There are several things I want to talk about regarding the Wisconsin situation. First, I agree with the moves by the governor. It is obvious that this is not just about saving money but about busting the public unions as well. I agree with this because I don't believe that public unions should have the right to bargain. The unions can and do spend lots of money to help people who are favorable to them get elected. These officials are not spending their own money but taxpayers' money. I have no problem with private unions negotiating with businesses. The officers of the company have to watch their bottom line and if they give away too much the company can go under. In the case of a government, it cannot go under and ultimately taxes have to be raised. The private unions cannot help elect the people they negotiate with but the public unions can. So this is an unfair advantage.
Having said that, I am also against corporation's ability to almost spend an unlimited amount on an election as the supreme court ruled last year. Where the unions have an unfair influence on state and local government with their money, the corporations have too much influence on the federal level with their money. The supreme court ruled that corporations and unions have freedom of speech. But this means more money means more freedom. To me that is wrong.
The democrats walked out so that there is no quorum for a vote in Wisconsin and the conservatives are up and arm and say that this is unethical. While I am on the side of the Republicans on the bill, I don't agree with the conservatives' complaint. The quorum is a rule and the democrats are using a rule to their advantage. This is just like the republicans using filibuster to make Obama make concession on healthcare last year. In both cases the will of the majority is stifled because a rule makes it difficult to bring a vote to the floor. Obama had to figure out a different tactic and so Walker will have to do the same here. It is the rule. I don't like either rule, but what is fair for one is fair for the other.
This is a difficult problem for Obama. He is siding with unions which is going to hurt him in reelection. But he has no choice. If the Wisconsin unions are abolished, those in many other states may fall also. He needs the unions in many of those toss up states and without them, reelection becomes extremely difficult. So while he wants to be more centrist in the next two years, he has no choice but to come out in support of the unions. My position is different from Obama on this issue. But if a republican defeats Obama, I am afraid the country will be worse off because the regulation of Wall Street and other businesses will be much more lax. While I don't like the tactics of the unions, it is the Enrons, the Madoffs, the Mazillos etc. who have cause us much more pain economically in the last few years.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
2 comments:
Use the following html code to make a clickable link in your comment (instructions in the sidebar). You can test the link by previewing your comment.
<a href="http://angryyellowman.blogspot.com">Angry Yellow Man</a>
The above example will display as Angry Yellow Man
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nothing like a snow storm to slow things down in Wisconsin. I wonder if the Democrats who are staying away are in a warmer climate!
ReplyDeleteIt's a tough issue, and one which is hard for me to take sides. You are right that this is a huge deal and if Wisconsin's unions fail to reverse the governor's proposal, we'll see Indiana and Ohio fall as well.
I'm not a big union supporter but I do support teachers and education. It seems to me that these areas are hurt every time there's a cut in budget. I don't have knowledge of all the areas and unions that will be losing their funding and bargaining rights, so I'll have to trust you on what you say.
It's unfortunate that government is influenced by money from corporations and unions. There's a certain yin/yang to it though and I guess it isn't going away.
As far as Obama goes, I wonder if he'll play non-committal like he did with Egypt and let the situation play out. You'd think that he would need to back the unions in some sort of way though. I'm assuming a huge chunk of support is from them.
What surprises me is the ratio of turnouts to these protests. I wonder if the conservatives live far from Madison and can't get away to demonstrate.
Checked out your blog about Egypt and it sounds like Libya is getting pretty close to tipping.
-LBOAYM
In the national elections the corporations and unions fight it out as Republicans are in the back pockets of the corporations and the Democrats are in the back pockets of the unions. In state and local elections the public unions have too much influence as they vote in mass for the people who have control over their contract negotiations. Who opposes these unions except for a few taxpayer associations? It used to be that you make less in the public sector but make up for it with better benefits. According to ABC news, no conservative network, the public sector pays more now than the private sector for doing the same job and the benefits are way better than those of the private sector. Most taxpayers don't realize or care about this. That is why the difference in the protesters in Wisconsin. One side is fighting for their pay and benefit while the other side consist of only Tea Party people. Unless the unions are busted, when the economy gets better, the unions will go back to the table and get back all their concessions they lose here.
ReplyDeleteI don't blame a teacher or cop who wants to get more money or benefits. I have more disdain for people that make 200 million and still try to rip people off. But two wrongs don't make a right so as a taxpayer I am against public unions and their support of politicians who give them what they want. When stronger regulations against bad corporations are proposed, if that ever happens, I will be for those.
I will have more to say about all these revolutions in the making soon. But I wonder how come no general comes outs to fire the colonel that everybody is against in Libya?