| America's independent, non-partisan advocate for overburdened taxpayers. | Home | Donate | RSS | Log in |
|
Blog Contributors
Brandon Arnold Dan Barrett Demian Brady Jeff Dircksen Ross Kaminsky David Keating Douglas Kellogg Richard Lipman Kristina Rasmussen Lee Schalk Pete Sepp Nan Swift |
LaborNTU and Foundation Poll Youth Conference for Their Important Issues
Staff from the National Taxpayers Union and NTU's research and education arm, NTU Foundation, participated in the 2013 International Students for Liberty Conference (ISFLC) with one question for attendees: What policies will you fight for? Over the course of the weekend, students and young adults responded by voting for one of six issues that we thought Americans of all ages could at least agree needs addressing. Many attendees were interested in the mission of NTU and NTUF and asked us many, often challenging questions. I recall one conversation about the economic and realistic reasoning behind whether or not to establish a federal Balanced Budget Amendment. Some even took up the cause of lower taxes and less government by becoming members of NTU or saying that they would enjoy the opportunity to intern with us over the summer. If you’re interested, check out our Internship page. We accept interns year-round and there’s a lot of government to roll back. Still others were looking to show their support for NTU and Foundation in other ways:
Blogger and Vlogger Julie Borowski stopped by for a bumper sticker and a picture We asked people to cast a vote for their number one issue that needs reform right now. Our six fishbowls highlighted some of the issues we thought the ISFLC participants would identify with the most. The issues were: a Balanced Budget Amendment, cutting the Pentagon budget, ending the Federal Reserve, less spending, real tax reform, and right to work. One lucky entry would be drawn to be interviewed on NTU's Speaking of Taxpayers podcast. The Results were interesting:
We also found that these six issues were just the tip of the iceberg. On a separate board, students pinned other ideas on where NTU and Foundation can help out taxpayers, including stopping sin taxes, ending corporate welfare, and fighting for bacon (yes, we had some serious bacon fans at ISFLC). All of this proved that young people are just as interested in the important fiscal issues as any other age group. Thanks to everyone who came by our booth and let their voices be heard and congratulations to Annie Setten who will be interviewed next Friday! 0 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
Speaking of Taxpayers, December 7 (AUDIO): Victory in Michigan, & More Subscribe to NTU's podcast "Speaking of Taxpayers" via iTunes HERE!
NTU State Affairs Manager stops in with big news from Michigan and around the country, and as always the "Outrage of the Week"! 0 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
Michigan Legislators Pass Right-to-Work Yesterday, amidst a throng of angry protesters, union thugs, pepper spray, and filibustering Democrats, the Michigan Senate and House each passed Right-to-Work legislation that Governor Snyder has pledged to sign. Because of a procedural rule, the package cannot be finalized for at least five days, but on Tuesday, Michigan appears poised to become the 24th Right-to-Work state in the U.S. -- quite remarkable for the birthplace of the modern labor movement. Conservative leaders and activists have delivered yet another damaging blow to labor unions in Michigan, where an attempt to enshrine collective bargaining in the State's constitution was defeated soundly on November's ballot.
