The New Republic

When is the Mukhabarat going to be out in force in Madison?

- liberalref

February 18, 2011 at 9:45am

I'd love to see Beck step one foot onto State Street. Bucky Badger wouldn't waste any time ridding us of Beck's worthless carcass.

- Bukharin

February 18, 2011 at 10:08am

Wow, people banding together to protect each other and increase their power is communistic?! I suppose that makes sense from a neo-liberal point of view. I always just kind of thought that was the basis of civil society...shows what I know.

- GSpinks

February 18, 2011 at 10:20am

I have to say, I cheered when I read that the entire Democratic caucus in the Wisconsin legislature had gone missing over this. Walker's bill isn't the stuff of middle east police states, but it's as dishonest and downright vengeful a bill as I've ever seen in a Midwestern legislature. I have no problem with the health care cost shift, and some of the other genuine cost savings features - they've got a hell of deficit problem, and you have to find money across the budget to make it work. But the blatantly anti-union, punitive measures are egregious and wrong, and particular wrong in being applied selectively, mostly to teachers, in fact, within the civil service. This is the opening salvo in the Californification of the Midwest, albeit without the added fun of ballot propositions. It won't be the last. With the GOP driving, we'll all live in dysfunctional semi-states soon.

- IowaBeauty

February 18, 2011 at 10:25am

Well, Iowa, yes, but keep in mind that part of the reason for their deficit problem is the massive tax cuts for teh wealthy recently enacted by that same governor in wisconsin. So, yes, Californication all around.

- miceelf

February 18, 2011 at 10:34am

The people who voted for Scott Walker don't have children in public schools -- most of them don't have school-age children, period. That should tell you all you need to know about the situation in Wisconsin.

- wildboy

February 18, 2011 at 10:34am

"Neoliberal" is a worthless word.

- liberalref

February 18, 2011 at 10:34am

Wildboy, do you actually know this?

- mnkoplow

February 18, 2011 at 10:48am

That thought occurred to me, too, mn. I wondered if wild has data on this or if it is just ideological boilerplate.

- liberalref

February 18, 2011 at 10:49am

This is depressing me. Can somebody to a regression analysis and figure out what the world would be like if Scalia had picked Gore instead of Bush?

- Nusholtz

February 18, 2011 at 11:15am

Anthony Kennedy would have been much likelier than Antonin Scalia to have sided with Gore. Kennedy is the Justice who the attorneys are always pitching to in cases where the vote count is expected to be razor-close. Regression analysis is a useful tool when looking at the past, but it would be useless in trying to game the future, just as everything else is, so I assume you are kidding, nush.

- liberalref

February 18, 2011 at 11:26am

Me too, Nusholtz. I was just thinking how some days I can get up, the sun is shining, I'm in love (hot date two nights ago, whoohoo!), there are no crises at work, a great weekend is ahead, and everything seems perfect. Then I am reminded that there people who are genuinely interested in what Glenn Beck has to say about anything, and I suddenly begin to despair for myself, our nation, and the world.

- Fishpeddler

February 18, 2011 at 11:32am

Libref Yes, I am being whimsical. It's just that Bush weakened the country so much, with negligent invasions of other countries and bad tax policy, that I think someone has to say, "Look here. The Republicans made terrible mistakes and because its one country and we are all together in this, we all have to pay the price today." Meanwhile... Fish had a hot date! Maybe you can post pictures on the side where it says "ARALifestyle.Com" right to the right over there--------->

- Nusholtz

February 18, 2011 at 11:44am

On Wisconsin http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harvey-j-kaye/on-wisconsin-and-to-the-n_b_825049.html

- hkaye

February 18, 2011 at 12:01pm

Wisconsin more like Greece -- Unionized public sector parasites in protest over having their exorbitant benefits reduced to levels still well above the private sector. A quintessential liberal moment. Reality check: "The bill would also require union members to contribute 5.8% of salary toward their pensions and chip in 12.6% of the cost of their health insurance premiums. If those numbers don't sound outrageous, you probably work in the private economy. The comparable nationwide employee health-care contribution is 20% for private industry, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The average employee contribution from take-home pay for retirement was 7.5% in 2009, according to the Employee Benefits Research Institute. "

