February 25-27, 2011
Feb 25 05:36 Senate GOP Says Read My Lips: No New Taxes Feb 25 06:51 Paying Their Fair Share? Or Tactical Retreat? Feb 25 09:16 Environmentalists' Propaganda Feb 25 10:10 Gov. Dayton, We Aren't In Denial Feb 26 04:16 RomneyCare & Its 2012 Implications Feb 26 06:07 Teacher Union Racketeering? Feb 26 07:13 BREAKING NEWS: Dayton's Obstructionism in Transcript Form Feb 26 10:32 Hostile Union Environment Feb 27 02:43 Ellison, Dayton Fighting For Health Care Monopolies
Prior Months: Jan
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Senate GOP Says Read My Lips: No New Taxes
When he returns from DC, Mark Dayton will have a most unwelcome gift from the GOP. What he'll find is a letter from Senate Republicans saying they won't be raising taxes. PERIOD . They've consistently said that, from during the campaign to when they were sworn in through today.
Republicans in the Minnesota Senate have put in writing what they've been saying publicly about Gov. Mark Dayton's budget plan: They don't like it and won't go along with his call for higher state taxes.
In a letter signed Thursday by all 37 GOP members, the majority party senators tell Dayton that they think he is increasing spending too much. They declared they "all are opposed to raising taxes" to fix a $6.2 billion deficit.
The first-term Democratic governor is pushing $3.3 billion in new taxes, primarily by raising rates on top earners.
The GOP senators make a case for government downsizing but don't provide details. Republicans at the helm of the House and Senate have given committees until the end of March to come up with budget bills.
It's aggravating to see Bloomberg say that GOP senators won't provide details for how they'd like to downsize government. It's aggravating because Gov. Dayton's administration have withheld information that they need to put a budget together.
Gov. Dayton's administration has acted like they've beyond the reach of the legislature several times, which I wrote about here :
Chairman Tony Cornish: Rep. Liebling, If you and the governor want to keep your head in the sand about illegal immigration and illegal aliens, that's fine with me. One case in point: I asked the state patrol to show up today and testify on my illegal documents bill . I had an officer who's assigned to ICE.
I told him he didn't have to take a stance on the bill. All I wanted was factual information. The governor's office took back the state patrol officer and would not let him testify on the illegal documents bill even though all I wanted was factual information.
How can the legislature put a budget together when Gov. Dayton won't let executive branch employees testify? Let's note that this officer wasn't set to testify on a nothing subject. He would've been testifying before the House Public Safety Committee.
I've heard from numerous people that this isn't an isolated incident, that it's starting to become a pattern in both the House and Senate.
Rest assured that when Gov. Dayton's administration stops withholding information from the legislature, the legislature will keep its promise of not raising taxes. We don't have a tax problem. It's a spending problem.
It's worth noting that what's laughingly being called Gov. Dayton's budget proposal is a purely political document. It isn't a blueprint for getting government spending under control. It isn't a blueprint for creating a dynamic economy that doesn't need an annual infusion of government-incurred debt.
What Gov. Dayton and the DFL are proposing is another pork-filled bonding bill whose sole accomplishments are 1) spending money we don't have and 2) piling more debt onto the next generation. If that's the DFL's definition of wisdom, then they're a wisdomless political party.
The other thing that's important to note is that Gov. Dayton didn't propose a little tax increase to fill in a small gap. He proposed the biggest tax increase imaginable. Not only does his proposal include creating a fourth tax bracket with a top rate of 10.95 percent but it also creates a fifth bracket that adds a 3 percent surcharge on successful small businesses.
That's before considering the fact that Gov. Dayton's tax proposal includes a major property tax increase on homes valued at more than $1,000,000.
Gov. Dayton campaigned on "making the rich pay their fair share." He also promised that Minnesota wouldn't have the top tax bracket in the U.S. Thanks to his 3 percent surcharge, Minnesota's top tax bracket essentially jumped from 7.85 percent to 13.95 percent. That's an 80 percent jump in the tax bracket. Raising the top rate to 10.95 percent represents a 40 percent increase in the top tax bracket.
