asking state employees to contribute more to their pension plans and health care benefits. Although they have not told the governor so, the union bosses seem to be willing to accept those two changes. So the major issue remains the collective bargaining provisions of the old outdated law. Walker fully understands that without the part of his proposal designed to curb union excesses, any gains to help balance the budget this year will only be temporary and the state will be right back in the fiscal soup again next year as the unions use their muscle to try to win back what little they now offer to give up. Dee Perez-Scott just doesn’t get it. Walker has been forced to impose cutbacks because the state is broke. The teachers believe that he offered tax breaks to businesses that were equivalent to the value of the amounts they have been asked to contribute to their own pensions and health plans. That may be so but the governor has to worry about more than just the teachers. He needs to find ways to put Wisconsin workers back to work. If he has been able to encourage businesses to hire through tax incentives, he has done his job.
Dee Perez-Scott, rather dramatically, overlooks the fact that the governor’s proposal regarding collective bargaining does not extent to salaries. The unions will continue to be able to bargain on wages. Accordingly, any discussion of teachers’ salaries is irrelevant. Teachers may not have large starting salaries but they have a retirement plan second to none – usually a lifetime pension at 75% of their final average salary. How many in a 401k with no such guaranteed pension would like to have that deal
I stand with the Wisconsin’s courageous governor. His family is already being guarded against union thugs.
Several of my close relatives are teachers. Most teachers know and understand they will have low salaries. Perhaps that is in part because those who cannot do, teach. But most teachers are ordinary people in jobs that require extraordinary ability to succeed. Few have that ability, hence the lower salaries. Many care about educating our children. For others it is just a job for which they are not particularly well-qualified. They must be giving out Masters Degrees by the hands full these days.
Most of us had teachers that were influential in our lives. In the little high school where I went, there were only 50 students in total. The principal taught everything from business law to algebra to livestock to general science. Obviously, he was not qualified to teach all of those subjects but he did the best he could and supported the students who were interested in learning and kept the bullies in line.
I stand with the governor and the taxpayers in Wisconsin. When the teachers show us that they can stand and deliver, then let’s talk about salaries and benefits. When all of the public employees are willing to accept the retirement plans and average benefits accorded to typical or comparable employees in the private sector and when the budget is balanced, let’s reward them accordingly. Until then they have little to complain about. As one counter demonstrator pointed out, “You can always quit if you don’t like your working conditions, pay and benefits.” Fat chance of that and that is the bottom line. They know they have a sweetheart deal.
Dee Perez-Scott, rather dramatically, overlooks the fact that the governor’s proposal regarding collective bargaining does not extent to salaries. The unions will continue to be able to bargain on wages. Accordingly, any discussion of teachers’ salaries is irrelevant. Teachers may not have large starting salaries but they have a retirement plan second to none – usually a lifetime pension at 75% of their final average salary. How many in a 401k with no such guaranteed pension would like to have that deal
I stand with the Wisconsin’s courageous governor. His family is already being guarded against union thugs.
Several of my close relatives are teachers. Most teachers know and understand they will have low salaries. Perhaps that is in part because those who cannot do, teach. But most teachers are ordinary people in jobs that require extraordinary ability to succeed. Few have that ability, hence the lower salaries. Many care about educating our children. For others it is just a job for which they are not particularly well-qualified. They must be giving out Masters Degrees by the hands full these days.
Most of us had teachers that were influential in our lives. In the little high school where I went, there were only 50 students in total. The principal taught everything from business law to algebra to livestock to general science. Obviously, he was not qualified to teach all of those subjects but he did the best he could and supported the students who were interested in learning and kept the bullies in line.
I stand with the governor and the taxpayers in Wisconsin. When the teachers show us that they can stand and deliver, then let’s talk about salaries and benefits. When all of the public employees are willing to accept the retirement plans and average benefits accorded to typical or comparable employees in the private sector and when the budget is balanced, let’s reward them accordingly. Until then they have little to complain about. As one counter demonstrator pointed out, “You can always quit if you don’t like your working conditions, pay and benefits.” Fat chance of that and that is the bottom line. They know they have a sweetheart deal.
Dee Perez-Scott Applauds Madison Madness
Dee Perez-Scott blindly supports the madness in Madison, Wisconsin while knowing nothing about the history of the budget-busting Democrat Party as it yielded to every union demand. It's time for Dee Perez-Scott to realize that state government should be responsive the taxpaying public not dominated by the unions that have drained the Treasury aided and abetted by Democrats who care nothing about anything except recovering the power they lost in the recent elections.
The Democratic/government-union days of rage in Madison, Wis., are a disgrace. Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan calls it Cairo coming to Madison. But the protesters in Egypt were pro-democracy. The government-union protesters in Madison are anti-democracy -- they are trying to prevent a vote in the legislature. In fact, Democratic legislators themselves are fleeing the state so as not to vote on Gov. Scott Walker's budget cuts.
That's not democracy.
The teachers' union is going on strike in Milwaukee and elsewhere. They ought to be fired. Think Ronald Reagan PATCO in 1981. Think Calvin Coolidge police strike in 1919.
The teachers' union on strike? Wisconsin parents should go on strike against the teachers' union. A friend e-mailed me to say that the graduation rate in Milwaukee public schools is 46 percent. The graduation rate for African-Americans in Milwaukee public schools is 34 percent. Shouldn't somebody be protesting that?
Gov. Walker is facing a $3.6 billion budget deficit, and he wants state workers to pay one-half of their pension costs and 12.6 percent of their health benefits. Currently, most state employees pay nothing for their pensions and virtually nothing for their health insurance. That's an outrage.
Nationwide, state and local government unions have a 45 percent total-compensation advantage over their private-sector counterpart. With high-pay compensation and virtually no benefits co-pay, the politically arrogant unions are bankrupting America -- which by some estimates is suffering from $3 trillion in unfunded liabilities.
Exempting police, fire and state troopers, Walker would end collective bargaining over pensions and benefits for the rest. Collective bargaining for wages would still be permitted, but there would be no wage hikes above the consumer price index. Unions could still represent workers, but they could not force employees to pay dues. In exchange for this, Walker promises no furloughs or layoffs.
Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels is also pushing a bill to limit the collective-bargaining rights of teachers for wages and wage-related benefits. Similar proposals are being discussed in Idaho and Tennessee. In Ohio, Gov. John Kasich wants to restrict union rights across the board for all state and local government workers. More generally, both Democratic and Republican governors across the country are taking on the extravagant pay of government unions.
Why? Because taxpayers won't stand for it anymore.
In an interesting twist on this story, even private unions are revolting against government unions. Private unions pay taxes, too. And they don't have near the total compensation of the public unions. It's no wonder they're fed up.
So, having lost badly in the last election, the government-union Democrats in Wisconsin have taken to the streets. This is a European-style revolt, like those seen in Greece, France and elsewhere. So it becomes greater than just a fiscal issue. It is becoming a law-and-order issue.
