Jeff Darcy/The Plain Dealer
Rachel tweeted a video last night that I'd emailed earlier to our staff. It was Cleveland comic Mike Polk, Jr.'s angry and hilarious YouTubed reaction to the latest Browns loss, in which he yells at an empty Cleveland stadium, "You are a factory of sadness!" (I caution you about one expletive he utters -- which, given the Browns' play of late, is understandable.)
I'd shared a laugh about it before the show with my fellow Clevelander (and our guest last night), Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Connie Schultz. In our conversation, she related two aspects of it to the ongoing struggle over union rights back home: first, only we can talk that way about our own. Criticism like Mike Polk's wouldn't be welcome from an outsider. Secondly, we Ohioans (Clevelanders, especially) are bred to hold grudges. That's just sports, you may say. But Ohioans have plenty of political frustration with its Steelers-fan-in-chief, Ohio governor John Kasich, and that could be also bad news for national Republicans.
Issue 2, the referendum on Governor Kasich's union-stripping Senate Bill 5, is being voted on today. A "yes" vote means you want his bill to become law; "no" means just the opposite. Last night, Ms. Schultz illustrated how impassioned Ohioans have become to stop Senate Bill 5, and why this battle may create a grudge that voters not only take to the polls today, but a year from now:
John Kasich has been the best community organizer in the state for Democrats, but it`s not just Democrats who have decided they're voting no. I mean, we've seen so many Republicans come out against this. We're seeing a lot of independent voters. In my own neighborhood, yards that have McCain signs in 2008 have vote no on Issue 2 signs.
The sister of an Ohio nurse and an Ohio schoolteacher, she elaborated on why this has hit so close to home for so many in the Buckeye State:
Everybody knows a schoolteacher or a police officer or a firefighter or a nurse...This is what Kasich and the Republicans did not anticipate is when you go after public workers, you`re going after family members of tens of thousands of Ohioans...And when you go after the rights of workers to collectively bargain for wages, benefits and job conditions, you are suddenly not just going after unions. You're going after the promise of America. And it was so interesting to watch people who thought they didn`t care at all about unions suddenly realize they care very deeply about the rights that unions brought to workers in this country. This has been an incredible groundswell movement of support for unions and what unions stand for.
Mike Polk said in his now-viral video, "I know there are more important things than football, but you are supposed to be our pleasant distraction from those things. All we do is pay you money to put us in a bad mood every week." And that's just football! What happens when those "important things" are threatened, and Ohioans in a really bad mood about that, and have recourse to do something about it? We'll find out today.
The full segment is embedded after the jump.
Syndicated columnist Connie Schultz talks with Rachel Maddow about the strength of the support for repealing Ohio's union-stripping bill, as reflected in the spike in volunteerism and individual activism.
More: Mother Jones on the Ohio elections -- both on Issue 2 and the lesser-known Issue 3, a Tea Party-driven referendum seeking to keep President Obama's health reform from taking effect in the state.
Leave a Comment:
I LOVED last night's interview with Connie Schultz. She is as impressive as her hubby.
I am a retired federal worker.
Issue 2 in Ohio is going to make state workers just like federal workers.
So the Republican game plan is to make all government employees in Ohio just like federal workers, and the excuse is that this will save money?
Even John Glen is against this.
This would bomb schools back into the stone age.
Fire fighters and police could be fired for complaining about safety equipment and infrastructure like police radio and fire engines.
I'll bet that's not listed in the voter disclosure.
You're missing the real goals Republicans have here. You make the work environment unsafe and don't provide enough tools to get the job done. Then, you rail against the poor quality of the service being produced by overworked public employees who don't have the equipment and materials to do the job well. Finally, to solve the "quality problem," you privatize the function--education, police work, welfare services, etc.--and allow corporations access to the revenue streams.
The private firms access tax funds, eliminate workers, reduce budgets, cut services, while siphoning off lots of profit. Republicans declare that quality has improved and all problems have been solved through the "magic of privatization."
This sounds remarkably like the last decade or so of politics relating to Texas Public Schools. Reread mpguy's first paragraph and picture private vs. public schools.
True.
The only possible way that eliminating public service employee unions would save money is if the game plan is to fire police, teachers, and fire fighters that complain about unsafe working conditions, lack of text books, and substandard pay.