- mr_rationale

February 18, 2011 at 12:16pm

Once again, the badly-written Heritage program codenamed "rationale" natters on about parasites, without ever even once referring to the parasites of the financial sector, which helped tank that selfsame sector and sink the economy. Now, here I mean a certain slab of the financial world. I have a reverence toward those concerns who have issued IPOs that resulted in productive companies in the tech sector and elsewhere, but I have contempt for those firms who went crazy with the CDOs and leveraged themselves so far out there that they hung themselves out to dry, and us with them. Is it possible that the fatuous rationale is so in love with his mantra that the markets are perfect that he didn't even notice this parasitism?

- liberalref

February 18, 2011 at 12:25pm

Last night to do my best friend for my college years at the Univ. of Wisconsin called and invited me to drive down from Minneapolis to Madison to participate in the demonstrations. I was sorely tempted to join him, but my employment as a corporate shill dictated otherwise. In spite of my failings, the demonstrations in Madison are encouraging for two reasons. First, people are starting to recognize the real agenda of the Republican Party. I was struck by the man-on-the-street interview quote in this morning's Minneapolis paper quoting a white male industrial union member. The tone of the comments indicated that the interviewee almost certainly voted for Reagan and a litany of Republican officeholders. Indeed, he is statistically likely to have voted for Scott Walker. The man was outraged at the anti-union bias of the Republican Party. It was as if the last 30 years never occurred and that we are for the first time seeing the real agenda of the Republican Party. I felt like shaking him and asking him where he had been the last 30 years. My second cause for optimism is that people are finally venting their rage at the proper target. In the last election people vented their rage against the people that were actually on their side and voted for people who opposed their interests. As usual, rat misses the issue. The issue is not whether or not public employee salaries and benefits are overly generous, an issue that can be debated among reasonable people who may reach different conclusions, it is the union busting tactics of the Republican Party that is the issue. This is obvious; however, he sees fit to ignore the real issue and attempt to deflect attention from that issue. If the Republican Party believes that public employee salaries and benefits are overly generous, they can bargain with the public employee unions.

- spd1955

February 18, 2011 at 12:51pm

rationale: I abhor your use of the word parasite to refer to the people who are responsible for educating the coming generations of adults. But in the interest of finding common ground, let me adopt the conceit. I am a "parasite" in the private sector. I was paid by my employer last year something on the order of 6X the median family income in the United States. My employer could afford to do that because we produce products for which we enjoy significant pricing power, and the resultant very high gross profits. In other words, we charge our customers more than we need to in order to recoup our investment and a "reasonable" profit to facilitate additional research and development. We do that so we can pay ourselves a lot of money. Yes, I pay 15% of my health care costs, and contribute 100% of my "pension" through a 401K, but I have to say, neither is much of a burden given my gross. But in your twisted world, I'm a noble pillar of the private economy while the Wisconsin school teacher who earns .6X of the median family income - note the decimal point, I didn't have one - but happens to have used collective bargaining to get her employer to pay her pension costs, is a parasite. Tell me how her union negotiation is different from my pricing power? You've got a twisted little mind, friend.

- IowaBeauty

February 18, 2011 at 1:50pm

Don't take it personally, IB. Rationale is a piece of work and he (it) wouldn't know a parasite from a beaver.

- liberalref

February 18, 2011 at 2:08pm

Lib and mn, it was hyperbole on my part. The attached link summarizes exit polls in Wisconsin's gubernatorial election, and while Walker handily won among voters over 65, they only constituted 16% of the overall electorate -- not enough of a margin for his victory. Interesting that he won by a similar margin among voters 30-44, but significantly less among those 45-64. Something tells me that those who voted for him who DO have kids in public school are not terribly excited by the latest developments. http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/106635128.html

- wildboy

February 18, 2011 at 2:16pm

Undoubtedly rat believes Glenn Beck is an untold "geniouse." [sic intended]

- Bukharin

February 18, 2011 at 2:48pm

spd1955, yes, I'll second your experience. I know several of the same type of union member where I'm at, and their reaction has been similar. I'll also add that Jon Cohn, and other TNR editors have outlined some of the context of union and other collective bargaining agreements involving insurance and retirement pay. These groups traded away pay increases for better health care benefit packages (part of the reason taxing Cadillac plans was so tough) and better retirement packages. As Jon has pointed out at least once, if not more, it's easier to contribute to your benefit and retirement plan if you're getting paid more. It's not about destroying unions.

