Progressive Thinking on Wisconsin - UPDATE

Here is the core of the leftist complaint against Scott Walker, from Ruth Conniff writing for The Progressive.

It is a winning strategy for the right to stir up resentment among insecure, nonunion workers against their neighbors who have better benefits and more secure jobs. But Walker and his billionaire backers don't offer them anything--just an ideology that says we need more tax breaks for the very rich, but we can't afford to continue giving public employees good health care and retirement benefits and job security in their public-service jobs.

The tax breaks for the rich part is gratuitous leftist clap trap that had nothing to do with the recall campaign against Walker, so I'll just ignore that. The core of the argument is that the workers who can use political power to get above market wages should do so, too bad if the taxpayers are on the losing end of the proposition. They should all be in unions as well.

Fortunately, this is a fantasy, as private sector union membership has been in steady decline for decades. Ultimately, state workers shouldn't get better benefits than their private sector counterparts. This is especially true of retirement and medical benefits as these costs have a way of ballooning while not directly being tied to the efficacy of the work performed. To suggest that its somehow right for state workers to lord it over the taxpayers because they have organized into unions is to pave the way for dictatorship. When government workers feel unaccountable because they can elect whom they choose, we are on the road to dictatorship. I am not exaggerating, this is a scary path. This is why Walker's impressive victory tonight is so important for the nation.

UPDATE

John Nichols at The Nation offers his delusions, attributing Walker's victory merely to money and spinning a solid defeat thusly:

Yet, against overwhelming odds, Wisconsin's recall movement fought its way to a dead heat, losing only narrowly in its effort to remove a "right-wing rock star" whose reelection became the top priority of the Republican party, the conservative movement and the 1% billionaires who made Walker's reelection a national priority.
. . .
What could Democrats and the unions have done differently. They could have taken a portion of the millions they did spend on television ads attacking Walker -- whose negatives were already high and who was taken regular media hits regarding a criminal investigation of his aides and donors -- and spent it on early advertising to make the case for collective bargaining and the recall election. Democrats and their allies do a lousy job of framing debates, and that was certainly the case in Wisconsin.

Dead heat? Walker won in Wisconsin by about the same margin that Obama won nationally in 2008. As to the message, the Democrats ran away from the collective bargaining issue when their own polling indicated that it was a big loser with the voters. This was an election with very high turnout. Voters frankly just rejected the idea that unions shouldn't be reined in.

Wisconsin Recall and Lefty Attacks and Counterattacks

It's coming down to the wire in Wisconsin to retain Republican control of the state senate. Right now the outcome is too close to call; of six races, three went to Republicans, two to Democrats and one is still a toss up. If the Democrats win the last race, Darling (R) vs. Pasch (D), then they will have gained control of the Wisconsin senate. There are two recalls of Democrats next week, however. There is a twitter post from John McCormack that Darling has won, but I haven't seen hard news.

The labor unions have spent massively to make this a referendum over the curtailment of collective bargaining privileges passed by the Wisconsin legislature and signed by Governor Scott Walker. But money has poured in on the conservative side as well, but not as much according to HotAir. Regardless of the outcome, we have to face the fact that the labor unions, often funded with your tax dollars, are going to fight reform every step of the way. 2010 is not likely to be repeated in 2012, as the left and labor learn how to counterattack.

Relatedly, we see the strategy that Team Barry will take with whomever the GOP nominates. Politico is reporting that since Obama believes that Romney will be the nominee, his team has the following brilliant campaign strategy:

Obama plan: Destroy Romney

How's that hopey-changey, no more politics as usual, bring the country together thing working for you?
I guess when your lame excuses sound like this, you can't do much else:



"When I said change we can believe in, I didn't mean change we can believe in tomorrow, I didn't mean change we can believe in next week." Fundamentally transforming America is not change I will ever believe in.

UPDATE

Wisconsin News 3 is calling the last race for Darling, the Republican.
Labor, outspending Republicans 2:1, $13 million. Not retaking control of the senate, priceless.