President Obama, who keeps telling us he's a budget cutter, has taken the side of the public unions. House Speaker John Boehner correctly rapped Obama's knuckles for this. If the state of Wisconsin voters elected a Chris Christie-type governor with a Republican legislature, then it is a local states' rights issue.
But does President Obama even know that the scope of collective bargaining for federal employees is sharply limited? According to the Manhattan Institute, federal workers are forbidden to collectively bargain for wages or benefits. Instead, pay increases are determined annually through legislation.
Meanwhile, Walker said it would be "wise" for President Obama to keep his attentions on Washington, not Wisconsin. "We're focused on balancing our budget," he said in a television interview. "It would be wise for the president and others in Washington to be focused on balancing their budget, which they're a long ways from doing."
Amen.
Obama should stay out. And Walker should stand tall and stick to his principles. A nationwide taxpayer revolt against public unions can save the country. Otherwise, the spiraling out-of-control costs of state public-union entitlements will destroy the local fisc, just as surely as the unreformed federal entitlements of Social Security and health care are wrecking our national finances.
Larry Kudlow
Madison Madness
The Democratic/government-union days of rage in Madison, Wis., are a disgrace. Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan calls it Cairo coming to Madison. But the protesters in Egypt were pro-democracy. The government-union protesters in Madison are anti-democracy -- they are trying to prevent a vote in the legislature. In fact, Democratic legislators themselves are fleeing the state so as not to vote on Gov. Scott Walker's budget cuts.
That's not democracy.
The teachers' union is going on strike in Milwaukee and elsewhere. They ought to be fired. Think Ronald Reagan PATCO in 1981. Think Calvin Coolidge police strike in 1919.
The teachers' union on strike? Wisconsin parents should go on strike against the teachers' union. A friend e-mailed me to say that the graduation rate in Milwaukee public schools is 46 percent. The graduation rate for African-Americans in Milwaukee public schools is 34 percent. Shouldn't somebody be protesting that?
Gov. Walker is facing a $3.6 billion budget deficit, and he wants state workers to pay one-half of their pension costs and 12.6 percent of their health benefits. Currently, most state employees pay nothing for their pensions and virtually nothing for their health insurance. That's an outrage.
Nationwide, state and local government unions have a 45 percent total-compensation advantage over their private-sector counterpart. With high-pay compensation and virtually no benefits co-pay, the politically arrogant unions are bankrupting America -- which by some estimates is suffering from $3 trillion in unfunded liabilities.
Exempting police, fire and state troopers, Walker would end collective bargaining over pensions and benefits for the rest. Collective bargaining for wages would still be permitted, but there would be no wage hikes above the consumer price index. Unions could still represent workers, but they could not force employees to pay dues. In exchange for this, Walker promises no furloughs or layoffs.
Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels is also pushing a bill to limit the collective-bargaining rights of teachers for wages and wage-related benefits. Similar proposals are being discussed in Idaho and Tennessee. In Ohio, Gov. John Kasich wants to restrict union rights across the board for all state and local government workers. More generally, both Democratic and Republican governors across the country are taking on the extravagant pay of government unions.
Why? Because taxpayers won't stand for it anymore.
In an interesting twist on this story, even private unions are revolting against government unions. Private unions pay taxes, too. And they don't have near the total compensation of the public unions. It's no wonder they're fed up.
So, having lost badly in the last election, the government-union Democrats in Wisconsin have taken to the streets. This is a European-style revolt, like those seen in Greece, France and elsewhere. So it becomes greater than just a fiscal issue. It is becoming a law-and-order issue.
President Obama, who keeps telling us he's a budget cutter, has taken the side of the public unions. House Speaker John Boehner correctly rapped Obama's knuckles for this. If the state of Wisconsin voters elected a Chris Christie-type governor with a Republican legislature, then it is a local states' rights issue.
But does President Obama even know that the scope of collective bargaining for federal employees is sharply limited? According to the Manhattan Institute, federal workers are forbidden to collectively bargain for wages or benefits. Instead, pay increases are determined annually through legislation.
Meanwhile, Walker said it would be "wise" for President Obama to keep his attentions on Washington, not Wisconsin. "We're focused on balancing our budget," he said in a television interview. "It would be wise for the president and others in Washington to be focused on balancing their budget, which they're a long ways from doing."
Amen.
Obama should stay out. And Walker should stand tall and stick to his principles. A nationwide taxpayer revolt against public unions can save the country. Otherwise, the spiraling out-of-control costs of state public-union entitlements will destroy the local fisc, just as surely as the unreformed federal entitlements of Social Security and health care are wrecking our national finances.
Larry Kudlow
Madison Madness
Monday, February 21, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott Incites Violence in Wisconsin
Governor Walker of Wisconsin has pointed out that it is never a good idea to give emergency services workers like the police and firemen cause to walk off the job. That is the main reason he exempted them from the provisions of his budget-balancing efforts. Of course, the fact that they supported his election may also have been a secondary factor. Obama did the same thing by granting exemptions and bailouts to unions. So what’s new? As always, it doesn’t depend on what is right but whose ox is being gored.
There was no “bloodbath” even though Dee would like to incite riots and violence in the streets like those in Libya. The only question citizens need to ask is whether it will be the unions who run the state of Wisconsin, control public services and dictate budget-busting legislation or will the other non-union taxpayers have a say about how their state is run. This is just another page out of the book where public officials have feathered their own nests while services go to pot.
Dee Perez-Scott’s father belonged to one of the unions in Detroit that broke the backs of the auto makers while producing low quality cars. Her biases are obvious and cloud her ability to view the Wisconsin situation objectively. If you are a Republican governor, you are automatically wrong in her view. It doesn’t really make any difference what you do or say or why you do it. No one will take Dee seriously anymore.
I don’t know what happened to radicalize her. At one time, she seemed to be willing to consider compromise and listen to another point of view. She is now, and perhaps always has been, a “pinko” who allows no dissent in her blog. While using every foul name known to mankind in her blog, she lies through her teeth about her non-existent grandmotherly, no name-calling approach. Even though we don’t know how she got there, we now know her for what she is, a thorough-going anti-American who is disloyal to everything America stands for.
All of the teachers and civil servants who took sick leave and the doctors who supported them should be required to state under oath, subject to the laws of perjury, exactly what their medical condition was and how it was diagnosed in the streets. The probability that so many were actually sick all at once is zero and none. If they were sick, they should have been home in bed instead of in the capitol rotunda. That should be obvious to even the likes of Dee Perez-Scott and her ilk. As usual, she defends the guilty rather than coming down on the side of the law.
Collective bargaining has everything to do with balancing Wisconsin’s budget now and in the future. Collective bargaining and union political influence exercised through the Democrat Party are what got the state into this fiscal mess. (If I were Dee, I would call them Democruds like she uses the Re”thug”licans epithet she likes so much.)
