Here is a list of some of the nefarious demands of the public unions in Wisconsin. This what gives them a bad name.
union excesses
Showing posts with label Wisconsin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wisconsin. Show all posts
Friday, March 11, 2011
Monday, February 28, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott: A Wisconsin Prof speaks out
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?
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?
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.
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)