That isn't making "the rich pay their fair share." That's a political stunt. Not only shouldn't Gov. Dayton's proposal not be taken seriously. It's a proposal that should be mercilessly ridiculed.
Frankly, I don't know how the Senate GOP's letter didn't ridicule Gov. Dayton more. They obviously have more restraint than I have.
Gov. Dayton says his budget is "a starting point." Seriously, it's nothing of the sort. It's more joke than anything else. I recall the reaction in the chamber during his SOS speech when he announce his tax increase and debt bill. The DFL's silence was totally deafening.
Perhaps, that's the most telling sign of all.
Posted Friday, February 25, 2011 5:36 AM
No comments.
Paying Their Fair Share? Or Tactical Retreat?
This editorial in the Grand Forks Herald is well-intentioned but I'm questioning whether it's a little naive. Here's what's got me curious:
Now, as people who follow labor news know, it's rare that one side in a dispute suddenly makes such a big concession. Even less often does that side go out and publicly trumpet its gesture.
But that's what happened in Wisconsin. In the week since the announcement, labor supporters everywhere have touted the giveback as a sign of the union's willingness to share sacrifice, arguing with some effectiveness that it's Walker, not the union, who's the stubborn one.
What's the lesson for Dayton?
The lesson is that America's public-sector unions recognize we're in tough times and, if pressed hard, will to do their part.
This isn't the unions' magnanimous gesture. It's a tactical, temporary retreat. This has nothing to do with their willingness to do their part in solving the budget crisis. They've recognized that their popularity is in shambles. Charles Krauthammer's column encapsulates it perfectly:
Unfortunately for them, that telegenic faux-Cairo scene drew national attention to the dispute, and to the sweetheart deals the public-sector unions had negotiated for themselves for years. They were contributing a fifth of a penny on a dollar of wages to their pensions and one-fourth what private-sector workers pay for health insurance.
The unions quickly understood that the more than 85 percent of Wisconsin not part of this privileged special-interest group would not take kindly to "public servants" resisting adjustments that still leave them paying less for benefits than private-sector workers. They immediately capitulated and claimed they were only protesting the other part of the bill, the part about collective-bargaining rights.
Indeed. Walker understands that a one-time giveback means little. The state's financial straits, a $3.6 billion budget shortfall over the next two years, did not come out of nowhere. They came largely from a half-century-long power imbalance between the unions and the politicians with whom they collectively bargain.
This has all the signs of a tactical retreat. There's nothing I've seen that suggests that the unions have had a change of heart. Until that happens, state budgets will be subject to volatility.
That's why it's vitally important to not treat the symptoms (accepting the unions' offer). Rather, it's important that Gov. Walker holds out for the solution of limiting public unions' collective bargaining rights to wages and benefits.
Dayton's path forward is more mythical than anything else. Saying that he'll stand in the way of another Wisconsin might be a terrific soundbite but it isn't rooted in reality.
The MNGOP isn't proposing the sweeping changes that Wisconsin Republicans are pushing. Sen. Dave Thompson has called for freezing salaries. That's the full extent of it.
Gov. Dayton should return to the land of reality. It isn't like his proposals (think budget and tax increases) are rooted in reality. This certainly isn't rooted in reality either:
What to do?
Adopt a Minnesota version of the formula that Wisconsin unions now have agreed to, in return for House and Senate Republicans in Minnesota OK'ing a tax increase.
That's the way to get to 'yes' in Minnesota. It'll happen only when both sides do something that makes their core constituency, in Dayton's case, the union members he joined at the Capitol rally, plenty mad.
To get Republicans to vote for a tax hike, Minnesota's public sector workforce is going to have to cost less, probably a lot less. Likewise, to get the governor to call for wage and/or benefit cuts, Republicans are going to have agree to raise taxes.
That's the outline of a deal, one that balances the budget while moderating tax hikes and keeping collective bargaining rights intact. Dayton and the legislative leaders should meet sooner rather than later to work it out.
