With Senate Bill 5 scheduled for new hearings this week, is it too optimistic to expect bolder arguments from Republicans in the House of Representatives? Speaker Batchelder, in particular, tells it like it is – and on this subject, more frankness from conservative leaders is what Ohio needs. Why? Former NEA counsel Bob Chanin says it best:
Politically, the GOP is in a tight spot because the unions, Ohio Democratic Party, Socialist Party, and Communist Party form a unified bloc willing to chain itself to a taxpayer-subsidized tree in defense of a public worker’s “right” to have a percentage of his pay whisked into union bosses’ pockets and Democrat campaign coffers. And, as always, “conservatives” in the Ohio Senate are happy to side with the Democrats if it means a few minutes in front of a camera.
To balance the odds, here – at its fair market price – is my advice for the House:
- Exempt police, firefighters, and the highway patrol from most – or all – provisions of the bill
- End automated payroll deduction of union dues
Most of the squishes in the Senate mention police and fire as concerns – which is fair, considering that police and fire unions serve workers with far more demanding vocations. Payroll deduction of union dues is an indefensibly bad idea, and there’s no reason Ohio taxpayers should offer it. Since the unions haven’t paused in their routine of demanding increased taxes under the guise of “good jobs,” conservative leaders should continue to push for the most serious bill they can pass.
Government unions make a mint convincing workers they’d starve without collective bargaining, and make Ohio less competitive by demanding compensation taxpayers cannot afford. If the House incorporates my recommendations as enthusiastically as the Senate did, we’ll be in business!
Background: Startling Numbers
Researching government unions after I first noticed shenanigans from a union candidate last year, the simplicity of the problem was shocking: public unions work against the taxpayers. Union bosses ignore spending trends, the average Ohioan’s tax burden, and proof that big-government policies drive citizens away. Look at the numbers, and it’s tough to conclude Ohio’s government unions care about anything besides their own power. Consider AFSCME pay:
- Joseph Rugola, OAPSE Executive Director: $216,939
- Gary Martin, OAPSE Associate Director: $200,163
- Charles Roginski, OAPSE Regional Director: $164,239
- John Lyall, AFSCME Council 8 President: $155,482
- Andy Douglas, OCSEA Executive Director: $151,392
That’s only the top five. Ohio’s three largest AFSCME affiliates spent 31%, 32%, and 41% as much on member benefits as they spent on union pay in 2009. The Ohio Education Association may be even worse:
- 117 union employees paid more than $100,000
- 12 union employees paid more than $150,000
- Executive Director Larry Wicks paid $208,469
- Executive Director Dennis Reardon paid $202,997
In 2009, the OEA – a group that gets agitated about “the children” when you start to talk about limiting their clout – spent less than 36% as much on member benefits as on union pay.
Cross-posted at that hero and Third Base Politics.
March 21st, 2011 at 12:42 am
I’ve read lots of Jason Hart’s articals, & I conclude Jason, excessivly uses the terms “Fascist Fascism, Socialist Socialism, Communist – ism” & uses them as a powerful motive to create a picture. This is outrageous. I’m not for or against SB-5. Do YOU think Jason even read ALL or ANY of SB-5 before he so LOOSLY LABLED SB-5 as “Fascism, Doom, and an attack on the middle class” & then went on to state “Unless you’re in the Communist Party wing of the SB 5 opposition, you CAN’T openly call for higher taxes”. Maybe someday Jason will learn that speaking extreme & radical statements will not gain him much. Possibly the only thing I might see Jason gaining is maybe meeting his possible goal to agitate, scare, & interest others with powerful term, to maybe sway readers personal views, or to attempt to lead readers views toward his own political views, which appears to me to be one that fictitiously applies terms like “fascist, communist, & socialist” to current political situations & inferring, or honestly assuming that they are largly active political parties who have heavy interest in the events Jason writes about. For somebody who so boldly applies those political terms & infers to readers that they are well established locally, Jason has not submitted valid facts to link these entities to the issues he writes about, or justified his paranoid assumptions of Communism, Socialism, & Fascism being so locally present, operative, & deeply established and/or being a powerful political factor to our country, And Jason, I don’t mean a group of 100 communist that have a website, I mean show us a REAL established Socialist, Fascist, or Communist political party with enough power to even become a threat to our peoples well-being & gain crucial political control within America. 1. Just paranoid assumptions? 2.does Jason actually believe it? 3. Is it just easier to force puzzle pieces from other puzzles together so that your own puzzle is “complete” & “solved”. I VOTE #3. PLEASE VOTE or state your thoughts on how Jason boldly applied those political parties in SO many of his articals. People that generally use those terms so often seem to use them to instill fear, sway opinions, make the issue seem more important to YOU, & make their own view appear better to you. Some people who also use them so often seem to have convinced themselves it must be the right answer, whether due to paranoia, being mis-informed, or just using assumptions as well known facts, I just don’t know.
March 21st, 2011 at 7:35 am
@ mustav arodnyur poupr -
First, most of the hyperbole I’ve used has been jabs at the over-the-top rhetoric of the unions. If you’ve read “lot’s” of my writing, I would expect you to catch that. I’d also be shocked if I used a variant of the word “fascism” as many times in the past 6 months as you have in one comment.
Where have I come close to suggesting the Communist Party could “gain crucial political control within America”? My point is that the unions and their allies sound exactly like avowed Socialists and Communists. If you disagree, I’d love to see some evidence.
While you’re flipping out over my fear-mongering, ask yourself why I’ve published your rambling comment.