WISCONSIN AND BEYOND

By H. N. BURDETT

State governments are reeling from recession-driven revenue declines, but the impetus for protesting thousands to descend upon Madison, Wisconsin, and other U.S. capitals owes at least as much to a January 2010 Supreme Court decision.

In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Court ruled that the government may not restrict political spending by corporations. Such limitations would be a denial of freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, according to the majority in that 5-4 decsion.

While the Citizens United ruling does not directly address labor unions, the implication seems clear enough that it applies to them as well. Labor unions and corporations have been among the more productive cash cows of the Democratic and Republican parties respectively.

GOP strategists see the crippling state deficits during the recession as an opportunity to severely weaken if not outright eliminate, the influence of unions during election campaigns, thereby tipping the scales in favor of corporation-backed Republican candidates.

The most convenient target for attacking collective bargaining -- anathema to big business and, therefore, to the GOP -- is organized labor in the public sector. It is hardly a coincidence that the service employees and teachers unions are among the largest and arguably most powerful in the country.

Brookings Institute senior fellow E. J. Dionne, Jr. recently wrote in The Washington Post that he was told by an unnamed pro-union consultant: "The game goes like this. Destroy private-sector unions, reduce private-sector health and retirement benefits, then say, 'Hey, how come these public employees get such [relatively] good benefits? That's not fair.'"

Dionne added that the anonymous consultant took exception to those claiming private-sector unions are all right but oppose public-sector unions: "Private-sector unions are only 'okay' once they are completely emasculated."

Under Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's agenda, it would not be sufficient to merely reduce state employees' benefits to help lower the state's $3.6 billion deficit. His plan would eviscerate most of their collective bargaining rights. Benefits and working conditions would be removed from the bargaining table. Only basic pay would be negotiable. But even that would have to be kept in line with inflation.

With public-sector unions having roles in electing state legislators who determine their wages, they have undue political influence, according to the GOP mantra.

Meanwhile, a progressive think tank, Policy Matters Ohio, challenges the validity of the contention that public-sector unions are responsible for a significant amount of state government deficits. For example, last year the nine states that prohibit such unions had average shortfalls of 25 percent, compared to 24 percent in the 14 states that allow them.

New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg reminded us in a New York Times op-ed article that taxpayers foot the bill for pensions, benefits and job security for public employees "that almost no one in the private sector enjoys." But Bloomberg contended that these costs, now growing at rates outpacing inflation, are simply unaffordable.

"Yes, public sector workers need a secure retirement," the mayor conceded. "And, yes, taxpayers need top-quality police officers, teachers and firefighters. It's the job of government to balance those competing needs. But for a variety of reasons, the scale has been increasingly tipping away from taxpayers."

Bloomberg noted that budget deficits are being used by several states to justify efforts to scale back "not only labor costs, but labor rights." He stressed, however, that unions "play a vital role in protecting against abuses in the workplace, and in my experience they are integral to training, deploying and managing a professional work force."

"We should no more try to take away the right of individuals to collectively bargain than we should try to take away the right to the secret ballot," the mayor argued.

He further observed that in Wisconsin, "proposals to rein in spending on labor contracts have included proposals to strip unions of their right to collectively bargain for pensions and health care benefits.

"Yet the problem is not unions expressing those rights: it is governments failing to adapt to the times and act in a fiscally responsible manner. . .Benefits agreed to
35 years ago that now are unaffordable should be reduced. Similarly work rules that made sense 70 years ago but are now antiquated should be changed."

Bloomberg concluded: "The job of labor leaders is to get the best deal for their members. The job of elected officials is to get the best deal for all citizens.

"Rather than declare war on unions, we should demand a new deal with them -- one that reflects today's econonmic realities and workplace conditions, not those of a century ago. If we fail to do that, the fault is not in our unions, or in our stars, but in ourselves."

As the situation now stands, the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling has overturned decades of limitations on corporate spending to influence elections. Parlaying this with stripping unions of much of their hard-fought rights would gift wrap for big business a decided advantage in determining election outcomes.

In the current contentious climate, it would be well to remember that it is to organized labor that working men and women owe virtually every major right they have achieved from the minimum wage and the 40-hour week to workplace safety and laws restricting child labor.

Mayor Bloomberg is on target when he insists that collective bargaining must remain as sacroscanct as the secret ballot. Governor Walker and other state governors attempting to dilute or remove this right are indeed treading on their own constituents.