Government of the unions, by the unions, for the unions
By Art Gallagher
Despite the rhetoric coming from Paul Krugman, Dick Durbin, President Obama and other demagogues on the left in the wake of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s attempt to scale back public employee unions’ power, no one has yet attempted to “break the unions.”
That’s a shame because public employee unions are as serious a threat to Americans’ freedom as is radical Islam. Maybe more so.
In many states throughout the union, including New Jersey, public employee unions have more power and influence over government policy, operations and spending than our elected representatives. From our governor down to the councilman and school board member, elected office holders ability to manage and govern their jurisdictions are constrained by laws and contracts that protect employees from the public will.
Walker’s proposal in Wisconsin to remove unions ability to negotiate for pensions and benefits and Governor Christie’s reform agenda in New Jersey are considered bold because over the last 50 years unions have systematically and gradually taken over our governments. Their political power was extreme and unchecked. Before Christie took on the NJEA over the last year and thrived, no politician dared take on such a powerful special interest. Sure there where those who tried, but you don’t remember who they are and neither do I, because the unions destroyed them. Christie, and now apparently Walker, could be the right men at the right time to lead America back to a truly representative form of government in the States.
Yet, as bold and radical as the governors seem in the context of the last 50 years of growing union power, their proposals are relatively modest. Far from really “turning Trenton(or Madison) upside down” or doing “big things” Christie and Walker are modestly tinkering with the existing systems.
As Daniel DiSalvo, an assistant professor of political science at City College of New York, told the Star Ledger’s Tom Moran in a Q and A published yesterday:
Christie has created a big storm, in part because of his aggressive style. But what he’s proposed is not that controversial. It leaves intact the entire collective bargaining structure. Yes, he would impose short-term pain, but the Walker plan goes to the root of the problem.
Walker’s plan might go to the root of the problem, but it only exposes the root, it doesn’t cut it:
Q. Is Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker really proposing to end collective bargaining?
A. Not exactly. He’ll retain it for police, firefighters and state troopers. But he is proposing a drastic rollback for teachers and other public employees. They will retain the right to bargain over wages, but not benefits.
Politically, Christie’s success over the last year and Walker’s anticipated success could well be due to the moderateness of their proposals being sold to the public with bold rhetoric. Christie took on the NJEA last year by calling for wage freezes and health care contributions of only 1.5% of teacher salaries in order to save jobs. The union looked petty in their vocal opposition and the public sided with the Governor by overwhelmingly rejecting school budgets at the ballot boxes. The public continues to support Christie’s agenda and now the debate in Trenton is over how much spending to cut, not whether to cut. That’s a big change, but it is not systematic change.
But systematic change was not politically possible a year ago. It is becoming possible, but it won’t be swift. The unions took over our governments incrementally over a period of a half century. We, the people, did not notice it happening for the most part. Now that the public is waking up to the relative largess of public employee compensation and benefits, systematic change becomes increasingly possible, but it will have to be accomplished incrementally.
DiSalvo makes the case why public employee unions must be broken in his National Affairs article published last fall. Every political leader should take the time to read the article.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Captain Republican, Art Gallagher. Art Gallagher said: http://www.moremonmouthmusings.net/2011/02/21/government-of-the-unions-by-the-unions-for-the-unions/ […]
So, its ok for the republicans to break out the clubs and beat the unions to break them then….yeah, I figured as much.
Just like old times.
Plenty of republicans are in the back pocket of the unions. The unions don’t have to worry. Here in NJ we have Frank LoBiondo and Chris Smith. Both have taken hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years and voted for card check. They will make sure republican governors don’t go too far.
[…] in Government of the unions, by the unions and for the unions I said that “public employee unions are as serious a threat to Americans’ freedom as […]
Whoa we get to beat Unions with clubs. How come nobody told me about this before?
I must need knew glasses because I just reread Arts post and I don’t see that in their.
Either that or Ambrosiac is just being an ass (as in jackass or donkey) again.
If anyone’s interested and I hope you are, there’s a mini-Wisconsin happening this Friday in Trenton at noon. The thugs are coming down so we’ll be there to stand up for the taxpayers of the State of New Jersey.
Details are here: http://www.bayshoreteaparty.org/
I’m a taxpayer…boy, am I a taxpayer…and you certainly don’t speak for me. You and your ilk are the thugs. Trying to destroy the American way of life at every turn. All of a sudden, the unions are the evildoers. A very convenient scapegoat for your hate. I hope you realize, that republicans..and even Tea Partiers, are union members. Why shouldn’t they be able to BARGAIN for a better life. YOU are the problem with America, not the unions.
I was a union member when I was younger.
Unions have a place. I have to admit I recieved benefit from it.
Yet I have a problem with forced union membership.
I have s problem with having to pay the portion of union dues that go towards political activities I may disagree with.
I have a problem when unions sacrifice their younger members to layoffs so the older ones can get fat raises and benefit packages.
I have a problem with unions who fail to see the part they played in destroying the US industries that they once dominated such as steel and manufacturing. (its called killing the goose that laid the golden egg.
Finally I think Art makes a cogent argument as to why unions in the public sector are not proper.
I guess that makes me a hater.
Why shouldn’t they be able to BARGAIN for a better life.
Well, here’s the problem with public unions. Private sector unions bargain with management, and they find a middle way in the end. Public unions, who do they bargain with? They bargain with representatives who don’t have any money involved in this (since it’s taxpayers money, and taxpayers aren’t involved in the bargaining process). And it’s the officials that the public unions have contributed to during the elections.