Sunday, February 17, 2019

Showing True Colors, 0bama Sides with Unions

by D. E. Carson (writer), , February 17, 2011

For someone who thinks the Arizona immigration law was a “local issue”, 0bama is reversing stance in Wisconsin.

Barack 0bama refused to become personally involved with the Arizona immigration law last year referring to it as a “local issue”. But today, he reversed course and stepped right square into the middle of the fray in Wisconsin where the state government is attempting to solve some of its own budget problems.

In an interview with WTMJ in Milwaukee, 0bama said, “Some of what I’ve heard coming out of Wisconsin, where you’re just making it harder for public employees to collectively bargain, generally seems like more of an assault on unions. I think it's very important for us to understand that public employees, they're our neighbors, they're our friends.”

Wisconsin’s Republican governor, Scott Walker has proposed to correct many of Wisconsin’s economic woes by forcing state workers to cover half of their pension contributions. The proposal also requires state workers to foot the bill for 13% of their own health insurance costs (so much for 100% government coverage under 0bamacare). Government employee bargaining units would be stripped of the ability to negotiate for higher wages without approval by public vote and compulsory dues payments would become a thing of the past.

To show their contempt for Governor Walker, labor activists packed themselves into the state capitol in Madison chanting and screaming their protests. Schools have been closed because teachers organized a “sick out” and even dragged their students along forcing them to join the protest. Furthering the movement, the 14 Democratic lawmakers refused to appear to vote on the legislation and then allegedly left the state in a childish attempt to bring Republicans to their knees. Currently Republicans hold a 19-seat majority in the 33-member state senate; however, they are one vote short of the required number of members to conduct business. As a result, the vote could not take place.

Governor Walker referred to the Democrats’ abandonment of their jobs as a “stunt” and predicted the group would eventually grow up and return realizing they were elected “to do a job”. The election of Walker and Republican majorities in both state chambers set the stage for a massive change in Wisconsin’s perception as insanely pro-labor.

0bama’s comments, referring to Governor Walker’s plan as “an assault on unions” displays with crystal clarity 0bama’s desperate need for unions to back him in a re-election bid in 2012. 0bama loves organized labor because, evidenced by his praise for government workers calling them neighbors and friends. By coming out in support of the state employees in Wisconsin, 0bama is sure to guarantee himself that state’s electoral votes in 2012. Let the political posturing games begin.

Wisconsin Democrats rely heavily on organized labor to fund its attack campaigns on opponents. State government workers’ unions skim money from employee paychecks and funnel that money into the labor groups’ campaign contribution funds. 0bama has reason to be uneasy about Governor Walker’s plan because part of the proposal would require dues to be paid voluntarily.

In his interview, 0bama could not resist throwing another jab at Governor Walker, lambasting him for rejecting a high-speed rail line, but hovered mainly around his fallacious arguments in favor of labor activists.

Wisconsin has plenty of company in the budget crisis section. 0bama’s home state of Illinois boasts the worst economic crisis in the nation and its current governor, Pat Quinn is reluctant to change the status quo, proposing to continue massively under-funded state-worker pension plans by increasing spending by $1.7 billion and borrowing an additional $8.75 billion with bonds backed by new, higher taxes that double the state’s current rate.

Should Governor Walker’s plan pass, it would cast a pall over the state’s position as the birthplace of the union representing all non-federal public employees. The requirement that employees should pay part of their own health insurance and pension is something that has been done in the private sector for years. In Wisconsin, asking employees to pay for part of their benefits as a cost-saving measure to the state is not only exceptionally reasonable, it is exceptionally fair considering the costs to the employees are modest at best when compared to similar private sector plans. Should the measure not pass, the state would be required to lay off up to 6,000 state workers.

About the Writer

D. E. Carson is a writer for BrooWaha. For more information, visit the writer's website.
Want to write articles too? Sign up & become a writer!

7 comments on Showing True Colors, 0bama Sides with Unions

Log In To Vote   Score: 2
By D. E. Carson on February 18, 2011 at 09:32 am

C5 said: "Right-wing, hummer driving, mini-mansion owners want to kill the unions simply because the unions are an obstacle getting in the way of a corporatists from buying out our elections."

No, people want to kill unions because:

1) They over-demand and under deliver. Have you ever worked in a union shop Dean? Probably not. When everyone is paid the same wage, gets the same raise percentage at the same time regardless of how much or how little they work, the incentive to be exceptional is taken away. Exceptional teachers are paid the same as lousy teachers. Many of the teachers I've worked with say that they've given up on trying because there's no reason to be better.

