The Other Union Takedown


Pages: 1 2

As the above explosion in pension costs reveal, Mr. Zucchet, like most of his fellow unionistas, has lost touch with fiscal reality. Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, illuminated the impetus behind the landslide vote totals. “The appetite for pension reform in California is huge,” he contended. Voter Howard Delano, aged 60, echoed that sentiment. “It’s out of control,” he said after voting. “Nobody gives me a pension.”

And much like Wisconsin, union supporters were outspent by those advocating reform. In San Jose, government employee unions led by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) spent more than $440,000 in order to defeat Measure B. Business and taxpayer groups ponied up $682,000 to get it passed. In San Diego, business groups backing Proposition B outspent union supporters by an 8-to-1 margin. Also like Wisconsin, a petition drove the effort in San Diego, where more than 100,000 residents signed up to put the Proposition B on the ballot. In San Jose, an 8-3 City Council majority got the measure before the voters.

Progressives and their enablers have consoled themselves with the idea that, in both Wisconsin and California, being decisively outspent is what led to their defeat. But this is a misleading claim. The reality is that the wages earned by union political operatives don’t get counted as funds being spent on a campaign. Yet even if unions were thoroughly outspent, that is hardly a comforting rationale: it means more and more Americans are fed up with government employee unions and are willing to spend money to say so.

The specifics of Proposition B differ in the two cities. In San Diego, a six-year freeze on pay levels used to determine pension benefits has been instituted, with a two-thirds majority of the City Council votes required to override it. All new hires, except for police officers, will be into 401(k)-style plans, instead of the current defined benefit plans wreaking havoc around the nation.

In San Jose, current employees get to keep pension credits already earned, but must pay up to 16 percent more of their salary to continue that benefit, or they can opt for a more modest and affordable plan for their remaining years on the job. Future hires will have to pay half of their pensions costs. Furthermore, voters get to approve future pension increases, “bonus” pension checks to retirees have been suspended, and disability payments will be limited to those with injuries that prevent them from working. “It’s novel but it’s certainly not radical,” said Mayor Reed of the reforms. “Mayors across the country are very interested. We’re at the leading edge but we’re not alone.”

That may be an understatement. It is one thing to see government union power curtailed in a state like Wisconsin, where both Democrats and Republicans have been in control of state government at various points in time. In the ultimate progressive stronghold of California, where unions have run roughshod over the interests of taxpayers for decades, vote totals such as these, aimed at curtailing their power, are unprecedented.

In other words, something truly profound has occurred. All of the so-called current wisdom regarding government unions and their ability to sway politicians with massive campaign contributions and/or thuggish tactics is no longer current. In the space of a single evening, the aura of invincibility government unions have long enjoyed has been irreparably damaged. It’s as simple as taxpayers beginning to realize that government should provide services to all of its constituents, not just the privileged few–who have long viewed those privileges as entitlements or rights. This toothpaste isn’t getting shoved back in the tube anytime soon. Reform in Wisconsin alone could be construed as an anomaly.

Voters in San Diego and San Jose have made it a trend.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • Chezwick

    I read this news with elation on Drudge…but will the 9th circuit strike these successful initiatives down, just as it did the referendum that affirmed traditional marriage? I believe the term is 'Judicial tyranny'….and it's alive and well in America.

  • Ken

    Another 2 strikes to the heart of union tyranny!! Too bad, as Chez so sagely stated, the judicial activists will strike them down to placate their sycophants and hacks!!

  • Joey Cusak

    If taxpayers are now able to get together and outspend corrupt union bosses, should the credit go to…. the "infamous" Supreme Court decision in Citizens United?

  • StephenD

    I was told we are "giving up on the Middle Class" by going against the public workers unions. I asked which "Middle Class" should I support; the ones asking for more or the ones paying it? I can understand those that have been in for many years and as they approach retirement they should be able to count on their pensions. There ought to be a cut-off date/time in grade type benchmark. In other words, if the worker has 10 years or more to meet retirement age the pension should be lowered, if less than that. leave them alone. At least those with the time in can count on it and anyone with less time can look for other work if the cuts are unacceptable to them. The city can get its house in order fairly. But “Fair” as measured by the unions is “more, more, more.”

    • Jim_C

      The crazy thing is, Stephen–I agree, and I think your response "which middle class?" is excellent, as is the rest of your post.

      (I have a few caveats, of course, which I won't go into here).

      But the people on "my side" need to realize: tax dollars are not in endless supply, and they actually originate somewhere.

  • Yashmak

    “I was told we are “giving up on the Middle Class” by going against the public workers unions. ”

    What middle class indeed. Only about 15-17% of all US workers are employed in the public sector. Of those, only 37% are members of public-sector unions. This works out to a paltry 6% of all US workers who have public sector union membership.

    Next time someone tries that tired, dishonest line on you, spit the numbers back at them. As a side point, this actually beats the total number of American workers in the private sector who are members of unions. . .that number is just about 4.5% of all American workers. Add that to the public sector unions, and you have just over 1 in 10 American workers represented by unions.