What can we say about collective bargaining that hasn’t already been said about terrorism? Though the two lie on different planes of existence, one might consider the costs of retaining useless entities such as unions an attack on the average American taxpayer and their wallets. Though, the fight itself has been an entertaining one, with thousands of union workers assaulting Tea Party activists with such colorful terms as “d*ck-sucking corporate butt-lickers”. I must admit, I find it ironic that the unions, which are made up of the working class folks ( I.e., the less-than-wealthy American citizen), have resorted to name calling as a means to achieve their common goal of allowing union thugs to steal money from their paychecks. And the left is backing them wholeheartedly.
But let’s be clear about some things. This attempt by the left to pull the wool over the union workers eyes doesn’t impress me. Clearly, Democrats understand what happens to their party should Scott Walker’s sweeping legislation succeed. And while the left sees this as an opportunity to promote their own big government causes, the right and the Tea Party understand that the negatives outweigh the positives. And Obama continues hiding in the oval office, shielded by dozens of staffers who don’t want him to follow through on an important campaign promise.
Remember? Obama stated during his presidential run that if a situation like this ever occurred, and the GOP was attempting to take away collective bargaining, that as president he “would put on a pair of comfortable running shoes and walk the picket lines”. Still, he remains mostly silent on this issue, except to say that Walker is planning an “assault on unions”. Of course! Because if an amendment prohibiting collective bargaining had not passed in Indiana, for example, government employees would not have been allowed to take home an extra thousand dollars that no longer went to union dues, good employees wouldn’t have received raises, and bad employees would not have been curbed…things that high salaried democrats would have been comfortable with.
To be frank, government employees should never be allowed to unionize.
There was a time, though, when collective bargaining was always considered a poor choice. Indeed, FDR himself, a president adored like a superhero by liberal activists, thought that if such a thing ever entered the public servant’s life, that they would lose their raison d’etre. He went as far as to say that collective bargaining “cannot be transplanted into the public service”. Those emboldened by unions are people who don’t understand them. And this is because union leaders are leaders in misleading. Let’s think about the things they don’t want you to be aware of:
1) Union dues are often used to threaten and bully politicians.
2) As unions grow, so do union fees and taxes, taking more from your paycheck.
3) Unions take more money from teachers, which take more education from your children.
Democrats have had it good thus far. They have found that it is easy to buy votes from the working class when you deliver high salaries, amazing benefits, and then stick everyone else with the bill. And now, the possible end of CBA has the left sweating. More significant to them is the hit Obama 2012 re-election campaign will take. If he continues to be a cheerleader for the unions, he will receive very little sympathy from voters who have been greatly affected over the last few years by a waning economy.
If bureaucrats hope to continue living a cushy lifestyle off the backs of middle-class Americans, it may be time for Obama to grab those running shoes.