Feel Good Story of the Day - Wisconsin Supremes Uphold Collective Bargaining Law

H/T @michellemalkin. The Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the Republican led state legislatures bill that limited bargaining privileges of the public employee unions. The case turned on whether the courts have the right to enforce open meeting laws that govern the state legislature. This was more important than the mere issue of the content of the law itself. Had the law been overturned on procedural grounds, it would open the door for all sorts of mischief by the courts in ruling on whether legislatures followed their own rules. You could imagine that courts could rule that a law raising the speed limit on freeways could be overturned because the court disqualified expert witnesses called by the transportation committee. Judges have no business ruling on legislative procedure.

Professor William Jacobsen of Legal Insurrection is on the case. (A great legal blog along with Volokh for conservatives and libertarians.) ". . .the ruling, which overturned Judge Sumi's rulings both procedurally (for interfering in the legislative process) and substantively (there was no violation of the Open Meetings Law)."
. . .
The Court adopted the argument I had made here many times, that the Courts had no business questioning the legislature's interpretation of its own rules:

¶13 It also is argued that the Act is invalid because the legislature did not follow certain notice provisions of the Open Meetings Law for the March 9, 2011 meeting of the joint committee on conference. It is argued that Wis. Stat. § 19.84(3) required 24 hours notice of that meeting and such notice was not given. It is undisputed that the legislature posted notices of the March 9, 2011 meeting of the joint committee on conference on three bulletin boards, approximately 1 hour and 50 minutes before the start of the meeting. In the posting of notice that was done, the legislature relied on its interpretation of its own rules of proceeding. The court declines to review the validity of the procedure used to give notice of the joint committee on conference....

This is a great victory, both procedurally and substantively. On the substantive grounds, it gives power back to local governments in Wisconsin to scale back benefits, overcome arcane overtime and inflexible work place rules and generally get a work force more in tune with modern American life.

Scott Walker Negotiates

Far from being the intransigent dictator portrayed by the left, Scott Walker, has been negotiating with Democrats. He has been willing to consider restoring some of the collecting bargaining privileges that the unions purport to be the reason for the Democrat fleebagging. However, we know that the real issue is union power and money. Even if all collective bargaining was restored, the Democrats and their union paymasters aren't giving in on the following:

The modifications do not address Walker prohibiting unions from collecting dues, often considered a sticking point in negotiations.

This is actually the one issue that I want Walker to remain firm on. I'm glad that he released the emails on negotiations, because he seems to be losing the public relations battle. This is unfathomable because the facts are on his side. Meanwhile I got the following email from DailyKos:

B,

This past weekend, while Scott Walker was threatening to fire a bunch of people, the Democratic Party of Wisconsin was collecting recall petition signatures, threatening to fire Scott Walker's Senators.

The recall has begun in Wisconsin, and the Democratic Party of Wisconsin is the central organizing hub. As such, we've added the Democratic Party of Wisconsin to Orange to Blue.

Can you contribute $8 to the recall effort, $1 for each of the eight targeted Republican Senators?

We are winning this fight. Polls show Scott Walker's approval rating dropping fast, and a clear majority of Wisconsin siding with the unions and the middle class. We are outnumbering the other side at rallies by margins of 5-1, 10-1, and even 35-1.

With numbers like those, we are in a good position to win the recall elections. The first step is gathering enough signatures to make the elections happen. Over 250 Kossacks in Wisconsin have signed up to help canvass--can you back them up by contributing $8 to the Wisconsin Democratic Party on Orange to Blue?

Man, it sure feels good to be winning. It will feel even better when we win.

In solidarity,
Chris Bowers
Campaign Director, Daily Kos

Solidarity? Whatever. I doubt that the recall would pass if all the facts about these negotiations were widely known. (I stripped the links out of the email.)