It might work as an outline in the newspaper but it's a total nonstarter in Realityville. It's going nowhere. Why raise taxes when all that'll do is put more money in special interests' hands? No thanks.
Posted Friday, February 25, 2011 6:51 AM
Comment 1 by Barb C at 25-Feb-11 08:21 AM
You read the Grand Forks Herald? Why? ;)
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 25-Feb-11 08:55 AM
I go where the news is. That's why.
Environmentalists' Propaganda
If you were thinking that environmental extremists were approaching sanity, this article will correct that delusional thinking:
A proposal in front of the US Senate will exempt wolves from the endangered species act and place the animals into sure extinction, according to activist Robert Dewey, Vice President for Government Relations of the Defenders of Wildlife.
What a liar!!! The only reason why timber wolf populations got low was the price trappers got for them from fur traders. Now that that's been solved, the chances of timber wolves going extinct are roughly equivalent of me getting hit with 3 lightning bolts while waving 2 winning lottery tickets on a street corner.
In other words, the chances are zilch and even less yet.
Dewey knows this. Here in Minnesota, timber wolf populations dropped into the triple-digit range in the 60's. Since then, their populations have steadily increased to the point where they're killing substantial herds of cattle.
That's before factoring in the fact that the wolf populations have been thinned by transplanting them from Minnesota into northern Wisconsin and Michigan's UP.
My bet, and I'm willing to bet the proverbial ranch on this, is that this lie will be used in a fundraising letter talking about a crisis of epic proportions. This establishes the base for that fundraising letter:
The House law exempts a single species of animal from the Environmental Protection Agency's list of protected species. That keeps professional wildlife management experts out of the discussion. Rather, the decision is made for political reasons. Such action sets the precedence for eliminating other protected species that get in the way of development by merely excepting them from the endangered species list. The matter has been to court before and lost, meaning senators are setting various states up for spending money on law suits instead of on wildlife.
Reading this, you'd think that not letting federal regulators regulate would doom the species. That isn't the case. The reality is that state agencies, like Minnesota's DNR, still can control the timberwolf herd. There are so many safeguards in the system that it's difficult to put real pressure on wolf herds.
Let's remember that wolves are still being regulated, as evidenced by them being categorized as threatened, not endangered, species. Here's Wikipedia's definition of endangered species :
An endangered species is a population of organisms which is at risk of becoming extinct because it is either few in numbers, or threatened by changing environmental or predation parameters.
Here's Wikipedia's definition of a threatened species :
Threatened species are any species (including animals, plants, fungi, etc.) which are vulnerable to endangerment in the near future.
That's quite a difference in definition, though I'm confident Mr. Dewey won't make that distinction in his fundraising letter or in his action alerts.
Mr. Dewey should be identified for what he is: a scam artist working hard to extract money from gullible activists.
Shame on him for his dishonest predatory tactics.
Posted Friday, February 25, 2011 9:16 AM
No comments.
Gov. Dayton, We Aren't In Denial
Gov. Dayton, We aren't in denial, as you suggest in this post , that there's a "direct impact of decisions made in St. Paul on property tax increases." It's just that we think that the decisions directly impacting property tax increases are the decisions made by the St. Paul City Council and Mayor Coleman.
In a conference call from Washington, D.C., where he is attending a meeting of the National Governors Association, the new DFL governor said Republicans in the Minnesota Legislature are 'in some kind of denial' about property tax increases that have resulted from cuts in local government aid.
'They continue to be in denial over the direct impact of decisions made in St. Paul on property tax increases,' he said.
I'll start trusting Gov. Dayton's economic judgments the day he doesn't rely on increasing income taxes to the highest level in the U.S. to balance his budget. Until then, I won't trust him as far as I could throw him if I had two broken arms and a bad back.
Gov. Dayton says that his approach to balancing the budget is a "balanced approach." How he can say that with a straight face knowing that his budget relies on $4 of tax increases for each dollar of spending cuts indicates that he isn't in touch with reality.