Unless collective bargaining is curbed, the state will continue to have budgetary problems. Wisconsin is lucky to have a Republican governor who has the courage to confront the root cause of the state’s budgetary problems. Dee Perez-Scott like, every left wing extremist, characterizes the governor’s legal obligation to balance the budget as being an affront to the rights of the working people of that state. No mention is made of the taxpayers who have to pick up the tab for the union’s excessive demands. In Wisconsin, and in Dee Perez-Scott’s tirades, we are witnessing the abject hostility of a unionized entitlement class to anything that might limit their lucrative compensation and benefit plans. It is they who want unlimited compensation and benefits funded off the backs of the taxpayers. It is true the union members are taxpayers too but how many of us would rush to accept a dollar even if we had to give back a quarter for every one we accept. This is what the union rhetoric is about. They want “more” and if they get it they will grudgingly cough up the tax on it. They probably add the tax to their demands so they achieve their after tax goals.
The people don’t want unions that make excessive demands and use the political process to fatten their wallets. Dee equates unions with the people. I guess she hasn't checked what percent of the people actually belong to unions. Unions through their minions in the Democrat party had their chance to be heard. Instead the cowardly Democrats slipped across the border into Illinois like illegal aliens. The TEA party caught up with them and tried to show them the way back to where they came from. That was great!
Dee is right about one thing. This is a David and Goliath fight with the giant unions bringing all of their forces to bear against the governor. He is David and hopefully he will slay the union Goliath. State workers and teachers should never have been allowed collective bargaining rights. That is something they should be willing to give up to continue to enjoy the security and benefits of a state job. There are other ways to achieve parity through surveys of compensation and benefits paid by private employers within the state. No unions necessary. The facts will speak for themselves if caution is used to properly evaluate public employee benefits of stable employment, vacation time, sick leave, and rich health plans. How many state employees and teachers are willing to give up their specified lifetime retirement plans for a specified contribution plan like a 401k? When they agree, call me.
The Tea Party once again is taking the initiative to oppose the union position they know is not in their own best interest. There was a time when someone like the Tea Party member, well-educated and intelligent, could find work in this country and not be taxed to death to pay the excessive demands of public and private unions and out- of- control government spending. Unions have always enjoyed the power of numbers and political influence to bludgeon companies and legislatures into acceding to their every demand. What the governor in Wisconsin is doing is trying to level the playing field between the taxpayer and the public unions. For too long the unions have had the upper hand driving companies and states to financial ruin. We could do without the Department of Labor until our fiscal crisis is solved.
Certainly there was a time when someone as untalented and dishonest as Dee could perhaps buy a new car and a home to raise a family. That is all gone now because of the excessive demands of unions have made American products uncompetitive in the global market. How can American companies compete with the Koreans, the Chinese and the Japanese when they are saddled with union demands that make it all but impossible to competitively price their outputs? If you haven’t noticed, along with the excessive demands of the unions in this country the number of good paying manufacturing jobs declined and were lost to other countries with lower labor costs. It was the union’s fault that corporate America had to find cheaper labor and export jobs to poorer nations to simply remain competitive.
Let’s look at a hypothetical example and keep it simple so Dee can understand it even as she denies it. Let’s assume that Dee will not dispute the fact that labor is cheaper in China, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and many other countries of the world. If American companies can make a widget for $100 but China can make it for $50, which will have the greatest market share? What if the U.S. Company moves the production of the widget to India where it can be produced for $45? Is that union busting or simply a matter of economic survival? If the U.S. refuses to buy parts made elsewhere and as a result our products cost 30% more that those of our competitors: Germany, France, Great Britain, Japan and others, how long will those good jobs last before the company goes broke for lack of sales? Dee wants to squeeze blood out of a stone. Good luck with that idea!
No one denies the good that unions achieved in the past. Their major failure was the inability to recognize what their excessive demands would do to good-paying American jobs. They were, and still are, cutting off their nose to spite their face or ineptly shooting themselves in the foot. The excessive union demands and their shoddy workmanship drove GM and the other American car companies to near collapse. The rise of the Toyota Corolla was an early warning sign. If you can ship cars across the ocean and still undersell American cars, you know the price of American labor is too high. And who knows how those high labor costs influenced companies to make the mistake of avoiding costly model changes and invest in other innovations. Money that should have been going into such things was not available because of union demands. America may have produced low mileage cars to meet the demands of the public. It was either that or concede the SUV market to the Japanese. People didn’t quit buying American cars because they were assembled by union workers. Americans quit buying American because they were tired of being offered union-built, high cost junk cars. The unions had killed the goose that laid the golden egg.
There was no “bloodbath” even though Dee would like to incite riots and violence in the streets like those in Libya. The only question citizens need to ask is whether it will be the unions who run the state of Wisconsin, control public services and dictate budget-busting legislation or will the other non-union taxpayers have a say about how their state is run. This is just another page out of the book where public officials have feathered their own nests while services go to pot.
Dee Perez-Scott’s father belonged to one of the unions in Detroit that broke the backs of the auto makers while producing low quality cars. Her biases are obvious and cloud her ability to view the Wisconsin situation objectively. If you are a Republican governor, you are automatically wrong in her view. It doesn’t really make any difference what you do or say or why you do it. No one will take Dee seriously anymore.
I don’t know what happened to radicalize her. At one time, she seemed to be willing to consider compromise and listen to another point of view. She is now, and perhaps always has been, a “pinko” who allows no dissent in her blog. While using every foul name known to mankind in her blog, she lies through her teeth about her non-existent grandmotherly, no name-calling approach. Even though we don’t know how she got there, we now know her for what she is, a thorough-going anti-American who is disloyal to everything America stands for.
All of the teachers and civil servants who took sick leave and the doctors who supported them should be required to state under oath, subject to the laws of perjury, exactly what their medical condition was and how it was diagnosed in the streets. The probability that so many were actually sick all at once is zero and none. If they were sick, they should have been home in bed instead of in the capitol rotunda. That should be obvious to even the likes of Dee Perez-Scott and her ilk. As usual, she defends the guilty rather than coming down on the side of the law.
Collective bargaining has everything to do with balancing Wisconsin’s budget now and in the future. Collective bargaining and union political influence exercised through the Democrat Party are what got the state into this fiscal mess. (If I were Dee, I would call them Democruds like she uses the Re”thug”licans epithet she likes so much.)
