|
Government Unions Win, You Lose Since President Barack Obama was sworn into office, the U.S. economy has shed 3.4 million jobs and the unemployment rate has risen to 10%. But not all sectors of the economy have been suffering equally. In fact, the sector of the economy most supportive of President Obama has not only avoided contraction, but has actually managed to grow instead. According to a report released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) last Friday, in 2009 the number of federal, state and local government employees represented by unions actually rose by 64,000. Coupled with union losses in the private sector economy, 2009 became the first year in American history that a majority of American union members work for the government. Specifically, 52% of all union members now work for the federal, state or local government, up from 49% in 2008. Or, to better illustrate these statistics: three times more union members work in the Post Office than in the auto industry. So what? Why should Americans care if unions are now dominated by workers who get their paychecks from governments, instead of workers who get their paychecks from private firms? There’s one simple reason: private firms face competition; governments don’t. Collective bargaining, the anti-trust exemption at the heart of a union’s power, was created to help workers seize their “fair share” of business profits. But if a union ends up extracting a contract from a private firm that eats up too much of the profits, then that firm will be unable to reinvest those profits and will lose out to competitors. But when a union extracts a generous contract from a government, the answer is always higher taxes or borrowing to pay for the bloated spending. And make no mistake: unionized government worker compensation is bloated. As Heritage fellow James Sherk notes “[t]he average worker for a state or local government earns $39.83 an hour in wages and benefits compared to $27.49 an hour in the private sector. While over 80 percent of state and local workers have pensions, just 50 percent of private-sector workers do. These differences remain after controlling for education, skills and demographics.” Unionized government employees not only want to keep their bloated compensation packages, but their leaders are desperate for more members and more union dues. That is why public-sector unions have become a fierce lobbying force for higher taxes and more spending across the country. Organized labor once fought against taxes and regulations that impeded the economic interests of their employers, but now they are in alliance with environmentalists pushing private sector and economy-crippling cap-and-trade legislation. It’s worth noting that the BLS did not count the United Auto Workers working for General Motors and Chrysler as unionized government employees. But perhaps they should have. Our country will share their fate unless something is done about unionized government power. |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Archive for January, 2010
From Dick Morris via Newsmax:
Highly informed sources on Capitol Hill have revealed to me details of the Democratic plan to sneak Obamacare through Congress, despite collapsing public approval for healthcare “reform” and disintegrating congressional support in the wake of Republican Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts.
President Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid all have agreed to the basic framework of the plan.
Their plan is clever but can be stopped if opponents of radical healthcare reform act quickly and focus on a core group of 23 Democratic Congressman. If just a few of these 23 Democrats are “flipped” and decide to oppose the bill, the whole Obama-Pelosi-Reid stratagem falls apart.
Here’s what I learned top Democrats are planning to implement.
Senate Democrats will go to the House with a two-part deal.
First, the House will pass the Senate’s Obamacare bill that passed the Senate in December. The House leadership will vote on the Senate bill, and Pelosi will allow no amendments or modifications to the Senate bill.
How will Pelosi’s deal fly with rambunctious liberal members of her majority who don’t like the Senate bill, especially its failure to include a public option, put heavy fines on those who don’t get insurance, and offering no income tax surcharge on the “rich”?
That’s where the second part of the Pelosi-deal comes in.
Behind closed doors, Reid and Pelosi have agreed in principle that changes to the Senate bill will be made to satisfy liberal House members — but only after the Senate bill is passed and signed into law by Obama.
This deal will be secured by a pledge from Reid and the Senate’s Democratic caucus that they will make “fixes” to the Senate bill after it becomes law with Obama’s John Hancock.
The plan is then to get it through the senate via reconciliation, which would only require 51 Democrat votes. According to Morris, Reid feels he can secure at least 52 votes.
Read the whole thing here
…..
-Cnation
Politico: The fallout: Democrats rethinking health care bill
Democratic leaders and the White House insisted ahead of the vote they aren’t preparing to desert health care. They admit they’ll have to come up with a new strategy to win passage, but said they didn’t want to allow one Senate race to take them off-course on the president’s top legislative item for the year.
But several House members said Tuesday night that they had no interest in pursuing the most likely scenario for moving ahead with a bill — approving the already-passed Senate version of health reform in the House – and some said President Barack Obama should step back and start over. more…..