- jet

February 18, 2011 at 3:24pm

Even FDR, that conservative icon, didn't believe in public sector unions. Iowa: you miss the point. The employer here is the private sector citizens of WI. They voted for this change. Elections matter right? SPD: The point is entirely about public sector benefits being too high. And cutting them to save money

- mr_rationale

February 18, 2011 at 3:40pm

Here is what we have learned so far from "Greece in Wisconsin" "• Democrats care more about protecting union wealth and power than any other political goal. • Democrats care only for outcome, not for rules, process, or even democracy itself if the people inconveniently elect Republicans, and • The media is made up of partisan Democrats in a way that makes them a reliable source of propaganda and an unreliable source of information."

- mr_rationale

February 18, 2011 at 3:45pm

Iowa: Really? You are making $300K. does your company provide goods/services for the Gov? are you the corporate counsel? Truly interested in your company and your role. And if you could convince other liberals to contribute to charity at the same rate as conservatives -- -we would eliminate poverty.

- mr_rationale

February 18, 2011 at 3:52pm

Here's what we've learned so far from "Greece in Wisconsin": (1) Goldman Sachs should be reimbursed 100 cents on the dollar for all of their AIG trades. (2) The income of hedge fund managers should be taxed at half the rate of their maids. (3) Although it was Goldman Sachs and hedge fund managers that tanked the value of their pension fund investments, the benefits of teachers and nurses should be slashed to to maintain (1) and (2). (4) Anyone that doesn't agree with (1), (2) and (3) cares "more about protecting union wealth and power than any other political goal" and "only for outcome, not for rules, process, or even democracy itself."

- kkseattle

February 18, 2011 at 4:57pm

IB - There is a significant difference between your privledged position and that of the public workers. We have a choice in choosing your product, and we pay for it. These Public Sector employees do not give us a choice on our contributions, they tell us to pay more taxes. Public Sector employees lag the private sector in performance, but demand equal pay, and higher benefits. Try to pay a parking ticket on Saturday. Can't. Try to pay a parking ticket with visa like buying a cheesburger at McDonalds. Can't. You have to use a third party service and pay stiff fees for the convience. Look for information on their website? Hit & Miss. Consistently poor performance. But these same employees know exactly how much money everybody else makes and they demand more. Now that we have a global economy, do you really think a mailman in China makes $ 50,000 and another $ 40,000 in pensions, health care and other benefits? Think a teacher in India makes $ 100,00 grand and has no co-pay for their Viagra? The recent recession nicked everybody's wallet. While your company is riding high, and you can afford your copays, the truth is that this will probably last about a nother 5-10 years. Then you have to fend for yourself. I have no problem with people making money. I'll pay more for teachers when we have schools of choice. I'll pay more for postage when the delivery it like UPS. Holding us hostage and calling our Governor names is not a great plan for progress and teaching our children.

- CRS9TNR

February 18, 2011 at 7:31pm

IB - There is a significant difference between your privledged position and that of the public workers. We have a choice in choosing your product, and we pay for it. These Public Sector employees do not give us a choice on our contributions, they tell us to pay more taxes. Public Sector employees lag the private sector in performance, but demand equal pay, and higher benefits. Try to pay a parking ticket on Saturday. Can't. Try to pay a parking ticket with visa like buying a cheesburger at McDonalds. Can't. You have to use a third party service and pay stiff fees for the convience. Look for information on their website? Hit & Miss. Consistently poor performance. But these same employees know exactly how much money everybody else makes and they demand more. Now that we have a global economy, do you really think a mailman in China makes $ 50,000 and another $ 40,000 in pensions, health care and other benefits? Think a teacher in India makes $ 100,00 grand and has no co-pay for their Viagra? The recent recession nicked everybody's wallet. While your company is riding high, and you can afford your copays, the truth is that this will probably last about a nother 5-10 years. Then you have to fend for yourself. I have no problem with people making money. I'll pay more for teachers when we have schools of choice. I'll pay more for postage when the delivery it like UPS. Holding us hostage and calling our Governor names is not a great plan for progress and teaching our children.