Dayton, asked about a letter sent by Senate Republicans Thursday opposing his budget, said the GOP lawmakers are 'on very thin ice to be poking at my budget proposal.'
This coming from the man who tried 3 times during the campaign to propose a balanced budget and failed. He said his first proposal would increase general fund revenues by $4,000,000,000. When the Department of Revenue scored it, they said it'd produce $1,900,000,000, less than half of what he predicted.
You'll forgive me if I don't accept Gov. Dayton's supposed economic credibility.
While his tax proposal would spare all but the top 5 percent income bracket, Dayton said, Republican policies would result in across-the-board property tax increases, which he called a 'regressive, unfair tax on everybody.'
Way to go Strib. That's some of the finest dictation from the allegedly MSM in almost a day.
'The time for this rhetorical game playing is over,' Dayton said. 'I've submitted by budget, and now it's their responsibility to develop their budget. Where is their budget?'
It's funnny that Gov. Dayton should ask where the GOP's budget is after he gave orders to his cabinet to not testify in committee or respond to official committee letters requesting information they'll need to put a budget together.
It's infuriating that Gov. Dayton would restrict important budget testimony then complain that the GOP haven't put a budget together. They'll have a budget put together the minute he stops being an obstructionist. Does he think the legislature can do its work when large amounts of key budget information is off-limits to them?
Thus far, Gov. Dayton is a disgustingly corrupt individual. He's stood in the way of the legislature getting its work done. Shame on him. If he doesn't put an end to this corruption, then I'll inform Minnesotans just what a corrupt, inept individual they elected as their governor.
There's a reason why he was picked as the worst senator in the U.S. Senate.
Posted Friday, February 25, 2011 10:10 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Quigley at 25-Feb-11 11:57 AM
Are we sure this idiot is in Washington shooting off his mouth or just in the closet um I mean office?
LGA cuts do lead to higher property taxes because no one holds the local elected officals accountable for doing the right thing and cutting items from the budget that would allow little or no property tax increase. The people in St. Paul and Minneapoils complain about property tax increases but they continue to elect the same tax and spend liberals into office.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 26-Feb-11 02:49 AM
LGA cuts do lead to higher property taxes because no one holds the local elected officals accountable for doing the right thing and cutting items from the budget that would allow little or no property tax increase.That's why I said that Chris Coleman & the St. Paul city council are responsible for their property tax increases. Those are "decisions made in St. Paul." They're just not the decisions Gov. Dayton was referring to.
Yes, I'm certain he's in DC. I saw video of him standing behind & just to the right of President Obama while President Obama yapped about something or another. He didn't look well, though.
RomneyCare & Its 2012 Implications
It's pretty widely accepted that Mitt Romney's presidential ambitions are tied directly to his health care plan. That's why it's imperative he find a plausible defense for the plan. Based on this article , he hasn't found it yet:
Despite the similarities between the two, chief among them the coverage requirement that provides for those without insurance to be fined, Romney has been trying to distance his plan from ObamaCare as he mulls a likely second White House bid on the Republican ticket.
He maintains that his plan was successful in Massachusetts but should not be applied at the national level, criticizing the president's plan for being an unconstitutional infringement on states' rights.
I can't argue that Obamacare is "an unconstitutional infringement on states' rights." That isn't the only unconstitutional provision in O'Care, though. Like O'Care, RomneyCare imposes an individual mandate on people, too. That's likely to be the bigger burden on a Romney candidacy than the states rights issue.
To be fair, they're both legitimate issues. The sad part is that RomneyCare violates both major constitutional issues if done on a national level.
There are 2 bigger points to be taken from this: 1) that Gov. Romney isn't a constitutional conservative and 2) he won't have the TEA Party's support for the general election.
A Romney ticket would be doomed for a landslide defeat. Without TEA Party support, a GOP candidate's support would likely look like John McCain's support: small and less than enthusiastic.
They'd work hard for House and Senate candidates but they'd sit on their hands when it comes time for Gov. Romney because the majority of TEA Party activists are looking for candidates who eat, sleep and breathe the Constitution.