…………….
Washington Post: With Brown victory, Webb calls for suspending health care votes
As Democrats reel from the loss of a U.S. Senate seat in deep blue Massachusetts, Virginia Sen. Jim Webb becomes the first senator we’ve seen tonight to call for suspending all votes on health care until newly elected Republican Scott Brown can take office.
Some Democrats had been mulling trying to complete health care legislation before Brown can be seated, to maintain their 60 seat super majority in the senate. But if Webb–or others–oppose the move, the 60-vote margin would be gone and the maneuverimpossible. more…..
…………….
Wall Street Journal: Brown Wins Massachusetts Senate Seat, Potentially Upending Obama Agenda
BOSTON — A little-known Republican upended the balance of power in Washington by winning a U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts, a result that imperils President Barack Obama’s top legislative priorities and augurs trouble for his party in this year’s elections…The Brown victory forces the White House and Congressional leaders into a mad scramble to decide how—or whether—to salvage their long-sought health-care overhaul. Rushing the bill after losing Massachusetts carries political risks. So does allowing it to collapse. more…..
…………….
Red State: A Shot Across the Bow from the Bay State
Let’s cut right to the chase: Scott Brown’s resounding defeat of Martha Coakley demonstrates many things. Chief among these is the vulnerability of everyany vital race (Corzine, Deeds, Coakley….), and the true unpopularity of the health care monstrosity the Democratic supermajority has been fighting amongst itself to produce over the course of this last year. more….. Democrat in the current election year, the impotence of the Democrats’ current leader and sitting President to sway public opinion in
…………….
Boston Globe: Election dramatically alters trajectory of Obama’s agenda
Congressional strategists had warned in the closing days of the Massachusetts Senate race that a Coakley defeat had the potential to trigger a series of retirements within the Democratic ranks as members flee a political wave that could wash out dozens in the House and high single digits on the Senate side.
“My message to my clients? Jump ship now,” said one Democratic operative who advises a number of targeted Members of Congress. “Obama can’t help you.” more…..
…..
-Cnation
And the Democrats lose their Senate supermajority. What an unbelievably great night!
I’ve been purposefully quiet about this race over the past week, but to the Democrats and to Barack Obama, I say this:
How DARE you disregard the will of the American people. You’ve lied, you’ve cheated, you’ve ridiculed and cast aspersions on the citizens of this great nation, you’ve trampled our Constitution and attacked the very core of the American spirit. You’ve demonized those who achieve and produce, and lionized the non-contributor.
Your year-long rein of unchecked tyranny ends now.
Heed the warning of Massachusetts, my progressive friends, because you’ve only just begun to see the wrath of a nation scorned.
…..
-Cnation
With 98% of the votes in:
Brown – 52
Coakley – 47
Live feed from the Scott Brown election party.
…..
-Cnation
This afternoon, Martha Coakley’s campaign accused the Scott Brown campaign of cheating in today’s special election. The specific accusation involved ballot tampering.
The press release:
For Immediate Release: January 19, 2010
Contact: Alex Zaroulis (617) 549-0358
Campaign Manager Kevin Conroy:
We’ve received several independent and disturbing reports of voters across the state being handed ballots that are already marked in favor of Scott Brown. This is obviously a serious violation, and our legal team is taking immediate steps to protect the integrity of this election.
We do not yet know why this is happening, but you and everyone you know needs to be aware of the situation so that you can carefully inspect your ballot. If a vote has already been marked, you must return the ballot to the elections official, demand a clean ballot, and call our Voter Protection Hotline at 617-351-6866.
###
Problem is, the original version of this press release was dated yesterday, January 18th 2010. A full day before the polls even opened. Here is a screenshot from before they corrected the date (courtesy Big Government):
Response from the Brown campaign. Not sure if this is in its entirety; it was all I’ve been able to find:
“Reports that the Coakley campaign is making reckless accusations regarding the integrity of today’s election is a reminder that they are a desperate campaign. In fact, news reports point out that today’s accusation was a pre-dated, in the bag political attack. Furthermore, Senator John Kerry accused Brown supporters of intimidation and bullying — a tactic taken directly from his own 2004 playbook. The reality is that Massachusetts voters will determine the outcome of this election despite political attacks leveled by Martha Coakley and national Democrats.” — Daniel B. Winslow, Counsel for the Scott Brown for U.S. Senate Campaign
CLICK HERE to view a screen shot of the pre-dated attack.