- CRS9TNR

February 18, 2011 at 7:31pm

I think a 42 cent stamp and having your envelope delivered anywhere in the United States in two -- or in cases of remoter areas, three -- days maximum is a pretty good deal, CRS9, in terms of price for service. I'm puzzled that, or indeed how, you think UPS is going to match that. And talking about remote areas, I haven't seen the recent plans from UPS to open an office in all remote communities in the nation. You have?

- ironyroad

February 18, 2011 at 9:00pm

Jeez, rat, you can multiply. Good on you. But surely you can't be surprised that there are people in the private sector who draw pay on that scale. Granted, last year was an exceptionally good one for me, but even if I were paid half of that, my argument would still hold. CR: As for your choice argument: BS. You don't get a say in how the corporations that earn profits at your expense, when they have the pricing power to do so, use those profits. Sure there are some things you can choose not to consume, but you need food, shelter and clothing, and I'd be damned surprised if you're going to forgo medical care, electricity, transportation - to name but a few - just because the industries behind those goods set their own salaries. You delude yourself into thinking you have a choice in this, but in reality, most of your choices are being made by others. So your real beef is just that teachers are paid by taxes - and still expect to earn a decent living. Like so many conservatives, you've got a hard on about taxes, and can no more see through the mist of your prejudice, than you can fly. Either that, or you just don't think police, fire departments, school teachers, etc are necessary. I'm sure you'd be overjoyed to live in a society without them. The real problem with public employee salaries is not that they enrich people at public expense - most of those folks earn fairly pedestrian middle class livings. It's that the private middle class has been gutted by decades of public policy that distributes wealth disproportionately to the upper few percent of society, leaving a nation of people hanging on to modest middle class lives by their fingernails, if at all. And the right's response to this is to demonize those who are still fighting.

- IowaBeauty

February 18, 2011 at 9:05pm

OMG. Today is the day that will go down in history as the day that rationale revealed itself to be a soft-headed liberal or at least very akin to one. It fantasizes about ending poverty through increased charity. Don't tell rat but poverty is not solely a lack of money.

- liberalref

February 18, 2011 at 9:56pm

IB - I think your blinded by your prejudices. Food, Shelter and Clothing are some of the most competitive industries out there. Food prices rise occaisionally, and there are a few large companies that have brand and pricing power, but I usually by the generic equivalent. Housing pricing power has never been demonstrated by any builder I know. And Clothing went overseas 15-20 years ago. My last suit about 4 years ago cost half of what I paid for my first one 30 years ago. Yes, my beef is with taxes. If you look at your taxes, I beleive that combined, property taxes, income taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes, phone taxes, I imagine you are problably paying north of $ 40,000 a year. I am. It was not like this 30 years ago. I beleive that unions are out of control. MY mother was the secretary of the local Teacher's Union a diviion of the NEA for 20 years. My Grandfather was a USW Steelworker for 30 years. The accomplishments of the unions from 1950 - 1970 were great for them and the United States. What's happened now that they are well paid and well managed is that they need to deliver more. The need more whether it makes sense or not. Yes I am frustrated by the gutting of the middle class. I work in the automotive industry. Our industry has eliminated about 1.5 million jobs over the last 10 years because of competitive pressures. In the 1950's we had a gentlemen's agreememnt, Detroit would support workers in Madison, and they would support Detroit by driving American made cars. Half the folks in Madison drive American (Union Made) cars. Do I really need to support these people? No. IB - What are you driving? Suppose the union made label wasn't too important in that decision was it?