Also worth noting is that Right-to-Work protects our fundamental Constitutional right to freedom of association. Americans in Right-to-Work states maintain their ability to join unions, but they are also given the ability to decline membership without fear of being penalized. For more on this historical victory in the Great Lakes State, head over to the Mackinac Center's blog for a great piece entitled "The Human Side of Right-to-Work Legislation." 0 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
Right-to-work clears Indiana House Last night the Indiana House voted, 55-44, to pass right-to-work legislation. The
Senate passed similar language earlier this week, and a final bill
should be on Governor Daniel's desk next week for signature. So ends a two-year drama of entrenched interests using every possible tactic to fight worker freedoms. NTU sends its congratulations to the 55 members who faced intense pressure on the bill and stuck to their free market principles. Ultimately, this vote was about helping the workers of Indiana and making the state a better place to do business. Last year, while the nation focused on the drama in Wisconsin, Indiana began its right-to-work fight. Due to procedures that mandates a 2/3 quorum present for all votes House Democrats were able delay consideration of the law by absconding to Illinois for weeks at a time. Republicans, who held a 60 to 40 member majority, eventually relented and pull the legislation from consideration. However, this year, new rules went into effect fining legislators $1,000 a day for consecutive missed days of work. Whether the threat of personal financial loss played a part or not, House Democrats chose not to flee the state again this year allowing for the vote to occur. Political gamesmanship aside the argument for right-to-work laws is solid. Allowing for greater worker freedoms is sound economic policy. As NTU stated in a letter earlier this month to the Indiana legislature; According to the American Legislative Exchange Council’s Rich States, Poor States, all 22 Right-to-Work states outpaced Indiana’s 30 percent growth in gross state product from 1999-2009. In our highly mobile world, capital and jobs are flowing to those states with pro-growth environments, one key feature of which is respecting and valuing the rights of workers to accept employment without being forced to pay union dues. The economic benefits of enhanced worker freedoms are quite clear. Right-to-Work states not only see higher levels of economic growth, but more workers have jobs, and those jobs tend to pay better when compared to forced-unionization states. Statistics from the National Institute of Labor Relations Research, covering 2000-2010, show that Right-to-Work states have seen a 0.3 percent increase in non-farm private sector payrolls compared to a 5.5 percent decrease elsewhere. Employees in those Right-to-Work states have seen compensation rise by 11.3 percent over that same period versus 0.7 percent in forced-unionization states. More importantly, right-to-work is about protecting basic individual rights. Workers should not see their paychecks held ransom by a third party which they do not choose to join. The American principle of freedom of association protects both the right of a worker to join a union if they so choose, as well as the right to decline membership and financial support for a union if they do not. Hopefully, by this time next week, Indiana will be the first right-to-work state since Oklahoma in 2001 and the 23rd overall. As Speaker Bosma stated in his floor remarks, "This announces, especially in the Rust Belt, we are open for business here."
Obama's Pro-Union Bent Stands in the Way of Economic Growth This recession has been long on horror stories. From persistent unemployment to crisis-level deficits, there have been very few things to provide us with any sense of optimism, much less cheer about. But Boeing has been the rare glimmer of hope. In the darkest days of the recession they made a decision to invest $1 billion in a new factory in South Carolina. It was a project that employed thousands in the construction phase and now promises to employ thousands more as workers are being trained to build planes in the brand new 1.2 million square foot plant. Unfortunately, what should have been an American success story, a reminder of the promise of America’s unrivaled free-markets, has instead become yet another depressing episode of government intervention. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which has taken a decidedly pro-union turn under the Obama Administration, filed a complaint in late April over its decision to open the plant in South Carolina rather than Washington State where it has operated a production facility for the last 20 years. At issue is whether Boeing acted in a “retaliatory” manner in deciding to expand production in South Carolina, which is a right to work state, versus union-friendly Washington. Admittedly, Boeing has had significant trouble in their dealings with unionized workers. In the past 20 years, Boeing union workers have gone on strike four times, the longest being 69 days. Analysts estimated that the most recent strike in 2008 costs the company as much as $120 million per day. What the NLRB is labeling “retaliation” most would consider sound business judgment. As Boeing CEO Jim McNerney explained in an op-ed in today’s Wall Street Journal, Our decision to expand in South Carolina resulted from an objective analysis of the same factors we use in every site selection. We considered locations in several states but narrowed the choice to either North Charleston (where sections of the 787 are built already) or Everett, Wash., which won the initial 787 assembly line in 2003. Our union contracts expressly permit us to locate new work at our discretion. However, we viewed Everett as an attractive option and engaged voluntarily in talks with union officials to see if we could make the business case work. Among the considerations we sought were a long-term "no-strike clause" that would ensure production stability for our customers, and a wage and benefit growth trajectory that would help in our cost battle against Airbus and other state-sponsored competitors. The move did nothing to eliminate or even reduce production in Washington’s Puget Sound area. In fact, Boeing continues to add jobs in Washington. The New York Times reported that Boeing has increased its unionized employment by 2,000 workers since its decision to expand to South Carolina. Furthermore, within the past year Boeing has added another manufacturing facility in Illinois, a pro-union state. The NLRB’s complaint is nothing more than a naked assault on America’s free market heritage. Such unprecedented legal action attempts to insert the pro-union desires of the Obama Administration for the economic and financial sense of the company when making business decisions. The end result of such blatant overreaching will be to further push economic growth overseas. Our corporations are already laboring under the second highest corporate tax rate in the world and an antiquated “worldwide” tax system that double-taxes their repatriated earnings. Is it wise to now intimidate them into only locating in union-friendly states which may demand uncompetitive wages or benefits? As Senate Republicans stated in their letter to President Obama, “America will not win the future if Washington penalizes workers in states that have discovered winning economic strategies.” Sadly, it appears Obama’s vision for winning the future has little to do with fostering economic growth, and a lot to do with placating his union friends. 1 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
A win for taxpayers in Wisconsin After weeks of protest and political theatrics, Wisconsin's legislative leaders finally overcame obstructionists in the General Assembly to pass a major overhaul of the state's collective bargaining laws for state workers that has been championed by Governor Scott Walker. The Governor has indicated he will sign the bill at the first opportunity. This is a major win for taxpayers in Wisconsin.