I believe that public opinion can be swayed, but Walker needs to make a better effort to explain himself. The Weekly Standard explains it best:

But what collective bargaining has meant in reality is that unions have had the final say in choosing layoffs over benefits reductions. As county executive in Milwaukee, Walker saw this happen in practice. So he wants to give school districts and municipalities flexibility in implementing better alternatives to layoffs, such as requiring employees to pay more for health insurance premiums.

Had some internet problems with RoadRunner tonight, so the blogging is light.

New Strategy in Wisconsin

I have previously opined that the Republican state senators in Wisconsin should hive off the collective bargaining portion of the bill and pass it without the Democrats present. This would take the air out of the issue and let the Democrats return. James Lindgren who frequently contributes to Volokh, has the same idea in an editorial on NRO. So far, the state Senate majority leader, Scott Fitzgerald (pictured) has declined to take this approach. The reasoning may be that some of his colleagues may be loathe to vote for a measure that strips the collective bargaining privilege unless it is wrapped in a larger budget vote. In my opinion, this is correct, although another reason is that they may not want to go on record as either in favor or against the measure, fearing a Tea Party challenge in the primary if they vote no, but an electoral defeat in the fall if they vote yes.

Regardless, the State Senate could pass the hived off bill without the Democrats present for legal reasons discussed in the article. There are principled reasons for doing so as well.

Making democracy work can be a difficult task, especially if some actors refuse to perform the duties with which they were entrusted by the people. Yet aggressive approaches that try to punish senators or protesters may backfire. The governor and the legislators who remain should do everything they can to get the business of the legislature done, with or without the Democrats. Responsible legislators should worry less about protesters and wayward senators and do their own jobs, passing the parts of the statute that don’t need Democratic support. This is not just a matter of strategy; it is a matter of principle. Instead of obsessing about who is not there and why one can’t do what one wants to do, those who remain should focus on the task at hand. If the Republicans believe that changes are needed to repair Wisconsin’s budget, they should enact most of those changes now.

Here, here. And it would remove the public relations disaster that the protests have become.

Another Set Of Reminders - On Wisconsin

To clarify a few points on the debate in Wisconsin.

• Collective Bargaining is not a "right." If it was, federal workers would have the right, they do not.
• Collective Bargaining is not a "right." If it was, then all state employees in the U.S. would have the right, they do not.
• Collective Bargaining is not a "right." Nowhere is it enshrined in the Constitution, it was granted by legislation in Wisconsin, by executive order in some other states.
• State workers are protected from arbitrary firing and have numerous other protections in Wisconsin.
• Collective bargaining, combined with pay check deductions and public employee union contributions to political candidates forms a taxpayer subsidy to the Democratic party. That is unfair. If I don't like Walmart's political views, I can boycott their stores, but I can't stop paying taxes to slow the flow of my money to a party I intensely dislike.
  
• Scott Walker has been criticized for wanting to bust unions. They say that like its a bad thing, it is not.

Cross posted to sdrostra.com.

Wisconsin Poll Results

The poll on whether or not Wisconsin governor Scott Walker should take the issue of removing some collective bargaining privileges as part of his package of budget reforms is closed. A majority of my readers voted to continue this fight, believing it to be central to the long term effort to get the state under control. I agree, but voted no, thinking that given the majority the Republicans hold, they have the ability to make this a separate vote and still win tactically. (The wording of the poll was poor, I promise to do better with my next poll.) I am going to start referring to collective bargaining for government employees as a privilege not a right, since Federal workers lack this right, it must not be a right in the same sense that freedom of speech is. The results:

57% (12 votes) No, Walker should stay the course.
23% ( 5 votes) Yes, tactical mistake, do it later.
09% (2 votes) Yes, it's wrong to take this away from unions.
09% (2 votes) Not sure.

This debate rages on and Scott Walker seems impervious to pressure, but the fleeing state senators are still hiding out and refusing to vote. I still don't understand why the Republicans don't remove this issue from the budget bill, pass it separately as a non-budget matter and get on with life.