The problem with public service unions is that they often gain an enormous amount of power to the detriment of the rest of the public. As a result, pensions, health benefits, work rules and even salary is often far more advantageous for public workers than those received in the non-public sector. I certainly do not believe that working people should be exploited but there has to be some natural balance in the public sector that does not exist now.
The problem with public service unions is that they often gain an enormous amount of power to the detriment of the rest of the public
can you show me a public Union gaining this enormous amount of power?
State and federal pay is often lower than that of their private sector counter parts when there is a private sector to be said counter part. This is especially true when you consider that most jobs- like that of firefighters and police- require that public employees typically work more hours than private employees (although this does vary by job). To compensate for the lower wage the public employee is being paid they are given above-par access to things like pension plans. This is called incentive.
It works in the private sector too (which I love how people conveniently forget as much): when you want to attract top talent you have to either a) pay that talent what it wants to be paid or b) provide benefits that out-match the benefits of competitors. The public sector is no different from the private sector in this regards. If we want top talent being attracted towards our police departments, fire departments, and other public service departments then we have to give those employees some incentive to go to the public sector. Someone who looks at a 35,000$/yr salary and compares that to what they could be getting in the private sector (let's say 40k/yr) is going to say "ya know you gotta offer me something better or I'm not going to work for you."
As for health care benefits usually speaking public sector employees at both the federal and state level are actually insured via private sector insurers like Blue Cross/Blue Shield. This means the healthcare private sector employees have access to is, at least in the hypothetical, the exact same as public sector employees. The only difference is the public sector guarantees as much to it's employees and the private does not. If the private sector is upset about this latter element then the private sector needs to change it's tune: it is not up to the public employees to compensate for what the private sector sucks at doing (I.E. taking care of it's employees).
Additionally I should point out one more fundamental flaw w/ the whole "because public workers have it better than private workers they are spoiled!" argument- a) no one is forcing you to work for the private sector so if you feel it's so much better go work for the public sector wherever you can get hired and b) unions are the very same entities that could be helping you to gain those better wages and benefits if people would participate in them. Additionally such a complaint doesn't consider private sector wages in context.
If you look at public sector wages they have stayed relatively consistent over the last 30 years w/ inflation. Private sector wages- however- have lowered. Which means that in complaining about public sector employees getting paid too much you are excusing the fact that the private sector is actually paying too little. It's like saying that because someone else works for 9$ an hour everyone must work for 9$ an hour. Why that salary is the way it is doesn't ever enter into the equation.
Ira, if public employment is so lucrative, why don't so many of those complaining try to enter public service during times when the economy is doing well? Yes, in bad times, those working for the government do better relative to private sector workers than usual. In normal economic times, this kind of talk dies down because private sector workers traditionally have done better. Funny, during the '90s, I don't remember people
This is the typical Republican strategy of identifying some enemy that they can expoloit for their own gain--and to distract people from what they're really up to. The bad economic situation that they created provides them with another opportunity for a two-fer: beat up on government and demonize a group that "isn't like the rest of 'us'."
Power takes many forms. The power of municipal unions is being able to get out the vote, and, not to be too cynical, force politicians to over promise on wages and benefits. Just look across the country at state and local governments. Many are struggling with huge budget deficits, and, in many cases, deficits caused by unsustainable benefit programs Politicians resort to tricks to keep wages down by giving lush benefits whose costs don't appear until far into the future.
Public workers should be paid a fair wage and benefits. But those should be constrained by the amount of available taxes and reality based earning forecasts for pension fund growth and health care costs.