In 2004, Kerry’s Campaign Team Sent A Guidebook To Their Colorado Staff Telling Them To Launch A “Pre-Emptive Strike” If “No Signs Of Intimidation Techniques” Are Reported. “If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a ‘pre-emptive strike’ (particularly well-suited to states in which there techniques have been tried in the past).
* Issue a press release
i. Reviewing Republican tactic used in the past in your area or state
ii. Quoting party/minority/civil rights leadership as denouncing tactics that discourage people from voting
* Prime minority leadership to discuss the issue in the media; provide talking points
* Place stories in which minority leadership expresses concern about the threat of intimidation tactics
* Warn local newspapers not to accept advertising that is not properly disclaimed or that contains false warnings about voting requirements and/or about what will happen at the polls” (Kerry-Edwards 2004, “Colorado Election Day Manual: A Detailed Guide To Voting In Colorado,” 11/04)
As you might expect, none of the claims of ballot fraud could be verified. No big surprise there. The Massachusetts Secretary of State has dismissed the allegations outright.
As one commenter put it, “These people (Coakley campaign) are so stupid they couldn’t fall out of a boat”
…..
More from Hot Air: Here we go: Scott Brown’s cheating, declares Coakley camp
Big Government: Coakley’s Press Release Charging Ballot Fraud Was Written Yesterday
…..
-Cnation
Probably the best single line from the senate race up in Massachusetts was Scott Brown’s response to David Gergen during the debate with Marsha Coakley and Joseph Kennedy. Gergen asked Brown a question having to do with sitting in “Teddy Kennedy’s seat”, to which Brown famously responded “…with all due respect, it’s not the Kennedys’ seat, and it’s not the Democrats’ seat, it’s the people’s seat.“.
On Friday, the Coakley campaign released a video by Ted Kennedy’s widow, Vicki Kennedy, in which she says the following:
“Tuesday’s election is to fill the term my husband didn’t have a chance to complete,” Vicki Kennedy says. “But it’s not the Kennedy seat. It’s the peoples’ seat.”
I don’t know what’s worse for the Coakley camp – the fact that they somehow felt they could get away with….uh, “co-opting” their opponent’s defining line without anyone noticing, or that they release an ad that reminds everyone how thoroughly Scott Brown dispatched their candidate in the debate.
…and yes, I know it’s not ‘Marsha’. Somebody tell Patrick Kennedy though. (My favorite tweet of the day comes from this guy, who wrote “if Martha Coakley was a brand of gin Patrick Kennedy would remember the name…“)
…..
-Cnation
John Ratzenberger at Sunday’s Scott brown rally in Boston, via National Review:
This isn’t the Democratic party of our fathers and grandfathers. This is the party of Woodstock hippies. I was at Woodstock — I built the stage. And when everything fell apart, and people were fighting for peanut-butter sandwiches, it was the National Guard who came in and saved the same people who were protesting them. So when Hillary Clinton a few years ago wanted to build a Woodstock memorial, I said it should be a statue of a National Guardsman feeding a crying hippie.
Heh…
…..
-Cnation
Maryland congressman Chris Van Hollen on the future of Obamacare should Scott Brown win the Massachussetts senate seat:
“Even before Massachusetts and that race was on the radar screen, we prepared for the process of using reconciliation,” Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said.
“Getting health-care reform passed is important,” Van Hollen said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” airing this weekend. “Reconciliation is an option.”
Read the whole thing here.
The sheer balls….with support for Obamacare nationwide averaging just 38% – due, I might add, in no small part to the brazen arrogance they’ve displayed in trying to get it through congress – it is almost beyond belief that they’d keep trying to push this thing forward.
If not for the destruction they’ve brought and continue to bring to our economy, national security and national spirit overall, the lengths this Democratic party is going to destroy itself it might actually be funny.
…..
-Cnation
…and yet Congress, at the behest of King Zero, continues to work against the will of the people.
…..
-Cnation