Government Employees and Collective Bargaining

Kimberly Strassel weighs in on the public employee union issues in Wisconsin by helpfully comparing their bargaining rights to those of federal workers under Obama. Full disclosure, I am an employee of the federal government, but I do not belong to a union nor to a "collective bargaining unit." Remember how Obama froze federal pay by executive order, without so much as an act of Congress? Under the proposed legislation in Wisconsin, Scott Walker won't even get that power. Like many politicians before him, Obama has been caught in his hypocrisy (which is seems the only sin remaining, according to the left.) More from her excellent summary:

Fact: President Obama is the boss of a civil work force that numbers up to two million (excluding postal workers and uniformed military). Fact: Those federal workers cannot bargain for wages or benefits. Fact: Washington, D.C. is, in the purest sense, a "right to work zone." Federal employees are not compelled to join a union, nor to pay union dues. Fact: Neither Mr. Obama, nor the prior Democratic majority, ever acted to give their union chums a better federal deal.

According to Strassel, this disparity explains why Obama has stopped talking about the issue, but in my opinion, the cat's out of the bag, and this is just one more issue where the President looks silly. Who in America is going to believe that Organizing for America isn't involved at his behest.

By the way, does this mean that Scott Walker should press on with the issue of collective bargaining? Not so fast, just being right on the issue doesn't mean that it is tactically or politically smart to push forward at this time. Personal opinion is that Walker should drop just the collective bargaining portion of the bill, get his budget passed, along with right to work and no union dues removed through the paycheck. Then he should come back on the collective bargaining issue. Hold hearings, make the comparison to the federal government and then pass the bill because you still have the votes.

Only one day left to vote in the poll.

Wisconsin and Collective Bargaining - Dick Morris' Poll

I previously posted that I didn't find the USA Today/Gallup Poll on American opinion on the Wisconsin situation to be credible, because it showed that there wasn't a majority favoring any course of action to reduce government deficits. Dick Morris commissioned a poll in the state that seems a little more illuminating.

• By 74-18, they back making state employees pay more for their health insurance.
• By 79-16, they support asking state workers contribute more toward their pensions.
• By 54-34, Wisconsin voters support ending the automatic deduction of union dues from state paychecks and support making unions collect dues from each member.
• By 66-30, they back limiting state workers’ pay increases to the rate of inflation unless voters approve a higher raise by a public referendum.

But the bad news is this:

On the issue of limiting collective bargaining to wage and benefit issues, however, they break with the Governor, opposing the proposal by 41-54.

This is a tricky area for Republicans. The more have I thought about it, the more I believe that the bargaining issue isn't core. Removing the requirement to join a union, removing paycheck deductions, and increasing the contributions of the employees to their own benefits seems sufficient to carry the day.

Tea Party and Wisconsin - Breakin' it Down

In a great interview on local San Diego TV station KUSI, Leslie Eastman makes the key points about the incestuous relationship between the unions and their recycling of money to Democrats. She also points out the standard anti-democratic tactics of the unions and their supporters.



Click here if the embed doesn't work.

Temple of Mut has the full coverage from the Tea Party and Tax Fighter press conference today.

U-T also had coverage.

Wisconsin, Bargaining Rights and SEIU Tactics

On Saturday, I questioned the wisdom of including "bargaining rights" in the package of reforms in Scott Walker's proposed legislation. Specifically, he has proposed that the right to bargain over benefits and working conditions would be removed from the current legal framework for government unions. Further, he is proposing an end to payroll deductions for union dues as well as instituting right to work, which ends mandatory union participation. Also he is proposing an annual vote of collective bargaining units to maintain certification as a union. The full list of proposals here. I was concerned that the proposed removal of bargaining rights would be seen as anti-democratic by the general public and harm the greater cause of getting union power reduced. This is a tactical not a fundamental concern. I don't think that there is an inherent right of collective bargaining for government workers in the same way that I believe freedom of speech is an inherent right.

The intervening days have brought new information to apply to the problem. First, Rasmussen reports that likely voters favor the governor over the unions by a 48%- to 38% margin in a national poll. (Wish it were a Wisconsin poll.) I was hoping the margin would have been higher, but given the loud and angry protests, this is a great sign that the public isn't ignorant of the underlying issues.