- CRS9TNR

February 19, 2011 at 8:44am

Here's a specific example of how the Conservative notion that "private sector" does it better and for less can be a fallacy when applied to public sector departments. The mayor of a particular American city decided to fire the entire department of planning & development for the city under the assumption that these public sector parasites were living high on the hog with their 40 hour work weeks, health care and pension packages (if you were tough enough to stick around for 30 years). The mayor's argument was that he could outsource the department to a private sector consulting firm to take over the project planning and management of city projects for much less than paying a department of 15 people. The city hired this consulting firm that subsequently mismanaged over 100 projects of varying scales and mishandled funding for city reconstruction projects all while simultaneously over charging the city by tens of millions of dollars in fees. Projects were delayed or mismanaged in such a way that the incoming mayor put a hold on all the city projects for over 6 months to review the havoc that the private consulting firm wrought. The new mayor, after learning of the malfeasance - over charging of fees, mismanaged project funding, and delays of over 4 years in reconstruction projects - then terminated the private sector firm and began rebuilding the planning and building department as a new Capital Projects department to manage and oversee 100 priority projects for the city. The city was able to hire new, younger talent at a fraction of the cost of hiring out to a private firm who's only interest it seems was to milk the city for fees without doing much except passing the proverbial buck of responsbility. My point is that the idea that closing or reducing some public functions and departments under the idea that they're inefficient or that the private sector would provide them for less cost or be more efficient many times is not true and a lot of the time costs the city more especially when that service being provided is one that is needed to facilitate a functioning city but also providing a service that is meant to provide a product that benefits the citizens as a whole. Hired guns don't always produce the best results no matter how much smoke they blow up your ass. I see this at the public and private levels in my industry and I can't say that many project management "consultants" bring much to the table except for a 10% cost in overhead to the client and no sense of liability or obligation to do a good job for the benefit of the end users. Many times they complicate the system to "prove" their necessity. I've never personally worked for a union yet I've had relatives that were public sector employees in non-union departments but were protected by the city's employee services department that acted independently of the city with regards to employee protection. My relatives live in modest brick ranch houses driving used cars and thanking the stars that medicare kicked in to supplement their cut pension benefits. What I find most people object to when they use the term "public sector" or union-employee in a snide or derogatory tone is that there is the impression and assumption that these people live high on the hog. Is there room for abuse? Yes but I don't see the private sector acting any better. They just use tax payer money bailout to excuse the abuse. I think the anti-union objections tend to stem from the feeling of envy and frustration in not having the mechanism to negotiate with your employer as a group of employees for basic employee rights and benefits and guaranteeing a living wage whether you are a public school teacher or a Boeing engineer or airline pilot. That's quite a different story than when you go into the office as a professionally licensed private sector employee and can find yourself underpaid and overworked without recourse or feeling that you have the ability to negotiate knowing the owner can fire "without cause" or they use the "well we don't do that for other employees so we can't do that for you" line and make the environment uncomfortable enough to entice you to quit and move on to the next available job at lower pay and even more demoralizing working conditions or you suck it up, take the 20% pay cut and hope for better days to come along in another few years when you can get pack to the pay grade you had. Today's job environment only exacerbates this for many of American workers out there. Yeah...there is legitimate bitterness out there among the private sector Joes but I find the narcissistic-revenge-driven desire to cut down their fellow working-class Americans at the knees who still barely cling to the tenuous security that unions provide is both counterproductive and highly un-American because all it does is pit the working class against the working class so we don't pay attention to the kleptocrat that have been screwing America for the last 30 years in the name of corporate profit, cheap labor and indentured servitude under the guise of consumer debt load.

- singlspeed

February 19, 2011 at 3:37pm

Mr. Rationale -- Did elections matter when Tea Partiers were protesting the passage of health care reform?