Unless collective bargaining is curbed, the state will continue to have budgetary problems. Wisconsin is lucky to have a Republican governor who has the courage to confront the root cause of the state’s budgetary problems. Dee Perez-Scott like, every left wing extremist, characterizes the governor’s legal obligation to balance the budget as being an affront to the rights of the working people of that state. No mention is made of the taxpayers who have to pick up the tab for the union’s excessive demands. In Wisconsin, and in Dee Perez-Scott’s tirades, we are witnessing the abject hostility of a unionized entitlement class to anything that might limit their lucrative compensation and benefit plans. It is they who want unlimited compensation and benefits funded off the backs of the taxpayers. It is true the union members are taxpayers too but how many of us would rush to accept a dollar even if we had to give back a quarter for every one we accept. This is what the union rhetoric is about. They want “more” and if they get it they will grudgingly cough up the tax on it. They probably add the tax to their demands so they achieve their after tax goals.
The people don’t want unions that make excessive demands and use the political process to fatten their wallets. Dee equates unions with the people. I guess she hasn't checked what percent of the people actually belong to unions. Unions through their minions in the Democrat party had their chance to be heard. Instead the cowardly Democrats slipped across the border into Illinois like illegal aliens. The TEA party caught up with them and tried to show them the way back to where they came from. That was great!
Dee is right about one thing. This is a David and Goliath fight with the giant unions bringing all of their forces to bear against the governor. He is David and hopefully he will slay the union Goliath. State workers and teachers should never have been allowed collective bargaining rights. That is something they should be willing to give up to continue to enjoy the security and benefits of a state job. There are other ways to achieve parity through surveys of compensation and benefits paid by private employers within the state. No unions necessary. The facts will speak for themselves if caution is used to properly evaluate public employee benefits of stable employment, vacation time, sick leave, and rich health plans. How many state employees and teachers are willing to give up their specified lifetime retirement plans for a specified contribution plan like a 401k? When they agree, call me.
The Tea Party once again is taking the initiative to oppose the union position they know is not in their own best interest. There was a time when someone like the Tea Party member, well-educated and intelligent, could find work in this country and not be taxed to death to pay the excessive demands of public and private unions and out- of- control government spending. Unions have always enjoyed the power of numbers and political influence to bludgeon companies and legislatures into acceding to their every demand. What the governor in Wisconsin is doing is trying to level the playing field between the taxpayer and the public unions. For too long the unions have had the upper hand driving companies and states to financial ruin. We could do without the Department of Labor until our fiscal crisis is solved.
Certainly there was a time when someone as untalented and dishonest as Dee could perhaps buy a new car and a home to raise a family. That is all gone now because of the excessive demands of unions have made American products uncompetitive in the global market. How can American companies compete with the Koreans, the Chinese and the Japanese when they are saddled with union demands that make it all but impossible to competitively price their outputs? If you haven’t noticed, along with the excessive demands of the unions in this country the number of good paying manufacturing jobs declined and were lost to other countries with lower labor costs. It was the union’s fault that corporate America had to find cheaper labor and export jobs to poorer nations to simply remain competitive.
Let’s look at a hypothetical example and keep it simple so Dee can understand it even as she denies it. Let’s assume that Dee will not dispute the fact that labor is cheaper in China, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and many other countries of the world. If American companies can make a widget for $100 but China can make it for $50, which will have the greatest market share? What if the U.S. Company moves the production of the widget to India where it can be produced for $45? Is that union busting or simply a matter of economic survival? If the U.S. refuses to buy parts made elsewhere and as a result our products cost 30% more that those of our competitors: Germany, France, Great Britain, Japan and others, how long will those good jobs last before the company goes broke for lack of sales? Dee wants to squeeze blood out of a stone. Good luck with that idea!
No one denies the good that unions achieved in the past. Their major failure was the inability to recognize what their excessive demands would do to good-paying American jobs. They were, and still are, cutting off their nose to spite their face or ineptly shooting themselves in the foot. The excessive union demands and their shoddy workmanship drove GM and the other American car companies to near collapse. The rise of the Toyota Corolla was an early warning sign. If you can ship cars across the ocean and still undersell American cars, you know the price of American labor is too high. And who knows how those high labor costs influenced companies to make the mistake of avoiding costly model changes and invest in other innovations. Money that should have been going into such things was not available because of union demands. America may have produced low mileage cars to meet the demands of the public. It was either that or concede the SUV market to the Japanese. People didn’t quit buying American cars because they were assembled by union workers. Americans quit buying American because they were tired of being offered union-built, high cost junk cars. The unions had killed the goose that laid the golden egg.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Disgusted Allen West to Dems: Grow Up!
Rookie U.S. Rep. Allen West delivered a stinging indictment of his colleagues in a letter to constituents in which he rails about House members’ “ignorance, belligerence, and dishonest rhetoric.” Without naming names, but clearly implying that he was including President Barack Obama, the Florida Republican also decried Washington’s interference with Wisconsin’s budget turmoil. The text of the letter to residents of Florida's 22nd District:
U.S. Rep Allen West
“Over this past week I have watched and listened to members of the House of Representatives from across the aisle.
“I am appalled at their ignorance, belligerence, and dishonest rhetoric filled with empty emotional platitudes. Have they no shame in realizing that their inept, incompetent failures are the reason why we are debating this continuing resolution. They failed to pass a budget during the 111th Congress.
“Have they no honor in realizing that their fiscal irresponsibility over the past four years has resulted in our standing on the precipice of a fiscal canyon from which we may not recover.
“Also troubling are the events in the state of Wisconsin which mirror those that happened in Greece several months ago. We are witnessing the abject hostility of a unionized entitlement class that is being lauded by the liberal left, seemingly to include our President.
“It is such a critical time for our Republic, yet there seems no visionary leadership — it is as if America stopped producing adults. I have never seen a greater assembly of petulance and sophomoric behavior as what I have witnessed this week on the floor of the House of Representatives.
“To those across the aisle, please explain to the American people how your economic policies have created a better environment for long-term sustainable growth.
“This debate is about jobs and the economy.
“It begins with remedying the spending problem on Capitol Hill. It includes tackling the burdensome taxation and regulation policies strangling our country. It is the understanding that Keynesian tax and spend policies did not grow America’s economy, but the indomitable, entrepreneurial spirit of the American people.
“Government sets the conditions for job and economic growth, it does not create jobs.
“I am pleased that we are having open debate in the peoples’ house. However, there is clearly something lacking in this discourse — the recognition of the failure of the bureaucratic nanny-state liberal policies.
“Rest assured that I will do everything in my ability to stand firm and lead on the principles that make America exceptional.”
U.S. Rep Allen West
“Over this past week I have watched and listened to members of the House of Representatives from across the aisle.
“I am appalled at their ignorance, belligerence, and dishonest rhetoric filled with empty emotional platitudes. Have they no shame in realizing that their inept, incompetent failures are the reason why we are debating this continuing resolution. They failed to pass a budget during the 111th Congress.
“Have they no honor in realizing that their fiscal irresponsibility over the past four years has resulted in our standing on the precipice of a fiscal canyon from which we may not recover.
