Of course Prop. 32 would slam unions

Aug. 9, 2012

By John Seiler

Politics has balance. When one party gets too strong, other parties move to take it down. That’s as true of totalitarian countries, where the factions are unseen, as it is in democracies, where the factions usually operate in public.

In California, the government-employee unions’ power has waxed higher than that of any other faction the past 20 years. It has to go do down. Already, the number of public employees has declined because budgets have had to be cut during the Great Recession. Tax increases, such as Gov. Jerry Brown’s $8.5 billion in Proposition 30, actually would make matters worse by sticking a knife further into the private sector that pays for everything.

So it was inevitable that another attempt to restrain overweening union power would come forth. This time it’s Proposition 32 on the November ballot. Also inevitable was this:

“Unions representing teachers, firefighters and state workers are airing statewide radio ads this week that cast the initiative as ‘a deceptive proposition stuffed with special exemptions for the oil companies, Wall Street and those secret campaign super PACs who want to rig the system while the middle class pays the price.’”

Prop. 32 would restrict contributions from union members and corporate employees. But it would do nothing to stop independent PACs set up by rich people, a right protected by the notorious Citizens United Supreme Court decision.

But who else is supposed to oppose the unions? As things now stand, the unions easily can pluck massive dues from the tax-paid salaries of union employees, then use the money to fund political campaigns that rig the system in favor of the unions. In addition to high salaries, this system has produced the massive pension spiking of the last decade that is bankrupting cities and put the state itself in hock $500 billion.

The unions have gone on a long spending spree with the taxpayers’ credit card, but now the plastic is maxed out and the taxpayers don’t want to refill it, and indeed don’t even have the money to refill it.

What goes around comes around, comrades.

 

 

No comments

Write a comment
  1. Dyspeptic
    Dyspeptic 9 August, 2012, 12:16

    I have a very simple analytic technique for determining Yea or Nea on propositions. If labor cartels, Gaia worshippers, illegal alien advocates or ambulance chasers are against it, I’m for it, and if they are for it, I’m against it. So far it has been completely reliable. Yes on Prop. 32, No on Prop 30. Simple as can be.

    Reply this comment
  2. jimmydeeoc
    jimmydeeoc 9 August, 2012, 13:08

    LOL dyspeptic……

    I thought similar thoughts this a.m. when I heard a “No On 32” ad on KFI……

    I couldn’t for the life of me tell you what the message was…..but my ears perked up when at the end, the list of funders and supporters was read….

    …..Police, Fire, CTA, etc. That’s all I needed to hear. If they’re agin’ it – I’m for it.

    Certainly keeps it simple.

    It’s almost to the point to where if heard public union members overwhelmingly put mustard on their hot dogs……I’d start reachin’ for the ketchup bottle.

    Reply this comment
  3. NTHEOC
    NTHEOC 9 August, 2012, 14:09

    California voters have twice before, in 1998 and 2005, rejected right-wing attempts to destroy labor’s political voice. Unable to win by honest means, conservative groups decided to come up with something more deceptive and more dangerous this time around.backers of Prop 32 include Orange County anti-union activists and right-wing billionaires (often one and the same) and the usual suspects among Republican activists. But come November California voters should see through the deception behind the initiative. It is a highly deceptive measure that would greatly enhance the political influence of billionaires, Super PACs, and conservative business interests, and undermine the ability of working Californians both in the private sector and public!!!

    Reply this comment
  4. psa188
    psa188 9 August, 2012, 16:02

    I’m voting “yes” on 32 and “no” on 30 and our local county sales tax increase.

    But I’m afraid that there are not enough voters out there concerned about this issue to get past the massive union disinformation campaign that exemplified by NTHEOC. I was hoping this would pass the last time, but Arnold was half-assed about it.

    Reply this comment
  5. PJ
    PJ 9 August, 2012, 20:21

    “Ban automatic deductions by corporations, unions, and government of employees’ wages to be used for politics.”

    This is the only provision that makes sense. Unions launder their money through other unions and PACs nationwide. CA politicians will see the benefit directly or indirectly, and other Dems across the country will get the money instead.

    Reply this comment
  6. Luis Alvarado
    Luis Alvarado 9 August, 2012, 21:13

    So let me get this straight, the article is saying yes the Unions are out of control and killing our state’s economy. Prop 32 would clip their wings (wich is good) but who is clipping the Super PAC’s? Well, first things first, the Super PAC’s are on both sides, and they do not get on the floor of the Capitol and threat legislators by telling them that if they do not vote their way they will take them out….like the union bosses do.