Second, Scott Walker was on the TV over the weekend and made the case that in Wisconsin, the state employees have some of the strongest worker protections of any state. What this means in practice, from my experience in the federal work force, is that it is almost impossible to fire workers except for the most blatant misconduct. Given such protections, where workers cannot lose their jobs, is it fair that they can then hold their employer hostage by striking? It creates a huge imbalance that allows the unions to blackmail the government into accepting binding arbitration where they tend to get their demands met. Explaining these facts could go a long way towards getting voters to approve of such a legal outcome.

Third, Rush Limbaugh today talked about the importance of being on offense, not defense. He brought the following to my attention. According to TPM:

State Senate rules require only a simple majority to pass a non-fiscal law. That means that only 17 Republican votes from the party's 19-vote majority would be needed to end the collective bargaining.

Republicans could strip the collective bargaining provision out of the budget legislation, pass it separately without Democrats present and get on with life. Further, this would remove the reason that the Democrat state senators are on the run, and get the budget passed as they might feel compelled to get back to their jobs. Republicans should take a page from Democrats and pass legislation when they have a majority. As much work as we did to kill Obamacare and rally the country against it, the bill is still on the books. The time to get our legislation passed is when we have the votes.

Ace of Spades has evidence of SEIU's tactics of intimidation (H/T: Temple of Mut). Trying to stop the Pledge of Allegiance? Really? The SEIU has every right to protest, that right is fundamental, unlike collective bargaining. But ever notice how when SEIU is involved, there is a potential for violence, and many times there is actual violence. Every Tea Party rally I have attended has had a police presence, and they act like they have nothing to do, because they don't have anything to do. Tea Party types don't even leave litter at their rallies. Meanwhile, lefty types who define themselves in opposition to the Tea Party movement are calling on their supporters to harass Tea Party coordinators who have nothing to do with so called "infiltration tactics."

I am rethinking my position. Like many conservative positions, there is often a "feel good" slogan used by the left in opposition that turns out to be incoherent when examined. Apparently, the country has decided that the direction of government requires the general public to pay more attention. Thank God.

Wisconsin and Bargaining Rights - A Bridge Too Far?

Protesters by bused in union supporters in Madison, WI with attendant violent rhetoric and imagery remind us that those currently getting the largess of our tax dollars will use those dollars to maintain the status quo. Dean has coverage here and here. The LA Times is reporting that Tea Party supporters have joined the counter protest, telling the public employees "Do Your Job." This is a watershed moment for the Tea Party, we have said that government employee unions are ruining the ability of state and local government to deliver basic services. This is why removing automatic pay check deductions for union dues is important, as is passing right to work legislation.

But I question if going after collective bargaining is the smart move, as it has energized the opposition, and made it look to the public as if some fundamental right is being violated. During the 1980s when Lech Walesa was organizing Polish workers to fight back against Soviet hegemony, we applauded his efforts and part of our criticism of communism was that workers lacked the right to organize independent unions. Granted, public employee unions are in a bit different category than those in the private sector, but that seems a difficult case to make. The most important goal should be to break their power to continue to elect politicians who do the bidding of the union overlords. To do so, right to work and no paycheck deduction for union dues are sufficient to deprive them of the cash needed to influence elections.

The proposed removal of bargaining rights seems secondary and not efficacious towards achieving the main goals of the Tea Party. It has energized the unions, and brought them some measure of public sympathy. I would propose that Governor Scott Walker take that issue off the table and propose a statewide referendum on the issue. It would also have the effect of putting the unions on defense, having to spend millions to defeat such a measure. In the interim, the state of Wisconsin would be putting money in workers pockets and taking it out of the hands of union bosses by removing the pay check deduction.

If I am wrong with this analysis, I would like to hear from other Tea Party organizers.