“Also troubling are the events in the state of Wisconsin which mirror those that happened in Greece several months ago. We are witnessing the abject hostility of a unionized entitlement class that is being lauded by the liberal left, seemingly to include our President.
“It is such a critical time for our Republic, yet there seems no visionary leadership — it is as if America stopped producing adults. I have never seen a greater assembly of petulance and sophomoric behavior as what I have witnessed this week on the floor of the House of Representatives.
“To those across the aisle, please explain to the American people how your economic policies have created a better environment for long-term sustainable growth.
“This debate is about jobs and the economy.
“It begins with remedying the spending problem on Capitol Hill. It includes tackling the burdensome taxation and regulation policies strangling our country. It is the understanding that Keynesian tax and spend policies did not grow America’s economy, but the indomitable, entrepreneurial spirit of the American people.
“Government sets the conditions for job and economic growth, it does not create jobs.
“I am pleased that we are having open debate in the peoples’ house. However, there is clearly something lacking in this discourse — the recognition of the failure of the bureaucratic nanny-state liberal policies.
“Rest assured that I will do everything in my ability to stand firm and lead on the principles that make America exceptional.”
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott is off her rocker!
Filling her blog with smears and name-calling, Dee accuses Republicans of being out to destroy the teachers’ and public employees’ unions. She says nothing about the cowardly disappearance of the Democrat legislators into a neighboring state in an attempt to prevent a vote on the Wisconsin governor’s budget. The unions say they want to have a chance to discuss the governor’s proposals and suggest alternative ways of balancing the budget. If they are sincere about this, they need to get the Democrats back to work. The Democrats are quasi-union members and therefore are principally responsible for getting Wisconsin and other states like Illinois, New Jersey, California and New York into a fiscal mess. Dee doesn’t care about that. She can’t be bothered with such mundane things as complying with state law and balancing the budget. She calls that “dirty tricks.”
In Wisconsin, the average teacher salary is $50,424 for 9 months of work or, on an anualized basis, $67,232. How many of those among the unemployed would jump at the opportunity to make that much and then enjoy a early retirement and an exceptional vacation and medical plan. Some teachers deserve more because of their excellence in the classroom. But the union opposes merit pay. They want all teachers to be paid the same regardless of merit.I wonder if that is the way it worked in the Fortune 500company where Dee claims to have been employed at one time? Not bloody likely! In colleges and universities pay is based on merit. Why not in K -12? If the student has not learned, the teacher has not taught but we pay them anyway.
The governor made it clear that while he is in office, the state is not going to be run by the unions or their Democrat henchmen. The unions have bankrupted states and company after company. General Motors and Chrysler would be dead by now if they hadn’t been bailed out by the government. The unions refused to grant Ford concessions similar to those granted to GM and Chrysler. I guess they forgot to look at Ford’s balance sheet and see the heavy load of debt it has to bear because of union demands over the years.
Teachers and civil service employees do very well when it comes to salaries and benefits. The benefits have never been properly valued as part of their overall compensation package. It’s time to put a price tag on those benefits and keep in mind that teachers‘ salaries are for just nine months of work with many holidays and non-teaching days within that nine months.
States are finding that they simply can’t afford the lucrative benefit plans state employees have enjoyed. Most workers in private companies have to depend on a specified contribution plan not a specified benefit plan. That’s what should be happening in the states to get their fiscal houses in order. Let’s take the example of a married couple both of whom are teachers who began teaching when they were 22 years old. By the time they are in their 50s they will be fully vested with a lifetime retirement entitlement of something like 75% of their final average salaries. In Wisconsin, that might mean a family income of $100,000 while they are working and then a lifetime pension of $75,000. Contrast that lifetime pension with a person in a 401k plan whose portfolio has been decimated by the recent recession and unemployment.
The principal objective of every political party is to defeat the opposition candidates from the president on down. McConnell at least had the courage to say out loud what we all know about political parties.
When it comes to tax cuts, which would you rather have: money in your pocket or in the pockets of union members who always want “more?” Which would you rather have high taxes on businesses that limit their ability to sell their products and create jobs or instead put that money in the pockets of unions who will use some of it for political purposes – like supporting legislators who are willing to accede to their every demand even if it bankrupts the state?
In Wisconsin, the average teacher salary is $50,424 for 9 months of work or, on an anualized basis, $67,232. How many of those among the unemployed would jump at the opportunity to make that much and then enjoy a early retirement and an exceptional vacation and medical plan. Some teachers deserve more because of their excellence in the classroom. But the union opposes merit pay. They want all teachers to be paid the same regardless of merit.I wonder if that is the way it worked in the Fortune 500company where Dee claims to have been employed at one time? Not bloody likely! In colleges and universities pay is based on merit. Why not in K -12? If the student has not learned, the teacher has not taught but we pay them anyway.
The governor made it clear that while he is in office, the state is not going to be run by the unions or their Democrat henchmen. The unions have bankrupted states and company after company. General Motors and Chrysler would be dead by now if they hadn’t been bailed out by the government. The unions refused to grant Ford concessions similar to those granted to GM and Chrysler. I guess they forgot to look at Ford’s balance sheet and see the heavy load of debt it has to bear because of union demands over the years.
Teachers and civil service employees do very well when it comes to salaries and benefits. The benefits have never been properly valued as part of their overall compensation package. It’s time to put a price tag on those benefits and keep in mind that teachers‘ salaries are for just nine months of work with many holidays and non-teaching days within that nine months.
States are finding that they simply can’t afford the lucrative benefit plans state employees have enjoyed. Most workers in private companies have to depend on a specified contribution plan not a specified benefit plan. That’s what should be happening in the states to get their fiscal houses in order. Let’s take the example of a married couple both of whom are teachers who began teaching when they were 22 years old. By the time they are in their 50s they will be fully vested with a lifetime retirement entitlement of something like 75% of their final average salaries. In Wisconsin, that might mean a family income of $100,000 while they are working and then a lifetime pension of $75,000. Contrast that lifetime pension with a person in a 401k plan whose portfolio has been decimated by the recent recession and unemployment.
The principal objective of every political party is to defeat the opposition candidates from the president on down. McConnell at least had the courage to say out loud what we all know about political parties.
When it comes to tax cuts, which would you rather have: money in your pocket or in the pockets of union members who always want “more?” Which would you rather have high taxes on businesses that limit their ability to sell their products and create jobs or instead put that money in the pockets of unions who will use some of it for political purposes – like supporting legislators who are willing to accede to their every demand even if it bankrupts the state?
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott, racist, impugns the character of a state senator.
A state senator reportedly recently called on citizens to “empty the clip and do what has to be done” in order to address the illegal alien invasion and all of its adverse consequences for America’s quality of life and standard of living. To those who have the capacity to think outside the ethnocentric box, his meaning should be obvious. To stop and reverse this invasion of aliens, we need to marshal all of the tools and means at our disposal and apply them vigorously and without hesitation.