Thanks to the steadfast determination of Governor Walker and like-minded legislators to see this reform through, Wisconsin's government, especially at the local level, will have the tools necessary to tacke the state's $137 million deficit this year and the $3 billion deficit in the next state budget. Additionally, officials will be able to tackle the growing costs of public employees before they eat up the state's finances. No longer will government and taxpayers be beholden to union demands to annually increase spending for their priorities. Instead, the government will be able to determine what it really needs to spend money on and what it can do without. Some say that this action by Walker is an outright attack on public workers and threatens to turn Wisconsin into a third world country. But as my friend Josh Barro at the Manhattan Institute points out, the Wisconsin reform is neither new or breathtaking: "Only 26 states have laws that grant collective-bargaining privileges to substantially all public employees. Twelve have laws that give collective bargaining to some workers, and twelve have no statewide collective-bargaining law at all, though some municipalities may grant bargaining rights in those states." "And as I have been pointing out until I get blue in the face, most federal civilian workers do engage in collective bargaining, but wages and benefits are excluded from that bargaining, rendering it very limited. Far from seeking to strengthen the hand of federal-employee unions, Barack Obama has sought to impose a two-year wage freeze on federal workers through the budget process. If the federal government had a bargaining law like the one Wisconsin has today, he would be unable to do that." Although some will continue to spin this reform for their own political purposes, taxpayers in Wisconsin can breath a little easier with the knowledge that their government is finally waking up to the need to break through the status quo and willing to make the reforms necessary to save the state from fiscal collapse under high and growing costs. 4 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
The Buckeye Way While we watch the continuing showdown in Wisconsin between Governor Scott Walker and the state’s public sector unions, the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board says (subscription required) we should also pay attention to what’s happening in Ohio and the important lessons it has to teach those who believe in reforming government.
Showdown in Wisconsin
Picture this: protestors storming the capitol. State workers declaring that their pay and benefits are sacrosanct. University students banging drums and wearing red shirts. Schools shut down. Soldiers on standby ready to assume control of vital government services. Am I talking about Paris, France? Or Athens, Greece? Nope, I just described the scene right now in good ole Madison, Wisconsin.
The brouhaha in Wisconsin is in response to Governor Scott Walker’s proposal to end the ability of most government employees to collectively bargain for benefits such as health care and pensions. Although workers could still bargain for wages, increases would be capped at the CPI or another rate through a voter referendum. Walker also wants to require state workers to contribute 5.8% of their salary towards pensions and pay 12.6% of their health insurance premiums. By contrast, private workers contribute 7.5% towards retirement and pay 20% of health insurance premiums, on average.
Walker says he is doing this because he is facing a budget crisis. Wisconsin will run a budget deficit of $137 million this year and a $3.6 billion deficit in the next budget. The governor, a former chief executive of Milwaukee County, estimates that if he does not have the ability to demand more concessions from public sector unions, he will be forced to layoff 5,500 employees or roll back major government programs, like Medicaid.
The public sector unions and their allies have responded strongly in opposition to the proposal. Thousands have turned out to the state capitol, filling the hallways, blocking access to the General Assembly’s chambers, and banging on windows. Public schools in Madison actually closed on Thursday because 40% of the teachers called in “sick.”
But the twists and turns continue. Although the Senate scheduled a vote on the Governor’s proposal for Thursday, the vote did not happen; the entire Democrat caucus was nowhere to be found. Republicans control the General Assembly and reportedly have the votes to pass the Governor’s proposal, but they are one vote short of a quorum to conduct business. With the Democrats gone, there are not enough Senators in the chamber to hold a vote. According to some reports, the caucus decamped to a Best Western hotel in Rockford, Illinois, which is outside the jurisdiction of the Wisconsin State Patrol. More rallies, for and against the governor’s proposal, are planned for the weekend. It’s anyone’s guess as to what happens next.