That description doesn't fit Mitt.
If Gov. Romney is the GOP nominee, it'll be an electoral disaster for Republicans. It'd mean needlessly missing a great opportunity at defeating President Obama.
This is too important an election to pick someone like Gov. Romney. First, we'll need the TEA Party energized to win. If they aren't energized, we can't win. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION. Second, Romney is a target-rich environment. His vulnerabilities are too plentiful. Third, Gov. Romney's time has passed. His message doesn't resonate like it might have in 2008. The landscape has changed that dramatically.
Posted Saturday, February 26, 2011 4:16 AM
No comments.
Teacher Union Racketeering?
Everyone who isn't comatose or hasn't been comatose knows about the teachers union's absence from Wisconsin during their show of solidarity on public employee union collective bargaining rights. It isn't likely that they know that the teachers' union was selling health insurance to school districts . What's worse is that they were selling it at a steep price:
Bernie Nikolay should be happy. His school district; he's the superintendent in Milton, had a good November.
The girls swim team won the state title, a first for Milton girls athletics. And an arbitrator said the district could switch health coverage away from the insurer owned by the teachers union. That'll save the district as much as a million bucks a year.
For a district with a $33 million budget, that's cheery. For the rest of the state, it means a tide may have turned.
How important is that $1,000,000 to the MSD? It's this important :
The School District of Milton Board of Education will have its first look at the ways district administrators propose to fill in an approximate $850,000 budget shortfall for 2010-2011 during a special meeting Monday evening.
It's just big enough to cause the school district's monster deficit. Remember that the bill from the teachers union's insurance company wasn't $1,000,000. It's that the savings was $1,000,000.
For a school district with a budget of $33,000,000, that's a monstrous-sized savings realized.
Milton was paying $48,301 more in premiums for every month that it couldn't switch from WEA Trust to a pair of plans from Madison-based Dean Health and Janesville-based MercyCare that it said were comparable.
That the union opposed the switch from WEA Trust to a more taxpayer-friendly insurance plan says everything about the teachers union's priorities. That $1,000,000 in savings could've gone towards hiring more teachers to lower class sizes. It could've been used to get better equipment in science labs. It could've just been saved. It could've been used for a combination of those options.
This isn't a tiny consideration. It's gigantic in impact.
It could mean the end to the costly market dominance of WEA Trust, the health insurer owned by the Wisconsin Education Association Council. Just under two-thirds of Wisconsin districts use WEA Trust, a puzzling preference since its coverage is so costly.
Districts that buy WEA Trust plans average $1,665 a month for family premiums, according to their state association, while those choosing other carriers average $1,466. The difference is greatest where taxpayers cover the whole premium.
This is inexcusable. The biggest question is why this had to go to arbitration. Here's the explanation:
The question is why it had to go to arbitration at all. The answer is that in Wisconsin, school districts can't change health carriers, even if they keep benefits the same, without negotiating. And teachers unions have been very partial to keeping WEA Trust.
I can't imagine why "teachers unions have been partial to keeping WEA Trust" as their health insurance carrier. (I'M KIDDING!!!)
Health benefits are a big reason labor costs are squeezing school districts. Not only are schools slow to adopt coverage that restrains costs, but simply being shoved into the high-cost provider hurts, too.
I thought that the unions looked out for working families, the little guy. How is making an extra $1,000,000 a year looking out for Main Street?
Columnist Patrick McIlheran sums it up this way:
The state's finances are in ruins. The state's chief expense by far is K-12 schooling, and we're certain to hear that our choice is only between more taxes or more ignorance. Nonsense: What we pay for, what we get are crucial questions. Teachers deserve fair pay and benefits, but fairness doesn't include a privileged position for one particular insurer, not when that preference sucks away scarce school money.
This is proof that the deficit isn't just about revenue. Spending restraint is vitally important in putting Wisconsin back on solid financial footing.
UPDATE: I found this in the comments thread to Ed's post about WEA Trust:
Saugatuck's teachers are the area's first to drop MESSA health insurance, a move that will save the school district nearly $180,000 a year, officials said.