Those who wish to misinterpret the senator’s remarks have ignored the obvious and suggest that the senator is inciting people to murder illegal aliens on a wholesale basis. That is a good example of the distortions and propaganda the pro-illegal alien crowd and their ilk resort to when they have no substantive arguments.
They even go so far as to attempt to relate the senator’s remarks in some way to the recent murderous rampage of a demented young man in Arizona. The is typical of how disloyal ethnocentrists twist the truth to serve their nefarious purposes.
Instead of pursuing more nonsense in that vein, they should be doing some soul-searching and self-contemplation regarding what a doubling of the U.S. population will mean to each of us in terms of the quality of life and our standard of living. Early in the 20th century, Teddy Roosevelt struggled to begin the process of establishing national parks and monuments to protect and preserve the natural wonders of America for all citizens and their descendants. At that time, America's population was a fraction of what it is today.
Legal immigration amounting to a million or more per year will account for most of that future growth and yet Congress, aided and abetted by the shortsighted immigration lobbies, continues to sit idly by as the America we know and love goes down the drain. They need to take action now to reduce the total to no more than 200,000 per year so we can work toward a stable population that will be substantially less than the projected 0.6 – 1.3 billion we are faced with by the end of this century.
Illegal aliens are not an immigration issue; they are an issue of law enforcement, border security, population, and national security. The pro-illegal alien crowd is singularly unconcerned about anything except the wishes of their illegal constituents. Their compassion hurts America and Americans solely. WE know they are racists because they focus almost exclusively on Latinos thus exposing their ethnocentric bias and the shallowness of their position. We do indeed need to “empty the clip” if we are to defeat the forces inimical to the national interest, character, sovereignty,language, ideals, and security and the rule of law.
Those who wish to misinterpret the senator’s remarks have ignored the obvious and suggest that the senator is inciting people to murder illegal aliens on a wholesale basis. That is a good example of the distortions and propaganda the pro-illegal alien crowd and their ilk resort to when they have no substantive arguments.
They even go so far as to attempt to relate the senator’s remarks in some way to the recent murderous rampage of a demented young man in Arizona. The is typical of how disloyal ethnocentrists twist the truth to serve their nefarious purposes.
Instead of pursuing more nonsense in that vein, they should be doing some soul-searching and self-contemplation regarding what a doubling of the U.S. population will mean to each of us in terms of the quality of life and our standard of living. Early in the 20th century, Teddy Roosevelt struggled to begin the process of establishing national parks and monuments to protect and preserve the natural wonders of America for all citizens and their descendants. At that time, America's population was a fraction of what it is today.
Legal immigration amounting to a million or more per year will account for most of that future growth and yet Congress, aided and abetted by the shortsighted immigration lobbies, continues to sit idly by as the America we know and love goes down the drain. They need to take action now to reduce the total to no more than 200,000 per year so we can work toward a stable population that will be substantially less than the projected 0.6 – 1.3 billion we are faced with by the end of this century.
Illegal aliens are not an immigration issue; they are an issue of law enforcement, border security, population, and national security. The pro-illegal alien crowd is singularly unconcerned about anything except the wishes of their illegal constituents. Their compassion hurts America and Americans solely. WE know they are racists because they focus almost exclusively on Latinos thus exposing their ethnocentric bias and the shallowness of their position. We do indeed need to “empty the clip” if we are to defeat the forces inimical to the national interest, character, sovereignty,language, ideals, and security and the rule of law.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott's Blog Mission Statement - Revised
"An ethnocentric, pro-illegal alien forum in which all civil comments regarding immigration and political issues with which the blog owner disagrees are excluded thus promoting the hate, anger, and misunderstandings between Americans who support the national character, language, ideals, and sovereignty, and border security and the rule of law, the very foundation of civilized society, and those who don’t."
Monday, February 7, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott Slides into Nonsense - Again!
Dee Perez-Scott, in another tirade against what she erroneously calls “Arizona’s 'Hate' Bill, SB1070”, crosses the line into nonsense yet again. Dee’s narrow, ethnocentric agenda makes her an icon of intolerance regarding every view that disagrees with hers. She is a heroine to every foreigner in our midst, every illegal alien, every border jumper, and every violator of immigration laws. She continues to have no regard for her fellow citizens or their wishes. Dee, the darling of the extreme left wing, has a lesion on the loyalty lobe of her brain. She likes to accuse the right of bigotry, nativism, xenophobia, racism and sundry other forms of what she mistakenly calls “hate”. She has never admitted the reasonableness of the many legitimate arguments against population growth, excessive legal immigration, illegal aliens, chain immigration, and instant citizenship for the children of illegal aliens, tourists, and temporary migrant workers. Instead she prefers to brand all those reasonable arguments as “hate”. In doing so, she demonstrates her own form of “hate” through her overt disdain for her fellow citizens and everything they stand for. She and her ilk will certainly be the downfall of the last great hope of mankind, the United States of America.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott's Nemesis: Kris Kobach, an American Hero
Frustrated by the federal inaction on illegal immigration, cities and states have spent the last few years crafting their own curbs on unlawful residency. The most publicized of these was in Arizona, which ordered police with "reasonable suspicion" to check people's immigration status (and went further last week, introducing a bill that aims to deny citizenship to children born in the state whose parents are there without permission). Lawmakers have worked aggressively as well in Nebraska, Texas, Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Idaho, among other states, punishing schools that educate undocumented immigrants, landlords who rent to them, and businesses that hire them.
What unites these measures, however, is more than a really effective approach to border control. It's their ties to American hero: Kris Kobach, a Kansas-raised former law professor who has emerged as the intellectual architect of the fight against illegal immigration. The 44-year-old has authored, aided, or officially defended almost every effort in the U.S. designed to support and enforce immigration laws, beginning with his work as chief immigration adviser in John Ashcroft's Justice Department. Ever since the federal government abdicated its responsibility to use whatever means are necessary to stop and reverse illegal entry, Kobach has filled the void with well thought-out legislation and a spirited legal defense of any measures challenged by the ACLU or the federal government.
This year may be Kobach's most influential yet. From a base in Kansas, where he is the newly seated secretary of state, Kobach will help Arizona defend its laws against all comers. Both the Justice Department and American Civil Liberties Union have sued the state, claiming that immigration is a [long-neglected] federal matter. He'll also counsel a dozen or so states that are considering similar laws and a coordinated assault on birthright citizenship. And he'll litigate at least four ongoing immigration-related cases, including lawsuits against California (for extending in-state college-tuition rates to the undocumented) and San Francisco (for failing to notify immigration authorities before a thrice-arrested alien allegedly murdered three people). In typical hyperbole, the Soutern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) labelled Kobach efforts a "legal jihad." The SPLC called the path he's blazing "a trail of tears", a reference to the terrible toll on Cherokee Indians when they were displaced from their homelands by unscrupulous politicans.