In fairness, hear is what the Governor himself has said (in context of his previous experience as Milwaukee County Executive):

Walker argued that collective bargaining was the biggest hurdle to balancing the budget and that unions had little incentive to give ground because they almost always prevailed in arbitration. He said that the cuts he proposed were intended to prevent layoffs and accused union leaders of being uninterested in compromise.

Perhaps a better answer is to remove binding arbitration. Meanwhile, going for the jugular seems to have won the Governor a nice set of concessions.

Wisconsin public employees have agreed to the financial concessions pushed by the governor in exchange for retaining their basic organizing rights, Democratic Sen. Jon Erpenbach said in a statement released Saturday.

“I have been informed that all state and local public employees — including teachers — have agreed to the financial aspects of Governor Walker’s request,” Erpenbach said. “This includes Walker’s requested concessions on public employee health care and pension. In return they ask only that the provisions that deny their right to collectively bargain are removed. This will solve the budget challenge.”

He is standing firm. I really like him. Please take my new poll.

My Newest Hero - UPDATE

. . . after Mutnodjmet is Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, pictured at left in a photo from his successful gubernatorial campaign. He has taken aim at the public employee unions in his state, and outrage has ensued. If only Jerry Brown would follow suit.Walker has taken the sensible stance that public employee unions should have limited bargaining rights and should contribute to their own pension and health plans. According to the American Federation of Teachers web site his proposals include:

Limiting collective bargaining to the base pay rate; and requiring approval by referendum of any wage increase that exceeds the Consumer Price Index .

Requiring an annual vote of collective bargaining units to maintain certification as a union.

Rescinding the right of faculty and academic staff in the University of Wisconsin System to collectively bargain.

Prohibiting employers from collecting union dues through payroll deduction.

Increasing the amount state, school district and municipal employees pay toward their pension benefit under the Wisconsin Retirement System. State employees, for example, currently contribute about 0.2 percent of their gross pay, says Art Foeste, chair of AFT-Wisconsin's State Employees Council. Under Walker's proposal, workers would pay 50 percent of the monthly contribution amount. For 2011, Walker estimates the contribution would be 5.8 percent of gross salary. Foeste, a member of the AFT Public Employees program and policy council, says the increase "would be equivalent to a more than 6 percent pay reduction."

Upping state employee health insurance premium contributions. Currently, employees pay approximately 6 percent of the annual premium, or $78 a month for the family plan. Walker wants to increase worker contributions to "at least 12 percent of monthly premiums."

Sounds like a great template for states across the country. Unbelievably, the AFT web site describes these measures as a sign of disrespect to the workers. I know of no other retirement plan where workers contribute a paltry 0.2% of their pay for their own retirement and only 6% of their health insurance premium. In return for concessions, the governor has said their will be no furloughs (layoffs), and still the unions are stirring up huge trouble. Here is a picture of union protests from the WSJ:



And let's not forget the real import of the plan to reduce union power and therefore curb state deficits: it might harm Democrat electoral chances.

Proposals in Wisconsin and other states have "great ramifications" beyond the damage to union coffers and membership, said Gerald McEntee, president of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the nation's biggest public-sector union.

Unions have told the Obama administration that the state fights could affect the 2012 presidential election by draining unions' political resources, especially in states like Wisconsin and Ohio. "I think it can put him in some [political] danger," Mr. McEntee said of the president.

Good.

Cross posted to sdrostra.com. Don't forget to take our poll on renaming the Coronado Bay Bridge after Ronald Reagan, at right.

UPDATE

sdrostra.com commenter Michael A. Schwartz provides the following additional love for the Packer fan who is the governor of Wisconsin.

Gov. Scott Walker has also said he will sign legislation to turn Wisconsin into a “shall issue” state meaning that all law-abiding, sane, trained citizens will be able to obtain a concealed weapon permit for the purpose of self-defense. Wisconsin will join the 40+ other states that will choose not to trample Second Amendment rights. (California NOT being one of those 40+ and San Diego County having one of the worst track records in the state when it comes to issuing CCWs)