- esmense

February 19, 2011 at 6:06pm

CR: I can assure that the taxes I paid last year were well "north of $40,000." Not sure how far, because I haven't added them all up, but at least double that. But my state and local taxes combined - which are the ones at stake in the Wisconsin fight - including sales tax, were on the order of 7% of my cash income. For that I got state and local police, fire protection, a comparatively good public education system, significant state funding for medicaid for my neighbors who can't afford care, subsidized higher education at 3 state universities and many community colleges. I can certainly afford those taxes - in fact I'd call the whole thing a bargain. That doesn't include gas taxes of course. But they wouldn't add much. I don't use much gas. As for the public employee unions - I dislike some of what they've done in the past decades. I don't, for example, think anyone with an office job should be able to retire at 50 or 55 at 2/3 pay, and I think the state officials who agreed to those conditions were damned fools. I think the way unions protect incompetence in teachers is outrageous. But none of those things justify a wholesale attack on the right of collective bargaining, which is exactly what Walker is up to. Nor do they justify the outrage I keep hearing about public employee compensation. I have a good friend who teaches school nearby. She's taught for 15 years. She doesn't earn even the median personal income for a working Iowan, yet we trust the future of our country to her, and expect near miracles from her. She is no more a parasite than I am the Queen of England. As for your argument about competitiveness, I agree that most commodities you need to live are delivered by highly competitive industries. My point was that you have no choice but to consume their goods, and you have means to influence what they do with the profits. If the executives of Cargill and Perdue - whose products you almost certainly consume - choose to enrich themselves egregiously at the expense of consumers and their workers - which they do, by the way - there is nothing you can do about that, short of stopping eating. Why you would choose to excoriate teachers and police officers, who are at best holding their own in the middle class - and leave folks like that out of your criticism, I simply can't understand. There is an American, union made pickup truck sitting in my driveway, alongside a Japanese made hybrid, BTW. I'll be the first in line to buy an American union made replacement for the hybrid, as soon one is sold here that is equally well made and gets comparable mileage (you can't buy a Volt in Iowa yet, and the Fusion gets only about 70% the MPG of my Toyota), but for the time being I will merely note that the hybrid is also union made. Just happens to be a Japanese labor union, not an American one.

- IowaBeauty

February 19, 2011 at 9:31pm

IB - Thanks for a clear will developed and detailed argument. Perhaps we disagree. I think $ 40,000 in taxes is too high, you think it's appropriate. My argument is that taxation has gotten so far out of control that no body knows how much money is taken in or where it goes. I think more people would agree with me that we pay too much. I share the frustrations you have with public employee unions, and I have a few more beefs. Where we part ways is that I do not see Wisconsin's Republican legislation as 'Whole Scale Attacks on Collective Bargaining.' I see it as a modest step forward in equalizing the playing field between small cities and school districts and the large well funded unions pushing through stealth legislation. Yes Cargill and Purdue exextutives enrich themselves beyond comprehsion. Executive pay in America is oputrageous. I think Athletes and Performers are paid too much. But I don't have a solution for that. I know many fine teachers who are worth more than they are paid. My point is that many more fine people in the private sector face bankrupcies and lose their wages and benefits in awful set backs. Teacher and other public workers never have to worry about a bankruptcy and going backward. Prohibiting any restruicturing because they are good people kind of misses the point of restructuring. I have been to West Uion, IA and Keokuk, IA in my travels for work. Keokuk is wonderfuil in the spring with the Eagles migrating bakc north for the summer. Hard working town. Now they are competing against workers in Beijing who work for $ 1-2 a day. I hope my union friends there can compete against that. I don't think they will get the same attention as Wisconsin when their plant shuts down. Glad to hear you have an America Pick-Up truck. One of America's great products. The union that built your Prius has less legal protections that those propsed in Wisconsin. Japanese Unions are basically in-house unions in name only. I think the fact that the unions in Wisconsin are howling so loudly and calling in the Outsiders is more evidence of how diffiuclt these public employee problems are..

- CRS9TNR

February 20, 2011 at 2:00pm

It's not the absolute dollar amount that matters, it's the percentage of income that matters. 15% of a million dollars is a LOT of money, but somebody making a million dollars a year is going to miss that 15% a LOT less than somebody making $20K is going to miss THEIR 15% (or $3,000).

- AllanL5

February 22, 2011 at 12:41pm

"taxation has gotten out of control" oh, good grief. In the most prosperous heyday of our country, from the end of WWII through the sixties, the top tier tax rates were around 90%. of course, back thenmost people weren't paying 40K in taxes, but that's why we think about the RATE of taxation.

- miceelf

February 22, 2011 at 3:56pm