President Obama and the Democrats were elected in a landslide in November 2008. During the campaign they promised to increase the socialization of the health care system and they did. It was ugly to watch, but they had majorities and were finally able to push the legislation through. That is how democracy works. The opponents of “Obamacare” were really powerless so they went to the streets and made a fuss. The reality was that when the Republicans lost the election they lost the chance to effect the outcome. To quote my friend Paul D:
“Elections have consequences.”
In Wisconsin last November the voters elected Scott Walker a Republican as Governor and Republican majorities in both houses of their legislature. A major part of the platform that got them elected was reforming the benefits and the collective bargaining rights of state and local workers . It was ugly to watch but the Republicans were finally able to push the legislation they wanted through. The opponents of union reform were really powerless so they boycotted the legislature, went to the streets and made a fuss. The reality was that when the Democrats in Wisconsin lost the election last November, they lost the chance to effect the outcome. To quote my friend Paul D again:
“Elections have consequences.”
From either side democracy is an ugly process. It lurches about and at any one time somewhere near half of the people who are paying attention are not happy with what is going on. But the beauty is that it isn’t baseball. There isn’t a three strikes rule. In a few years there will always be another at bat, another election, and you can try again to get elected. When you do, you can move the rules in the direction you think is best for the country or your constituents.
“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”
Winston Churchill
My thoughts on Wisconsin and Public Employee Unions are complicated. I agree with Franklin Roosevelt:
“The Process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted to the public service.”
But I don’t want public employees to be without a collective voice. We need to find a new balance. This ugly process is how democracies find the new balance.
There is no doubt that most public employees now have benefits that exceed those available in the private sector. I would guess that the disparity will get corrected over the next twenty years or so. Defined benefit pensions will end and healthcare will be socialized with a private sector option for the upper middle class and the ruling elite. It will be a series of ugly disputes that will command the headlines and a hundred years from now will barely be mentioned in the history books. Do you remember the struggle in 1883 to end patronage and implement civil service? I rest my case.
Discover more from Simon Burrow
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Important principles that should be applied are:
1. The public sector (including congress) should not be able to exclude themselves from the laws or programs they create.
If we all must buy healthcare from insurance companies (Which is a stupid law for all of us, libertarian or progressive) then congress should do the same. If all of us have defined contribution pensions, then they should too.
2. Pension plans designed to make underpaid teachers stay in the profession should not be granted to highly paid executives or bureaucrats. A simple Cap of say $90,000 per year on public pensions should be applied.
re: there is no doubt that most public employees now have benefits that exceed those available in the private sector. I would guess that the disparity will get corrected over the next twenty years or so.
the problem is not so much the increase in public employee benefits (although I would agree that these is probably some correction needed to avoid padding at the end of the benefits qualification period) so much as the erosion of private sector workers’ benefits.
Public sector employees benefits are hopefully giong to undergo some correction here in the UK. Final salary pension schemes are hopefully going to get changed to average salary pension schemes. This is not going to go down well with the public sector unions. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12703232)
I agree that public employees should not be able to unionize. As a public, appointed employee, I have chosen this profession and the consequences that come with it. My job is to serve the public and that includes wisely using the tax dollars provided.
There is a misconception that all public employees receive fabulous benefits and great pay. I do not receive a whole lot of either. All my “benefits” will be received after I have served for 30 years.
I am all for reform, but I do believe that a select few of us are getting a bad rap b/c of the overpaid majority.
Pensions? How about the same IRA and 401Ks as the rest of us?
It’s not so much that public employees are hopelessly overpaid; its that they are treated so radically different than the people who pay their salary. This will always breed contempt.
P
JP I like your idea but it goes against human nature. What is the purpose of being in the ruling elite if you don’t have privileges. Maybe full disclosure would be possible.
Scott
It looks like we are going to have to raise the retirement age for everyone younger than me. Social Security is a defined benefit plan.
James
It is nice to know that we Americans are not the only ones who got into this problem.
Krista
You should have gone to work in a bigger city, you would have been better paid and your children would have had access to gangs.
Paul
Don’t worry it’s getting corrected. Why “contempt” why not “envy?”