Get free daily email updates

Syndicate this site - RSS

Recent Posts

Blogger Menu

Click here to blog

Jon Fleischman

Today’s Commentary: Controller John Chiang – The Union Tool

It seems to me that Californians are getting what they asked for in State Controller John Chiang.  The contrast between selecting Chiang or his opponent, taxpayer advocate Tony Strickland, on the November 2006 ballot could not have been more stark.  While Strickland was openly supported by a cadre of pro-taxpayer organizations and leaders, the bulk of Chiang’s support came from the left-wing of the Democrat Party, and most significantly, from public employee unions eager to have yet another “tool” in an important state constitutional office, ready to be put into play should the need arise.  (Below, left, is a photo of Chiang standing with all of his union supporters after being elected Controller.)

While the nation’s economy is reeling, as the United States, and California, plow into a recession, public employee union bosses continue to be advocates for the notion that somehow public employees are “more privileged” that their counterparts in the private sector and should be immune from the laws of economics – you know, that when less money comes in, less money can go out?  Unfortunately, that “Golden Rule” applies in government just like it does in the private sector. 

At a time when state government is facing a huge financial shortfall, directly attributed, by the way, by an overspending orgy that was completely advocated by the state’s public employee unions (I do not recall any unions calling for less spending on new government jobs, and instead calling for increasing state reserves to deal with potential shortfalls such as the one we are facing today), the unions are pouring proverbial fuel onto the fire by opposing any cuts in pay or benefits for their employees, hiding behind negotiated contracts.

Unfortunately, unlike the private sector, where market flexibility allows companies to adapt to economic conditions more freely – increasing activities during times of plenty, or downsizing during tougher times – the public sector has been so highly regulated by the tools of the public employee unions that have been propelled into the state legislature (over decades by the aggregate spending of countless tens of millions of dollars of public employee union dollars).  Now when state government so clearly needs to be able to cut its spending pretty dramatically to stay afloat, pro-union laws severely tie the hands of policy makers to do much about it.  In the private sector, a bankruptcy judge would open up labor agreements and cause them to be reworked to be reflective of the fiscal realities facing the affected company, with the idea that workers are not served if the company in question has to close its doors.  No such parallel exists for a government solution.

**There is more – click the link**

View Full Commentary

5 Responses to “Today’s Commentary: Controller John Chiang – The Union Tool”

  1. soldsoon@aol.com Says:

    Commissar Chiang wears the cap with the RED STAR….he spits in the faces of the producers protecting the bloated moochers ruining California. but as we forlorn: RINOS plan on raising some taxes…..
    RINOECONOMICS at its best!!!! Make everyone feel good, line my personal pockets, kiss posteriors of globalists, ruin domestic jobs and career opportunities, spend like a drunken sailor…now these losers have taxes on the table dancing into the wee hours with the Commissars….pathetic but expected for louts with no scruples, moral compass or compassion for the true producers in California who get duped time afte time voting for these disgusting RINOS

  2. bobe@winfirst.com Says:

    Jon Jon Jon! I wonder what you would say if you were the one asked to voluntarily give up 10 percent of your paycheck. Would you say “oh well, I don’t mind” or would you holler your head off?

  3. rogercovalt@hotmail.com Says:

    It would be nice if these elected officials would either take a paycut or no pay, at least until this budget situation clears up.

    Too much to ask for apparently from the people that created this mess.

  4. cubscott@gmail.com Says:

    Jon, I can’t believe you’re making me stick up for the union! (I detest the union and thanks to Gray Davis they get to steal a portion of my monthly paycheck.) Nevertheless, you are promoting outdated state worker stereotypes.

    I do believe that state workers had excellent benefits at one time, but over the years those benefits have dwindled down to more closely match the private sector. At the same time, salaries for state workers were falling out of parity with their private-sector counterparts. This was caused in part by the union that so dubiously represents me.

    Many times over the years I have wished that state government could be run as efficiently as the private sector, with easier hiring and firing, and performance-based pay, including bonuses. But those in the public sector are more attracted by steady employment, which is the last big plus left. And now the governor is trying to take that away.

    I do believe there is a lot of wasteful spending in California government. There are entire departments that we would be better off without. But don’t make the individual state workers take the fall if you’re not willing to reward them in times of plenty.

  5. Flashreport.org@RoyAllmond.com Says:

    No, John Chiang is not a tool. John Chiang is right in saying that Arnold has to bargain with the State workers.