In the absence of congressional action and the absence of any effective enforcement olaw by the Administration, Kobach is after what he says is the best alternative: "People often see federal immigration policy as a dichotomy between amnesty and deportation. But the most rational approach is a third one: you ratchet up the enforcement so that people make their own decisions to start following the law." In other words, take away the reasons people come to America illegally education, work, housing, and, yes, citizenship for their kids and, Kobach says, they will "self-deport." If there are no jobs and no cornucopia of government benefits, many will leave of their own accord. The government decries the ineffectiveness of certain measures taken to secure the border but continues to ignore the proven approach of continuous and vigorous internal enforcement based on mandatory E-verification across the board for all employers and all employees. Although some cite the exaggerated multi-billion dollar cost of deporting the millions of illegals, few have considered the obvious alternatives of self-deportation and deportation at the expense of the illegal aliens themselves and their employers.
Kobach's legal positions are tenable, even clever, say constitutional experts. He's clarifying the fuzzy line between state and federal power, says Peter Schuck, a Yale law professor. Racist organizations like La Raza, the SPLC, and sundry other so-called civil-liberties groups,immigrant advocates, and disloyal ethnocentrists bristle in response but present no substantive arguments. Kobach is endorsed by firebrands like Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., who see him as a beacon of hope against immigrations' unarmed invasion and its deadly consequences for the national character, language, culture, security, interest and the rule of law. Lacking any sustantive arguments, hate-peddling racist organizations resort to name-calling and accusations of bigotry, racism, nativism, and xenophobia against all of those with whom they disagree. But Kobach responds with "I don't have a racist or nativist bone in my body, adding with a wink that he gets why people might say so. "In a legal debate, when your opponents turn to name-calling, it's a good sign you've already won."
Adapted from an article
By Tony Dokoupil
Newsweek
January 30, 2011
What unites these measures, however, is more than a really effective approach to border control. It's their ties to American hero: Kris Kobach, a Kansas-raised former law professor who has emerged as the intellectual architect of the fight against illegal immigration. The 44-year-old has authored, aided, or officially defended almost every effort in the U.S. designed to support and enforce immigration laws, beginning with his work as chief immigration adviser in John Ashcroft's Justice Department. Ever since the federal government abdicated its responsibility to use whatever means are necessary to stop and reverse illegal entry, Kobach has filled the void with well thought-out legislation and a spirited legal defense of any measures challenged by the ACLU or the federal government.
This year may be Kobach's most influential yet. From a base in Kansas, where he is the newly seated secretary of state, Kobach will help Arizona defend its laws against all comers. Both the Justice Department and American Civil Liberties Union have sued the state, claiming that immigration is a [long-neglected] federal matter. He'll also counsel a dozen or so states that are considering similar laws and a coordinated assault on birthright citizenship. And he'll litigate at least four ongoing immigration-related cases, including lawsuits against California (for extending in-state college-tuition rates to the undocumented) and San Francisco (for failing to notify immigration authorities before a thrice-arrested alien allegedly murdered three people). In typical hyperbole, the Soutern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) labelled Kobach efforts a "legal jihad." The SPLC called the path he's blazing "a trail of tears", a reference to the terrible toll on Cherokee Indians when they were displaced from their homelands by unscrupulous politicans.
Kobach's contagious ideas and all-American good looks have made him a fixture on Fox News. But he's no wingnut. His path to public life is so pedigreed it makes John Kerry seem rough-hewn. Kobach earned top undergrad honors at Harvard; won a Marshall scholarship to Oxford, where he picked up a political-science doctorate; got a law degree from Yale, where he was an editor of The Yale Law Journal; and did missionary work in Africa. He even won two Masters national rowing titles in the men's double scull.In the heart of East Coast liberalism, Kobachs conservatism actually deepened, say the people close to him, including his mother, high-school debate coach, friends, and colleagues including Ashcroft, with whom Kobach hiked and bodysurfed. The only son of a car dealer and homemaker, churchgoing Lutherans who also believe in law and order Kobach is of French, German, and Nordic heritage, his ancestors passing through Ellis Island in the late 1800s ("It was legal," promises his mother, Janice). At Harvard, he led the Republican Club and gravitated toward conservative lion Samuel Huntington, who became an early mentor. But it was 9/11, and his realization that several hijackers had been in the country illegally, that crystallized for him the importance of border security as a way to protect both lives and livelihoods. Kobach authored the decried but much-needed fingerprint program for Muslims and Middle Easterners in the U.S. "American sovereignty is at stake," he tells NEWSWEEK. "You can't have open immigration and a welfare state." The annual cost to taxpayers of the millions of illegal aliens and their offspring is estimated to be as much as $330billion.
In the absence of congressional action and the absence of any effective enforcement olaw by the Administration, Kobach is after what he says is the best alternative: "People often see federal immigration policy as a dichotomy between amnesty and deportation. But the most rational approach is a third one: you ratchet up the enforcement so that people make their own decisions to start following the law." In other words, take away the reasons people come to America illegally education, work, housing, and, yes, citizenship for their kids and, Kobach says, they will "self-deport." If there are no jobs and no cornucopia of government benefits, many will leave of their own accord. The government decries the ineffectiveness of certain measures taken to secure the border but continues to ignore the proven approach of continuous and vigorous internal enforcement based on mandatory E-verification across the board for all employers and all employees. Although some cite the exaggerated multi-billion dollar cost of deporting the millions of illegals, few have considered the obvious alternatives of self-deportation and deportation at the expense of the illegal aliens themselves and their employers.
Kobach's legal positions are tenable, even clever, say constitutional experts. He's clarifying the fuzzy line between state and federal power, says Peter Schuck, a Yale law professor. Racist organizations like La Raza, the SPLC, and sundry other so-called civil-liberties groups,immigrant advocates, and disloyal ethnocentrists bristle in response but present no substantive arguments. Kobach is endorsed by firebrands like Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., who see him as a beacon of hope against immigrations' unarmed invasion and its deadly consequences for the national character, language, culture, security, interest and the rule of law. Lacking any sustantive arguments, hate-peddling racist organizations resort to name-calling and accusations of bigotry, racism, nativism, and xenophobia against all of those with whom they disagree. But Kobach responds with "I don't have a racist or nativist bone in my body, adding with a wink that he gets why people might say so. "In a legal debate, when your opponents turn to name-calling, it's a good sign you've already won."
Adapted from an article
By Tony Dokoupil
Newsweek
January 30, 2011
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott:'s Favorite Movie, "Machete"
Dee Perez-Scott, thrilled by the gratuitous sex, unparalleled bloody violence, nudity and depravity and pro-illegal alien tilt of this terrible movie has established it as her favorite. It is basically very silly and a waste of some talented celebrities. It promotes the idea of a network which helps smuggle Mexicans across the border resulting in a violent pushback from those who understand it as a lawless invasion from the South. "Machete" bears some responsibility for Arizona’s new law that allows the state to fill the border enforcement vacuum as the federal government has failed again and again to use continuous and vigorous internal enforcement to send an unmistakable message to those who violate our borders.