@Tom in the hypothetical I agree w/ you, but this also ignores the Reaganesque mantra of cutting taxes at every level. Cutting public sector employees benefits or pay simply because the state wants to reduce taxes on the upper class is not a sustainable taxation policy, nor is it fair. When people go to work for the public sector they are promised those wages and benefits and they continue their employment in exchange for those wages and benefits. The state does not have the moral authority to start slashing taxes and then tell the employees who worked for said promise that it suddenly can't meet the demand. The deficit issue most states are dealing w/ has to do w/ a) the recession and the market crash and b) because most states have went on this idiotic cutting spree in their attempt to seem more "fiscally conservative" when they've really been doing just the opposite. California is the best example of this. California created the budget deficit problem it has primarily from having ridiculously low taxes on things like property tax. Now suddenly they are forced to admit that governors and legislatures past had made huge budgeting errors and the burden is then placed upon the backs of public employees- employees who signed a contract w/ the government that the government has now suddenly decided to not keep. Quite honestly these union stripping bills will more than likely result in states like Ohio and Wisconsin spending millions more dollars that they don't have defending the laws in court and defending their breach of contract in court. Again all in the name of "fiscal conservatism" when such acts are neither. So yeah in the hypothetical states should not promise public employees benefits and wages that the state cannot provide, but if a state was balanced for 10 years and makes promises based on said budget, then someone else comes into power and cuts taxes, it is not OK to shift the burden of that idiotic policy onto the public employee.
Government workers are easy targets for conservatives because these are the people on the front lines dealing with the public. Republicans demagogue the issue of government employees pay and pensions which are generally subpar compared to the private industry. This is just a diversion from the real issues. Many people question the influence of unions, but cannot see the same issue when it comes to corporations. If big powerful unions are bad, then it follows that big powerful corporations are just as bad. The people who complain about unions has no credibility because they are falling for the scam. Republicans are good at prestidigitation--watch one hand while the other picks your pocket. When any politician waves the flag and thumps Bible--watch your wallet (unknown source of quote).
Ummm. Here's what happened here in Arizona (and by the way across much of the Sun Belt):
The State started running honking budget surpluses in the 90s. It commissioned a study by the ASU business school on what to do with those surpluses and the report advised:
Note that these were B-school types who were specifically tasked on what would attract businesses, and they found that the most attractive features for 21st century businesses were sound finance, infrastructure, and education.
Instead, the Governor of the time (who was later removed from office in a scandal) pushed tax cuts through the Legislature.
Later, in order to make room for even more tax cuts, the Legislature reduced its contributions to State pension plans even more.
Now, we're being told that the accumulated unfunded liabilities of those pension plans are so huge that the benefits have to be cut, never mind what the employees were led to believe at the time. No, really Sherlock? That's what happens when you pay people with IOUs: eventually they come due, with interest. Sort of like crumbling infrastructure, that.
@DC
Underfunding of pensions is not exclusive to government employees. There are many private pensions that are underfunded and business is using these pensions as a corporate piggy bank. The federal agency which administers pension plans for defunct companies has warned this underfunding is going to be a crisis if business does not change its practices. People think their pensions are secure when in fact, they are not safe. And what is the worst of all, is the Supreme Court ruling that companies can discharge pension obligations in a bankruptcy.
Mouzer:
I don't disagree that workers are being hurt by decisions made in the past. But, we are here, and this is now. First, all states are different. California has low property taxes because it is a refurendum state. People voted for that, but politicians ignored it through more spending. Second, it is unfortunate that employees must give back because of past abuses. Better that than an Enron. Third, I don't think they are trying to breach contracts: merely renogotiate them. All that is being asked is to assume more responsibility for past mistakes by politicians.
We should realize we need to pay for what we want. Yes, Corporations and governments should pay their share, but recipients should also. The consumer bubble burst because people thought they had an unlimited ATM card. Banks contributed, yes. But, in the end, people signed on the dottted line. People have the ultimate responsibility for their decisions.
Mike, I'm very well aware of this. FWIW, I'm 60 myself and started working when employer-paid defined-benefit pensions were SOP. I remember the scandal (heavily covered in EE trade pubs, including IEEE Spectrum) when GE (wave, Rachel) laid off a bunch of engineers with 20-30 years seniority and cashed out their pension benefits for a few hundred dollars each. All actuarily correct and legal, mind.
That led to the demand for "portable pensions," which was part of the move to 401(k) accounts. 401(k)s are hardly a cure all, but they have their points.
I myself was left behind by my previous employer as it wound down its North American operations. I'm very well aware that I was lucky in that, being a non-US company, their pension plan is fully funded and in a few years I'll be collecting about a thousand a month from them. Not a fortune, but it could be worse.
Meanwhile, despite divorce and putting three kids through University, I've managed to build up a decent if not great portfolio of retirement investments. I know what that's cost me and realize that I'm remarkably well off.