"We're the first district in the area to drop the MESSA insurance to my knowledge," school board President Mike Van Loon said tonight.
Under the new two-year contract, approved tonight, the Saugatuck Education Association will switch coverage from the Michigan Education Association-based insurance to Priority Health at a savings of $3,800 per teacher a year for Saugatuck Public Schools.
In other words, Wisconsin isn't the only state where the teachers union owns a health insurance company. It'll be interesting to see how many other states' teachers unions own health insurance companies that we're paying for.
Posted Saturday, February 26, 2011 12:00 PM
No comments.
BREAKING NEWS: Dayton's Obstructionism in Transcript Form
After posting about the Dayton administration's obstructionism in this post , an LA I've known for awhile sent me an audio tape of the hearing I'd referenced. Because I can't embed the audio into this post, I transcribed the relevant section of the 77-second exchange. Here's the transcript of the relevant part of the exchange:
LANNING: Mr. Kuhlman, can you tell me the status of the response to the letter we sent?
KUHLMAN: The letter was completed. I signed off on it last week and just in time for the governor's office to tell us to hold those letters until further notice... I'm a little hesitant to give you a letter with my name signed on it with my boss telling me not to do so.
LANNING: Well, thank you for your honest answer to that question, Mr. Kuhlman, and I think that's very disappointing to hear that you've, in effect, been given orders not to respond to our legitimate request for information to help us understand your operation...
Let's put this in context. Let's add the transcript of Chairman Cornish's scolding of Rep. Liebling on Dayton administration obstructionism:
Chairman Tony Cornish: Rep. Liebling, If you and the governor want to keep your head in the sand about illegal immigration and illegal aliens, that's fine with me. One case in point: I asked the state patrol to show up today and testify on my illegal documents bill . I had an officer who's assigned to ICE.
I told him he didn't have to take a stance on the bill. All I wanted was factual information. The governor's office took back the state patrol officer and would not let him testify on the illegal documents bill even though all I wanted was factual information.
These two incidents reveal that the Dayton administration is taking an imperial approach to responding to the legislature's legitimate requests for information, information that's needed by the legislature to put a budget together.
It's pure chutzpah for him to say this :
'The time for this rhetorical game playing is over,' Dayton said. 'I've submitted by budget, and now it's their responsibility to develop their budget. Where is their budget?'
Gov. Dayton, it's tied up in your administration because of the ordered obstructionism. If you'd let your administration work with the legislature, I'm confident that they'd put a sensible budget together quickly.
If, however, you continue with your obstructionism, then it'll take longer. Either way, though, the GOP legislature will put a budget together that won't raise taxes but does fund Minnesota's priorities.
Gov. Dayton, it's important that you know that I'll be telling Minnesotans everywhere about your obstructionism. I'll tell them that it's really a form of corruption.
The choice is your's. Continue the obstructionism and be branded as corrupt or respond to the GOP's legitimate information requests and play a constructive role in the budget process.
Posted Saturday, February 26, 2011 7:13 AM
Comment 1 by Donna Foster at 26-Feb-11 08:06 AM
Was there more of that audio? I'd like to hear what Tina Liebling had to say in that session. She must have said something that proves she has her head in the sand on the illegal immigration issue. It might help us show the voters down here in Rochester who she really is next election.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 27-Feb-11 02:32 PM
Gary:
When is governor Dayton going to propose a real budget. There is going to be no four billion tax increase. Dayton's budget spends four billion too much.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Hostile Union Environment
Kimberley Strassel's column is delightful in its irony:
The union horde is spreading, from Madison to Indianapolis to a state capital near you. And yet the Democratic and union bigwigs engineering the outrage haven't directed their angry multitudes at what is arguably the most "hostile workplace" in the nation: Washington, D.C.
It will no doubt surprise you to learn that President Obama, the great patron of the working man, also happens to be the great CEO of one of the least union-friendly shop floors in the nation.