The unions are targeting this reform because collective bargaining is the source of their power. By reforming collective bargaining, governors and legislators would have a stronger hand in contract negotiations to demand concessions to balance budgets and save taxpayers money. Some argue that reforming collective bargaining and labor laws could be a more realistic alternative to dealing with health care and pension costs than state bankruptcy. The stakes are high for both sides. Whatever happens in Wisconsin over the next several days will have ramifications for the rest of the nation.
This entry also appears at State Budget Solutions. 3 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
Ohio and Wisconsin move to limit collective bargaining Ohio and Wisconsin, two heavily unionized states awash in red ink, are about to make some major changes to the laws that govern public employees. The legislatures in both states are considing measures that would significantly change collective bargaining rights for state workers in an effort to find budget savings. Public employee unions have successfully used collective bargaining to obtain higher wages, guarantee jobs, and more generous benefits, including for healthcare and pensions, for their members. However, some feel that collective bargaining has been abused, extracts high costs on the state and taxpayers, and is increasingly irrelevant given other laws that govern the workplace. In Ohio, for example, a report by the Buckeye Institute shows that state employees earn more than private sector employees in 85 of the state's 88 counties. In fact, public employees unions have used collective bargaining to guarantee wage increases for government workers even as the private sector lost jobs. Since 2000, Ohio has lost 612,700 private sector jobs, but the state lost a net of only 1,600 government jobs. Today and Thursday, the Ohio Senate is hearing testimony on Senate Bill 5, authored by Senator Jones, which would eliminate collective bargaining for state workers in Ohio. In Wisconsin, Governor Scott Walker is proposing in his budget to limit collective bargaining for state workers (except police and firefighters) to the issue of wages. Additionally, Walker is proposing to require “government workers to contribute 5.8 percent of their pay to their pensions, much more than now; and requiring state employees to pay at least 12.6 percent of health care premiums (most pay about 6 percent now).” Walker says he is doing this because the state is broke and it’s time to pay up. This year, Wisconsin faces a budget gap of $137 million and a deficit worth several billion dollars over the next few years. If Walker can’t save money through reducing the cost of government employees, he fears he may have to lay off about 6,000 state workers or eliminate Medicaid altogether. With states like Ohio and Wisconsin facing serious fiscal challenges in the months ahead, it doesn't make much sense to continue to keep the hands of governors and legislatures tied when they negotiate with government workers. Failing to change collective bargaining laws could leave the states forced to make extremely painful choices that no one wants to contemplate. 5 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
Reflections on CPAC Today is the third and final day of the 2011 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), the largest annual gathering of conservatives and libertarians in the nation. After three days of staffing a well-visited booth, meeting with dedicated activists, and listening to dynamic speakers, I’m looking forward to some rest and relaxation, but also to what the future holds for the conservative movement. This year’s CPAC had the highest number of attendees (11,000) in the history of the conference. CPAC speakers ranged from Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the House Budget Committee Chair, to Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana, a potential presidential candidate who gave, in my view, an outstanding keynote address, which you can read here. Also, CPAC 2011 featured a number of new participating organizations that focus on both activism and policy related to social, economic, and political issues at the federal, state, and local levels. While attending CPAC, I had the opportunity to participate in a number of discussions about important tax and fiscal policy issues facing the United States. NTUF hosted a discussion about entitlement reform that featured experts such as Rep. Devin Nunes, Maya MacGuineas, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Steven Moore, and Dan Mitchell. The bottom line of their presentation was that we need to start tackling the problem of runaway entitlement spending before it’s too late. But budget reform should not be restricted to social programs. CPAC also featured a panel on how the nation can reduce defense spending to a more manageable level without jeopardizing readiness. As a former military aide to a fiscally conservative Member of Congress, I was pleased to hear all of the views presented and the many ideas for maintaining an affordable defense posture. The passion the attendees displayed at the panels, and in conversations with me at the NTU table, was striking. It bodes well for conservatives if these activists carry their views home and remain outspoken and active in the political process. For the last several weeks, there has been a lot of talk in the media about differences in the conservative movement over certain policies and suggestions that these differences spell certain doom the conservative movement. After three days of observing conservatives of all stripes from across the country, I can unequivocally say that reports of destructive differences among conservatives are greatly exaggerated. In fact, I would argue that the conservative movement has never been stronger and ready to bring real solutions to the many serious problems facing the nation. 3 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