    Talk about being a tool. Jon Fleischman, You are the tool of the Governator.

    How would you like it if your boss unilaterally decided you and your family were going to get a 5% cut in pay. Remember a 5% cut is off the gross, not the net. So depending on the amount of your deductions that could amount to maybe 10% of your net pay. Without your consent, without discussing it with you. Just YANK it out!

    If you can have 10% of your take-home pay taken away without having it severely impact your family, then you are overpaid.

    The Governator is doing his best to help the democratic party. Do you think that in the future, the democrats are not going to say “vote for us, because the republicans will take food off your table, and the roof from over your heads. Just look what Republican Arnold did!”

    Thanks to Arnold, I AM being foreclosed on. Thanks to Arnold, I have the real possibility less money to spend to stimulate the economy, not to mention the possibility of being laid off.

    Us State employees are performing a valuable service to the State of California. Services which the State has required to be done though various laws.

    Our services protect Californians in various ways. Apparently the only protection that Arnold understands are police & fire.

    Apparently all of the rest of the services provided is too much heavy lifting for Arnold’s brain to handle.

    The Governator does not understand that there is a negotiation process. If Arnold want us State workers to help with the budget mess, then come to the bargaining table with some honest propositions. Give us something for it.

    State workers never did anything to cause this problem. As a matter of fact, our collecting the fees for the State has collectively done more good for the State than Arnold has done since he has been in office.

    I have been saying that all of this talk about changing the California Constitution has been wasted on trivial matters. The change that really needs to be made is add after the budget is to be passed by the 15th of June … that if the budget is not passed by then, 90% the amount of known funds collected by the State is to be prorated to all items in the previous years budget, the other 10% (and all additional funds collected) is to be placed in an emergency fund. If the legislature & the Senate with approval of the Governor deems something needs to be funded, then all will have to agree it is an emergency to pull the funds out of the emergency fund. Also, any funding for programs that has been cut will also go to the emergency fund, any new programs will not receive any funding until next budget.

    However, an “or else clause” in the California Constitution would make too much sense.

    Let’s get back to the crisis at hand. Lets logically think things through about what Arnold is proposing. Arnold is asking for us State workers to skip working two days a month until July 2010. Why? So we can have cash in February, because we will run out of cash. How is it we will need to continue to have a cut in salary for over a year, when the cash shortage period will never last past April 15? Everyone will be paying their taxes by then.

    What the State needs to do to in order to keep from running out of cash, is to offer taxpayers an incentive to pay their taxes early. Maybe all it will take are some PSA’s (Public Service Announcements) stating that paying taxes early is a patriotic call to duty to help our State. Without having the State to pay more money in high interest loans.

    Another thought how is cutting peoples salary, laying off people, stopping construction projects helping the economy? If you can explain that, let me know.

    Apparently Arnold thinks he is still a movie producer. If you are running low on cash in a movie, the biggest drain is payroll. In that case, cutting payroll makes sense. Government accounting is a completely different game.

    I believe that the Union will prevail in the lawsuit fighting the Executive Order using the lame reason that it has to be done because it is an emergency. Unable to balance a budget, is NOT an emergency.

    I see this Executive Order for what it really is. It is merely retaliation for the Unions constant attack on Arnold.

    Arnold does not realize that the people who are attacking him are the top 1% top lunatics that march lockstep with any democrat without question.

    I am a Union member, even a steward. Not because I think that the democrats are right, it is because it is the only game in town.

    I had worked in Arnold’s campaign office and help in any way I could. Because I thought no one could be worse than Gray Davis. Now I a beginning to think if Arnold is not worse, he is fast approaching a close second.

    Possibly it is because his handlers … advisors … are secretly Barbara Boxer supporters. Because after his term is over, the next logical step would be to oppose her. Arnold’s performance has been sub par. Any chances Arnold had to unseat Boxer, has drifted away by now.

    Looking at the big picture, and all of Arnold’s actions. I see a trend. It appears that Arnold, who claims to be a Republican, has learned his style of governing from the communists.

    Never negotiate, simply make demands. No matter how draconian.

    If I could say something to all Californians, I would tell them to send Arnold a Voters Registration Card with a cover letter to fill-in his correct party affiliation – communist.

    And if you, Jon Fleischman, think that Arnold is right in running the State into the ground, maybe should do the same.