Wait, shouldnt have said that name. I think Campbell has a google filter on it so he can comment every time it is uttered.

The issue is simple – public workers have never paid the market price for their benefits. The gap between what they pay, and what the benefits cost is subsidized by my (yes, although I live in MN, I have WI tax exposure) and every other WI resident’s tax contributions. Walker will be changing that to reflect a closer to market rate (it is still not 100%).

As for collective bargaining – the federal government has done just fine without it. Why aren’t there protests in the streets of DC?

Finally – the underlying point here is a budget deficit. There are two ways to fix this: raise taxes, or eliminate spending. Walker is a conservative, so naturally, he chose the latter. He campaigned on it, and he executed it. I’m actually pretty confused at the surprise and outrage. The man said he would be doing it. Or did you not pay attention before blindly voting for the guy with the (D) behind his name?

But this is a Packer board. I’m through with this. Back to the Super Bowl champs.

You are correct, eliminating the union due payroll deduction is not a fiscal issue for the state except maybe for the minimal cost the state incurs to provide the service free of charge to the union. It is politicians trying to reduce the power and influence of a special interest group that is a huge player in the political system. i.e. – collect your own dues that you use to turn around and use against anyone who doesn’t want to increase the size and scope of govt. If the union is so glorious they should have no problem collecting membership dues from their members (like every other special interest group) or getting a yearly certification vote. Is that political? I guess but when you run with the bulls and sometimes you get the horns.

But basically busting public unions doesn’t address any fiscal issues. Collective bargaining from an economic standpoint actually increase the efficacy of the labor market because the employer can negotiate with one entity rather than every individual employee. Also, unions help address the monopsonistic tendencies in the labor market where the employer has more market power than the employee and thus distorts the market and prevents the market from allocating resources efficiently.

Not allowing contracts to be for more than one year also basically creates a lot more work because you have to renegotiate everything every year.

I also fail to see how not allowing dues to be collected via payroll deduction or forcing unions to certify themselves via secret ballot every year addresses any fiscal issues.

Finally, if the collective bargaining provisions truly did address fiscal matters they should have been passed under budgeting procedures which require a 3/5 quorum – which was not present.

I will say that if people actually want to read about unions this book is a very good one. http://www.amazon.com/Emerging-Institutions-Twenty-First-Century-ebook/dp/B001AOFT3S/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1300757968&sr=8-2-fkmr0

It is a collection of economic studies look at unions and other labor market institutions and how they effect the economy.

I’m fine with you taking issue with my position, but attacking Nick and TGinGB isn’t fair. I think they were simply agreeing with me that this topic is not relevant to the original post. Having said that, I’d like to apologize for seizing on the “Snot Walker” comment, above. Although I felt it was unnecessary, I should have let it pass. After all, this is a Packers blog, and the best of its kind in my opinion!

For the record, I pay full price for my stupid pills. However, refills require just a $5 co-pay.

1. Federalizes the treatment of health savings accounts. (gives the same tax benefit to HSA’s for state income taxes that the feds give in federal income taxes….most other states have this same deduction for years)

2. Created a income tax deduction or credit for businesses that relocate to Wisconsin.

3. Created an income tax deduction for businesses that increase employment in the state. (hire new employees)

The taxpayers are not “crying poor” because of these tax breaks. All three of which do not take effect until fiscal year 2012 and beyond so they do not contribute to the current year budget deficit. The state is “crying poor” because the state budget outlook going forward is a mess.

Walker had a current fiscal year shortfall they had to close and he has a rather large deficit for the next two year budget cycle to close. All the one time money the last Gov. used to bridge budget gaps is gone. (tobacco settlement, stimulus, one time gambling deals, raiding a malpractice trust fund, etc…) The last Gov. kicked the can down the road repeatedly and not it’s time actually reform the budget. It’s a big gap to bridge and public employee unions think their budget process and interests should be exempt to reform and they think they should be immune from political push-back despite being HUGE partisan players in the political process. They are the one special interest group in the process that apparently thinks their sh-t doesn’t smell.