This is, after all, the president who has berated Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's proposal to limit the collective bargaining rights of public employees, calling the very idea an "assault on unions." This is also the president who has sicced his political arm, Organizing for America, on Madison, allowing the group to fill buses and plan rallies. Ah, but it's easy to throw rocks when you live in a stone (White) house.
Fact: President Obama is the boss of a civil work force that numbers up to two million (excluding postal workers and uniformed military). Fact: Those federal workers cannot bargain for wages or benefits. Fact: Washington, D.C. is, in the purest sense, a "right to work zone." Federal employees are not compelled to join a union, nor to pay union dues. Fact: Neither Mr. Obama, nor the prior Democratic majority, ever acted to give their union chums a better federal deal.
Scott Walker, eat your heart out.
For this enormous flexibility in managing his work force, Mr. Obama can thank his own party. In 1978, Democratic President Jimmy Carter, backed by a Democratic Congress, passed the Civil Service Reform Act. Washington had already established its General Schedule (GS) classification and pay system for workers. The 1978 bill went further, focused as it was on worker accountability and performance. It severely proscribed the issues over which employees could bargain, as well as prohibited compulsory union support.
The combination of Strassel's sarcasm and factual irony is wonderful. That President Obama is acting like the greatest proponent of collective bargaining while running a union-hostile shop is rich.
Strassel notes as I did that the Wisconsin teachers union owns a health insurance company, which it exploits:
In Wisconsin, for instance, the teachers union doesn't just bargain for more health dollars. It also bargains to require that local school districts buy health insurance for their teachers through the union-affiliated health-insurance plan, called WEA Trust. That requirement gives the union (not the state) ultimate say over health benefits. It also costs the state at least $68 million more annually than it would if schools could buy the state-employee health plan, money that goes to a union outfit.
This is a rigged game. First, the union negotiates that the school district has to buy their health insurance from their union-affiliated health-insurance plan. Then, once the competition is eliminated, the union-affiliated health-insurance plan is essentially a district-wide monopoly.
If that sounds fair to you, then you're likely part of the teachers' union leadership.
I highlighted in this post that the unions take full advantage of that small-scale monopoly:
Bernie Nikolay should be happy. His school district; he's the superintendent in Milton, had a good November.
The girls swim team won the state title, a first for Milton girls athletics. And an arbitrator said the district could switch health coverage away from the insurer owned by the teachers union. That'll save the district as much as a million bucks a year.
That the teachers union's health insurance company was costing a school district an additional $1,000,000 over other insurance options is infuriating. To that school district's taxpayers, I'm betting that the figure was eye-popping, too. And infuriating.
Milton isn't the only city that's gotten locked into this monopolistic relationship. WEA Trust makes alot of money statewide by exploiting their monopolistic advantage.
This is precisely why Gov. Walker is insisting on limiting collective bargaining rights to wages and benefits. To settle for giving WEA the right to negotiate which insurance company a school district buys their health insurance from is absurd.
If I were advising Gov. Walker, I'd remind him constantly that he should bring this up in his press appearances. I'd tell taxpayers just how much money the teachers unions are costing them over and above what they'd have to pay for health insurance.
If the unions were fielding questions on this subject from infuriated taxpayers, this debate would be finished in a heartbeat. It'd be over because the subject would've been made personal.
I'd predict that once the taxpayers knew about this racket, their response would be visceral and intense.
Once taxpayers are furious about a subject, that's when the greatest local accountability happens. That's when positive things happen.
Posted Saturday, February 26, 2011 10:32 AM
Comment 1 by Rex Newman at 26-Feb-11 09:19 PM
Does this mean WEAC is not a non-profit? That they should be paying corp. income tax on that money? Same question for our own pipefitters that bought the golf course.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 27-Feb-11 01:45 AM
I'm not a tax attorney but I'd bet you're right. This isn't a tiny issue, is it???
BTW, I'm working on a post saying that Rep. Ellison & Gov. Dayton are standing in solidarity with...evil big insurance companies.