"Machete" a loving homage to the B-movies (or should I day F-movies) that played in fleapit cinemas in the 70s, replete with oodles of violence, gore and unnecessary sex and nudity and that are totally lacking in any redeeming social qualities. The revolutionary rhetoric is at once cartoonish, revolting and disturbing, just the kind of thing that appeals to Dee Perez-Scott. "Machete" is just about incendiary enough to incite an all out border war around the current hot topic of immigration and is consistent with the theme on Dee Perez-Scott’s blog where she incites violence through her name-calling and drumbeat of support for illegal aliens rather than the wishes of her fellow citizens and the rule of law. Her views consistently are colored by her ethnocentric disloyalty to the United States. Her brand of compassion hurts all Americans.
"Machete" is a bullet-riddled, slice 'em up affront to civilized society. When sulking Machete is not manically decapitating people in droves, he detonates the battle around illegal aliens eventually inciting them to violence and laying the groundwork for events like the recent Gabby Giffords attempted assassination. The nonstop, multiple personality series of lunatic antics of a number of characters reminds one of Dee Perez-Scott’s devious, insulting, and violence promoting blog and the unbalanced personality behind it.
"Machete" a loving homage to the B-movies (or should I day F-movies) that played in fleapit cinemas in the 70s, replete with oodles of violence, gore and unnecessary sex and nudity and that are totally lacking in any redeeming social qualities. The revolutionary rhetoric is at once cartoonish, revolting and disturbing, just the kind of thing that appeals to Dee Perez-Scott. "Machete" is just about incendiary enough to incite an all out border war around the current hot topic of immigration and is consistent with the theme on Dee Perez-Scott’s blog where she incites violence through her name-calling and drumbeat of support for illegal aliens rather than the wishes of her fellow citizens and the rule of law. Her views consistently are colored by her ethnocentric disloyalty to the United States. Her brand of compassion hurts all Americans.
"Machete" is a bullet-riddled, slice 'em up affront to civilized society. When sulking Machete is not manically decapitating people in droves, he detonates the battle around illegal aliens eventually inciting them to violence and laying the groundwork for events like the recent Gabby Giffords attempted assassination. The nonstop, multiple personality series of lunatic antics of a number of characters reminds one of Dee Perez-Scott’s devious, insulting, and violence promoting blog and the unbalanced personality behind it.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott in an Unfounded Criticism of Senator Vitter and Paul
Dee Perez-Scott in another of her misguided tirades against the Tea Party assails the plan of Senators David Vitter and Rand Paul to close the 14th Amendment “Anchor Baby” loophole that represents the one of the strongest incentives for border violations. The 14th amendment grants citizenship to anyone who is born in this country permitting them, sooner or later, to sponsor other relatives for permanent residency and to qualify immediately for a host of benefits.
It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry [birthright citizenship]. Originally, the amendment was designed to give full citizenship status to former slaves and their offspring. The authors of the 14th Amendment never would have imagined their words bestowing citizenship on the offspring of illegal aliens, tourists, foreign students, visa overstays, and temporary farm workers. Vitter and Paul have long recognized this irrationality and have now made a modest constructive proposal to fix the problem.
Dee Perez-Scott construes this to be an attack on Latino citizen children instead of an effort to correct a major problem and bring U.S. policy into conformance with that of most other civilized countries of the world. I fail to see anything in the proposal to suggest that it would be applied ex post facto but Dee uses that unsupported claim to try to stir up the emotions of the Latino community.
Vitter and Paul point out that, “For too long, our nation has seen an influx of illegal aliens entering our country at an escalating rate, and chain migration is a major contributor to this rapid increase – which is only compounded when the children of illegal aliens born in the U.S. are granted automatic citizenship. Closing this loophole will not prevent them from becoming citizens, but will ensure that they have to go through the same process as anyone else who wants to become an American citizen. Citizenship is a privilege, and only those who respect our immigration laws should be allowed to enjoy its benefits. This legislation makes it necessary that everyone follow the rules, and goes through same process to become a U.S. citizen.” What could be more reasonable?
According to Dee, “The halls of Congress have resounded with calls from several key GOP legislators for hearings into the 14th Amendment’s supposed grant of citizenship to children born in the United States who they believe are ‘illegal aliens.’” The problem would have been solved long ago if other members of congress had been able to see the need for reform in this area.
True immigration reform must be based on the current population, physical and resource status of America, and not some romantic notion about the days when we were indeed a nation of immigrants. We must think in terms of what immigration and tax policies will best preserve our quality of life and our standard of living. Neither a respect for our immigrant past nor compassion for all the impoverished millions of the world should be the guiding principle for immigration reform.
It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry [birthright citizenship]. Originally, the amendment was designed to give full citizenship status to former slaves and their offspring. The authors of the 14th Amendment never would have imagined their words bestowing citizenship on the offspring of illegal aliens, tourists, foreign students, visa overstays, and temporary farm workers. Vitter and Paul have long recognized this irrationality and have now made a modest constructive proposal to fix the problem.
Dee Perez-Scott construes this to be an attack on Latino citizen children instead of an effort to correct a major problem and bring U.S. policy into conformance with that of most other civilized countries of the world. I fail to see anything in the proposal to suggest that it would be applied ex post facto but Dee uses that unsupported claim to try to stir up the emotions of the Latino community.
Vitter and Paul point out that, “For too long, our nation has seen an influx of illegal aliens entering our country at an escalating rate, and chain migration is a major contributor to this rapid increase – which is only compounded when the children of illegal aliens born in the U.S. are granted automatic citizenship. Closing this loophole will not prevent them from becoming citizens, but will ensure that they have to go through the same process as anyone else who wants to become an American citizen. Citizenship is a privilege, and only those who respect our immigration laws should be allowed to enjoy its benefits. This legislation makes it necessary that everyone follow the rules, and goes through same process to become a U.S. citizen.” What could be more reasonable?
According to Dee, “The halls of Congress have resounded with calls from several key GOP legislators for hearings into the 14th Amendment’s supposed grant of citizenship to children born in the United States who they believe are ‘illegal aliens.’” The problem would have been solved long ago if other members of congress had been able to see the need for reform in this area.
True immigration reform must be based on the current population, physical and resource status of America, and not some romantic notion about the days when we were indeed a nation of immigrants. We must think in terms of what immigration and tax policies will best preserve our quality of life and our standard of living. Neither a respect for our immigrant past nor compassion for all the impoverished millions of the world should be the guiding principle for immigration reform.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)