2) When you have a union covering your ass at work, it's very easy to fall into the "they can't fire me, I'm in the union" mentality. When that happens, again, people begin to slack off on their work. Then when someone comes along who does his job and does it well, the old union guys stand up and complain, "the new guy is making us look bad." The reason he's making you look bad is because he's actually grateful to have a job and is willing to do that job whether you are or not.

3) Unions are why things cost so much. Think about why you can walk into Wal-Mart or Target Superstores and can buy the same groceries cheaper than you can at a Safeway or Ralph's or Albertsons. The reason is because the union has strong-armed the management into paying for Rolls Royce level benefits, whereas Wal-Mart and Target offer Buick level benefits and the employees kick in some as well. The company doesn't have to cover 100% of the benefits of 100% of the labor force, thus the prices are lower.

Perhaps you didn't know this, but a company's largest liability is not profitsharing or's payroll. Dividends paid to shareholders come AFTER payroll is covered and payroll includes paying the premiums on benefits and pension plans. Furthermore, the company -- NOT the shareholders -- determines how much it will pay in profitsharing/dividends. So all of your whining about corporations being evil and greedy is bullshit. Corporations have to pay their workers and if the company is a union shop, then the union will strong-arm management into cow-towing every time. It's a case of the union biting the hand that feeds it because if given free reign, unions would take everything that wasn't bolted down and put a lein on everything that was.

As for your link to Rachael Madcow...

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 3
By D. E. Carson on February 18, 2011 at 09:55 am

Askcherlock: Thank you for your insights into how unions operate. Personal experience with unions (being in one myself) has taught me the same thing. Every day I see guys strutting around our office like they own the place because they're in the union. And let me tell you something, when the subject of pay and benefits comes up these people become like rabid dogs with their, "like hell I'll give up anything" mentality. Then when budget cut time comes along, they stand up defying management to lay off anybody OR cut their benefits. It's really sad that there are people out there who claim to be "progressive" when in reality, they'd rather stick to the status quo. Liberals are afraid of change. They like things the way they are (I submit California and its current economic situation as exhibit A). It's really conservatives who want to make things better by making people responsible for themselves. When people are responsible for their own welfare, they tend to work harder and more efficiently whereas when the government gives out everything, people revert back to childhood wanting what they want and wanting it now. I've never had a problem with helping people get back on their feet, but when the crutch becomes a lifestyle, then there's a problem.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: -2
By PATRICK PETION on February 21, 2011 at 02:07 pm

why lies, some lier just repeat some stupid fact, we do not know were they get them from. as for example the wisconsin had a 121.4 million of supplus in beginning of 2011. why even answer such a lies. as he always said the obama administration had save the nation billion of dollar with the health care law, while the contry have trillion in debt. were he get his fact from. or he just a lier.ffacts is the state of wisconsin have a 3.6 billion budget deficit. the governor explain for them this is about balancing the budget. he continue to say ;we have got a 3.6 billion budget deficit that the governor word, he is the governor so he know, maybe the state should had vote for some lier whom can't event have one face. we should all ask if that is his real picture, because the first one wasn't. so any way the governor explain; we are broke just like nearly every other state across the country . it's about time someone stood up and told the truth. the governor word on fox news. now what should the governor does to reduce the 3.6 billion deficit. are we all part of a nation, if it is the case would it be reasonable for people whom work for the government as state employer help to reduce the deficit. why would they keep all their benefit while the state is broke. they have a stste job or federal job while most than 9% of the population is unemploy. why are we so selfish. how much should we tax the rich, let say 99% yep we get every penny they make whom will invest in the economy so we can have more job. oh the government. so everyone would work for the government, those who can't find one will be on well fare, great . you see how uneducated you liberal are.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: -3
By PATRICK PETION on February 21, 2011 at 02:18 pm

working for a corporatocracy. question does someone know what is a corporation. please answer that question

2 what would you do without corporation.

3 finally different between government institution and corporation. my next article i will explain those term for the morron whom doesn t know about them

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: -3
By PATRICK PETION on February 21, 2011 at 02:19 pm


 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: -2
By PATRICK PETION on February 21, 2011 at 02:21 pm

melody yep their is a pill name knowledge. do your research about corporation and government and liberty. undestand that we conservative and free enterprise system are for the people. the people is in charge not the government

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 0
By PATRICK PETION on February 21, 2011 at 02:22 pm


 Report abuse

Add A Comment!

Click here to signup or login.

Rate This Article

Your vote matters to us