Extreme Antics, Indeed
A couple of things happened today. First is that various people have posted a "if you agree with what the public workers of Wisconsin are doing, please post this as your status." I won't be doing that, especially after the e-mail that I got from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. For those wondering how that happened, here's the Reader's Digest answer. Back in 2004 I was part of the Democratic Caucus, and my hotmail address got on their list, and they're still sending me stuff. Most of the time I roll my eyes and delete it, but sometimes I get something so juicy that I just can't pass up turning it into a topic.
The e-mail was full of high dudgeon and frothy rhetoric that would be completely at home on your least favorite cable news channel. The author of the e-mail cites what's happened in Wisconsin as an example of "how extreme Republicans have gotten." Que? It isn't Republicans who refused to take their seats in the state Legislature to vote, and when told that state troopers would be sent to their homes to compel them to actually show up and do their job, fleed to the open arms of Illinois as if the whole thing were a game of tag. It wasn't Republicans who "called in sick" at their various public school jobs to protest the goings-on.
I'd like to point out that I've never once called in sick to work unless I was so ill that I would infect my workmates with whatever had a death grip on my corpus. I find that particular ploy completely reprehensible on the part of public workers, because they're paid by the citizens of the state. I would be OK with a law that says that if a public worker calls in sick to go protest, they're dismissed from employment. That would probably enrage the protestors gathering at Racine, complaining that this protest will "show [us] that democracy still works," and that this will "restore rights" and other nonsense. Then there's the absolute lunacy of trying to contest the election of the Governor, which is right beyond the pale.
There were other falsities in the e-mail, like "rather than asking the wealthy to pay their fair share, they're trying to balance the budget on the backs of those who can least afford it." I suppose if you think that "100%" is the fair share, then yes, the Republicans aren't trying to get the wealthy to pay their fair share, but in case Guy here didn't notice, the Congress is split, the Republicans only control one house. Neither party has complete control of government, which means that (gasp!) they'll have to work together to get things done.
In Wisconsin, the governor-to-be ran on a platform of "I will get the public sector under control" and the people liked that message so Scott Walker was elected. Among his "draconian" ides are asking public workers to contribute more to their health care. Not the "greatly increase the cost of their health care" that Guy claims, but a few percentage points. Still nohttp://www.livejournal.com/update.bml. t enough to come in line with the private sector's average, but anything is a start, isn't it? But that's not all! Governor Walker wants public workers to fund their own retirement plans by an additional six percent. Terrors!
Those who oppose these measures don't realize that the money that goes to pay public workers isn't just miracled out of thin air like in Monopoly where the banker can just issue scrip money when the bank runs out. That money comes from taxes. If you believe that asking people to carry their own weight in a recession equates to "the very people who teach our children and keep our communities safe", then there's not a thing I can say that will convince you of my side. Wisconsin has a $3.5 billion deficit, and that money will come from somewhere. My guess is that the people of the state aren't going to just roll over and let it be them.
The last thing I don't get is the complaint about "taking away their right to collective bargaining." When a labor union pours money into the election account of a candidate, then that candidate wins, and that candidate "pays them back" with benefits from the state fund, that amounts to bargaining with yourself. Who wouldn't want to be able to have someone on both sides of the table? The problem is that things like that cause the mounting deficits that states are dealing with, and "taxes" is no longer a tenable option.
I've seen both sides of the debate. Some of my friends side with the workers. Some don't, and think that they ought to nut up, go back to work and realize that the paradigm has changed. Let the people demonstrate and holler their slogans if it makes them feel better, they have a right to a part of the debate as much as anyone. If public workers think they're getting a raw deal, let them look in the private sector and see what's out there. Either the workers relinquish some of their benefits, or they find that Madison has to pay for their health care in IOU slips. What if Wisconsin allowed their citizens to vote on a referendum to see if they'd prefer to be a right-to-work state? That wouldn't be terrible. I encourage everyone to keep their eye on this story, because even if you're not in Wisconsin, you might be in a state that faces the same issue and this could end up happening across the country.
The e-mail was full of high dudgeon and frothy rhetoric that would be completely at home on your least favorite cable news channel. The author of the e-mail cites what's happened in Wisconsin as an example of "how extreme Republicans have gotten." Que? It isn't Republicans who refused to take their seats in the state Legislature to vote, and when told that state troopers would be sent to their homes to compel them to actually show up and do their job, fleed to the open arms of Illinois as if the whole thing were a game of tag. It wasn't Republicans who "called in sick" at their various public school jobs to protest the goings-on.
I'd like to point out that I've never once called in sick to work unless I was so ill that I would infect my workmates with whatever had a death grip on my corpus. I find that particular ploy completely reprehensible on the part of public workers, because they're paid by the citizens of the state. I would be OK with a law that says that if a public worker calls in sick to go protest, they're dismissed from employment. That would probably enrage the protestors gathering at Racine, complaining that this protest will "show [us] that democracy still works," and that this will "restore rights" and other nonsense. Then there's the absolute lunacy of trying to contest the election of the Governor, which is right beyond the pale.
There were other falsities in the e-mail, like "rather than asking the wealthy to pay their fair share, they're trying to balance the budget on the backs of those who can least afford it." I suppose if you think that "100%" is the fair share, then yes, the Republicans aren't trying to get the wealthy to pay their fair share, but in case Guy here didn't notice, the Congress is split, the Republicans only control one house. Neither party has complete control of government, which means that (gasp!) they'll have to work together to get things done.
In Wisconsin, the governor-to-be ran on a platform of "I will get the public sector under control" and the people liked that message so Scott Walker was elected. Among his "draconian" ides are asking public workers to contribute more to their health care. Not the "greatly increase the cost of their health care" that Guy claims, but a few percentage points. Still nohttp://www.livejournal.com/update.bml. t enough to come in line with the private sector's average, but anything is a start, isn't it? But that's not all! Governor Walker wants public workers to fund their own retirement plans by an additional six percent. Terrors!
Those who oppose these measures don't realize that the money that goes to pay public workers isn't just miracled out of thin air like in Monopoly where the banker can just issue scrip money when the bank runs out. That money comes from taxes. If you believe that asking people to carry their own weight in a recession equates to "the very people who teach our children and keep our communities safe", then there's not a thing I can say that will convince you of my side. Wisconsin has a $3.5 billion deficit, and that money will come from somewhere. My guess is that the people of the state aren't going to just roll over and let it be them.
The last thing I don't get is the complaint about "taking away their right to collective bargaining." When a labor union pours money into the election account of a candidate, then that candidate wins, and that candidate "pays them back" with benefits from the state fund, that amounts to bargaining with yourself. Who wouldn't want to be able to have someone on both sides of the table? The problem is that things like that cause the mounting deficits that states are dealing with, and "taxes" is no longer a tenable option.
I've seen both sides of the debate. Some of my friends side with the workers. Some don't, and think that they ought to nut up, go back to work and realize that the paradigm has changed. Let the people demonstrate and holler their slogans if it makes them feel better, they have a right to a part of the debate as much as anyone. If public workers think they're getting a raw deal, let them look in the private sector and see what's out there. Either the workers relinquish some of their benefits, or they find that Madison has to pay for their health care in IOU slips. What if Wisconsin allowed their citizens to vote on a referendum to see if they'd prefer to be a right-to-work state? That wouldn't be terrible. I encourage everyone to keep their eye on this story, because even if you're not in Wisconsin, you might be in a state that faces the same issue and this could end up happening across the country.