Comment 2 by Stop Union Bullying at 02-Jan-12 09:44 AM
AFGE local 589 at the Jackson MS VAMC is a prime example of Unions gone bad. Civility and common respect for human rights and dignity is dead. I challenge President Obama or any of our top Government officials to come to Jackson, Mississippi and see the hostile environment the AFGE President has caused. Veterans are paying the ultimate cost!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ellison, Dayton Fighting For Health Care Monopolies
I've posted a number of things about the racket that the Wisconsin teachers union has fleeced Wisconsin taxpayers with. WEA Trust is the instrument that the Wisconsin Education Association has used to fleece Wisconsinites out of their hard-earned tax dollars to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.
WEA has fleeced Wisconsinites out of millions of dollars by selling high-priced health insurance policies. They've done that after they've negotiated an exclusive rights contract when they've negotiated their contract.
Now Rep. Keith Ellison, (DFL-MN), sent 140 pizzas to the unions that's bilking Main Street Wisconsin out of their money. He's doing that under the guise of standing in solidarity with 'Wisconsin's working families.'
Why isn't Rep. Ellison worried about the taxpayers that WEA Trust has stiffed? Doesn't he care about these Wisconsin families? Is it that Rep. Ellison cares only about Wisconsin's teachers union and the money they shovel to Democratic politicians through WEA Trust?
Shame on Rep. Ellison for not siding with the vast majority of Wisconsin families. Shame on Rep. Ellison for taking the union's side after they've caused one property tax increase after another. Does Rep. Ellison think that's standing with the little guy? Let's remember that the union is the organzation that's cost teachers thousands of dollars of their wages by forcing them to pay higher premiums for their health insurance.
That's the principle that Keith Ellison is identifying himself with. That's the cause that Rep. Ellison is wrapping himself up in.
Let's remember that Gov. Dayton is standing in solidarity with WEA, too. He's identifying himself with WEA's practices, principles and profittakings, too.
I'm betting that Minnesotans would reject Rep. Ellison's and Gov. Dayton's appeal if they knew what they were selling. They'd reject their sales pitch in a New York minute.
Stand with Scott Walker. Stand with Wisconsin's taxpayers. Stand for the principles that a) competition is what makes this nation great and b)monopolies, especially government-controlled monopolies, sap us of our greatness.
This is a hill I'm perfectly willing to fight and die on. There are some issues that I have opinions about but that I wouldn't fight to the death about. This is a fight that I'll eagerly fight on because the fight is important and the underlying principle is so right.
Shame on Rep. Ellison and Gov. Dayton for fighting against the things that make America great. Shame on Rep. Ellison and Gov. Dayton for fighting for principles that strengthen unions and weaken Main Street America.
Unfortunately, this is an all-too-familiar pattern with Rep. Ellison and Gov. Dayton. It's apparent that they'll fight against the things that'll strengthen Main Street if it'll strengthen the unions.
Wisconsin needs public employee union reform in the worst way. It's costing their taxpayers tens of millions of dollars. It's costing their teachers thousands of dollars in additional health insurance premiums. It's driving school districts into major deficits. It's driving up property taxes for the average Wisconsinite.
That's what Gov. Dayton, Rep. Ellison, Richard Trumka and the union universe are fighting for. That certainly isn't standing with Main Street Wisconsin. That isn't standing with rank-and-file union members.
If they aren't standing for those causes, why are they fighting alongside union leadership? The answer, I'm afraid, is spelled p-ol-i-t-i-c-a-l c-o-n-t-r-i-b-u-t-i-o-n-s.
That's some cause to get wrapped up in, isn't it?
Meanwhile, Scott Walker has fought for Wisconsin's taxpayers. He's fought steadfastly for rank-and-file union members. He's fought unflinchingly against property tax increases.
Doesn't he deserve America's support?
Posted Sunday, February 27, 2011 2:43 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 27-Feb-11 01:52 PM
Gary:
Hennepin County moved to self insurance because they thought it will be cheaper. I wonder how many school districts will like to change to a cheaper healthcare plan. In the light of the union members having to donate more money they might care now about who the provider is.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