    Reply this comment
  7. NTHEOC
    NTHEOC 9 August, 2012, 21:46

    luis alvarado says,
    Well, first things first, the Super PAC’s are on both sides, and they do not get on the floor of the Capitol and threat legislators by telling them that if they do not vote their way they will take them out….like the union bosses do.
    ========
    What a stupid comment!!!

    Reply this comment
  8. Rex The Wonder Dog!
    Rex The Wonder Dog! 10 August, 2012, 00:22

    As things now stand, the unions easily can pluck massive dues from the tax-paid salaries of union employees, then use the money to fund political campaigns that rig the system in favor of the unions

    This is just a form of money laundering for the legislature. Fraud.

    Reply this comment
  9. Rex The Wonder Dog!
    Rex The Wonder Dog! 10 August, 2012, 00:24

    California voters have twice before, in 1998 and 2005, rejected right-wing attempts to destroy labor’s political voice.

    Sorry ntheoc, but public uniosn are not “labor”, they are a small trough feeder segment.

    Reply this comment
  10. Rex The Wonder Dog!
    Rex The Wonder Dog! 10 August, 2012, 00:37

    I’m voting “yes” on 32 and “no” on 30 and our local county sales tax increase.
    But I’m afraid that there are not enough voters out there concerned about this issue to get past the massive union disinformation campaign that exemplified by NTHEOC.

    I don’t know if Prop 32 will pass, but Prop 30-the pension sales tax-is DOA. I predict 60% against, 35% for. Landslide loss coming for Clown 😉

    Reply this comment
  11. Rob Griffith
    Rob Griffith 10 August, 2012, 05:05

    The 1978 Dills Act, signed into law by our once and current Governor Brown, laid a pipeline from the state treasury to the union halls. Prop 32 leaves the pipeline in place, but lets the workers, not the union bosses, control the valve. Power to the people!

    Reply this comment
  12. Rex The Wonder Dog!
    Rex The Wonder Dog! 12 August, 2012, 02:21

    The Dills Act allowed local munis to unionize and collective bargain, but Reagan did the same for State employees a decade earlier under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act…..

    Reply this comment
  13. Donkey
    Donkey 12 August, 2012, 05:55

    Rex, you are correct, Reagan did sign the “Meyers-Milias-Brown Act,” But like most humans, I believe he didn’t see the end result of the bloodsucking RAGWUS feeders, and if in power now, he would put and end to this abomination! 🙂

    Reply this comment
  14. Tick
    Tick 14 August, 2012, 07:15

    You can’t stop something if it isn’t being done. Corporations don’t use payroll deductions for political purposes they take money from profits– away from stockholders. This has no effect on corporate special interest, Corporate Super PACs, Corporate CEOs or Billionaire businesses contributing unlimited amounts to campaigns. These are the same Corporations that outsource our jobs. Corporate Special interests outspend unions 15-1.
    What’s at stake? overtime pay, work schedules, meal breaks, nurse patient ratios, work place health and safety laws, vacation days, sick leave to name a few. Take a peek at how these same businesses treat their employees in Saipan. In the Philippines $68 US dollars a month for 50 hrs per week and no worker benefits that we take for granted. Screw 32.

    Reply this comment
  15. SkippingDog
    SkippingDog 14 August, 2012, 20:10

    It’s nice to see that the opponents of Prop 32 already have over $20 million to fight it, while the Prop 32 supporters don’t even have $4 million yet. A look at the promoters of Prop 32 also demonstrates that it’s the same old anti-union Republican business people and groups who have been whining about nearly every facet of government since at least the days of the New Deal.

    Reply this comment
  16. YesOn32
    YesOn32 10 September, 2012, 09:48

    Unions in California are NOT democratic organizations because California is NOT a right-to-work state, meaning if you want to work for an organization that is unionized, you MUST join the union in order to be employed there and pay the union dues that the union may use to support candidates you do not want elected. As Thomas Jefferson famously said, which I believe still rings true today, “To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical.” #YesOn32!

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Your e-mail address will not be published.
Required fields are marked*



Related Articles

LAUSD board confirms its union-occupied status

Dec. 18, 2012 By Chris Reed When I heard that the Los Angeles Unified school board had passed a resolution

A dramatic illustration of teacher unions’ grip on Sacramento

The Obama administration has had enough of the California Teachers Association and the California Federation of Teachers and how they

Pension deniers attempt to shame reform advocates

May 16, 2012 By Brian Calle If you have not read or heard anything about California’s unfunded public employee pension