By the way, you can blame me and those like me for a share of the sorry state of the economy today: we're the Boomers in our peak earning years and instead of enjoying that by spending our money, we're squirreling it away as fast as we can. Winter is coming.
Public service unions only have a great deal of power in an alternate universe.
In this universe, the members can be fired if too many call in sick at the same time. That doesn't sound like they have very much power to me.
Union members cannot even negotiate pay because that is established by elected representatives.
The only "powers" public service unions have are:
Grocery store unions have more power.
People that want to start chiseling away at that list should remember that one of the demands by PATCO members in 1981 was to replace obsolete air traffic control radar systems installed during World War II, and the response by Ronald Reagan was to fire them all.
Can you imagine the demands they might have?
People that insist that they are going to save money when public employee unions are eliminated are going to do that by removing things from this list.
The rich corporate types are covertly infiltrating government offices, with the goal of defunding (through lack of taxes), and therefore delegitimizing the effectiveness of, those offices, so that corporations can ride in on gilded horses and save the day. Of course, the people will then have to pay a heavy price to the corporations, rather than pay a fair tax to the government. Oh, and the services provided will be for a select few, not for the general populace (but don't let this cat out of the bag).
Coming from a Lions fan -- it gets better.
Appreciate that. (Any idea when?)
Go Bengals!
OK. I'll shut up now.
LET'S TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT WHY SOCIAL SECURITY IS SUCH A MESS. I would like to put some light on the reason Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid is in such terrible shape. This country seems to want to make the American worker and PUBLIC believe that if there is an injury and/or sickness arising out of the workplace; there is Workers Compensation - to compensate for the illnesses and/or injuries. What is REALLY happening is that the Workers Compensation System is corrupt.... IF there is a SMALL injury or illness; then it is covered; however; beyond this - the Workers Compensation System in each state protects the employer (they don't want them to leave the state). Injured worker's are doomed to lose in Workers Compensation court; CORRUPT Workers Compensation JUDGES, and Worker's Compensation Insurance Carriers FORCE the injured worker to go on Social Security and deplete Medicare/Medicaid as well as Social Security funds. The insurance industry is killing Social Security by not accepting responsibility for the injured worker's medical. In the state of California; they say it is a "no fault" system. What a load of ....! The American worker is the backbone of ANY industry - however, they are thrown away like yesterday's trash when they are injured and/or get sick as a result of an unsafe work environment.
On my way to go vote NO on everything :)..This is Bengals country down here, but we Ohioans will stand up for all our teams. I agree we do have issues with outsiders talking smack :). GO BUCKS..GO UNIONS
hello there long time no see. how have you been?
still going to TP?
Go Bengals!
My cousin's team.
Pilot been battling Cancer, but did win..Now the recovery which is almost as bad..How you been?
Not been going anywhere lately :)
Glad to hear you are on the road to recovery.
i been well thanks.
hope to see and chat some more.
Thanks Pilot..I will be on more. I have to direct may frustration somewhere LOL
Well that was a naughty post ;-)
Mellowohio,
that be great look forward to seeing you more.
and big shout outs to all of OHIO fro last night.
The proof will be in the returns tonight. After watching the Wisconsin thing implode with the recalls failing, I am not too certain that Ohio has any more intelligent voters than Wisconsin. I will believe it when I see it. Between this in Ohio and the "Fertilized Egg As Human" amendment in Mississippi, I just hope some semblance of sense remains after tonight.
Jamil,
Did you get a chance to watch Mike Polk Jr.'s video about the gerrymadering in Ohio? It's pretty wonderful -- given Rachel's reporting on redistricting and voting laws, it might be a good one to check out.
The Brothers Koch believe this world's for sale,
And they've the money and power to pull it off.
Control of the governing elite should prevail,
The power of the common man makes them scoff.
The Roberts Court has blessed the corporations,
Giving rights to dominate the common man.
They'd use their ill-got gains to conquer nations,
And put our country's treasures in their hands.
The drive to put down unions is the first step
To put the middle classes in their place.
But failure to succeed is not their concept.
The rights of men to vote can't be erased.
The battle for Ohio's unions may be done;
The war to save our rights has just begun.