Archive for Government Employees
Piranhas Swimming at the Trout Farm
Posted by: | CommentsWhat are the foundations for a good government (if the idea even exists)? Adams and Jefferson discussed this subject occasionally in the hundreds of letters the two exchanged over nearly fifty years. They saw the basis for a good government wrapped within two characteristics. The first is a system of diluted power or decentralization. The second incorporated a system of checks and balances where no one governmental unit held absolute power over another. But where is the check on power when bureaucrats hold an elected position while still collecting money from the public trust? Is this not like the old adage of the fox watching the hen house.
Jefferson thought this to be the case. As President of the United States he issued an order (paraphrased) stating it is the right of any government employee to vote in an election. It is, however, expected that the government employee will not engage in electioneering or trying to influence the vote of others. If a government employee could not be involved in electioneering, then in essence they were banned from seeking political office while still employed as a public servant.
In 1939 Congress passed the Hatch Act that political activity of government employees must be restricted in order for government institutions to function fairly and effectively (another idea that does not exist). Under the Hatch Act federal employees may not:
• Use official authority to influence to interfere with an election
• Solicit or receive political contributions
• Be a candidate for public office in partisan elections
• Engage in political activity while on duty, in a government office, wearing an official uniform, or using a government vehicle.
Though the Hatch Act pertained specifically to federal employees, some states invoked similar restrictions. Through the years the prohibitions on political activity by government employees has been greatly water-downed.
After glancing at some of the individuals running for county board in the paper, I wonder why we allow government non-worker, workers to hold a political seat while still collecting a government paycheck and making bureaucratic policy. This is not good government when you allow a tax piranha to decide how tax dollars are to be spent. One of the candidates even wears a uniform. He is the police chief for the city of Prescott. Take a look at this crop of candidates and see how many collect a government check. They should fit in well with the rest of the county board.
Another Town Goes Belly-Up
Posted by: | CommentsIn my post below I highlighted the recent decision by the North Hudson Finance Committee to dig further into the pockets of taxpayers rather than laying off personnel, which may include police officers. Local towns and villages along with their government employees may want to take note of what is happening around the country.
Last night the capitol city of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg, filed for bankruptcy. The effect of such a move is yet to be determined. But Harrisburg is just the latest case of a municipality sinking under the burden of debt caused by fool hardy projects, bloated personnel costs, and declining tax receipts due to declining property values and individual incomes. Instead of cutting needless programs and employees like police sitting in a parking lot looking out for seatbelt violations, local governments continue operating with their head in the sand waiting for pennies from heaven to save them from showing people the city hall, county building, or statehouse door.
The unwillingness to cut government down to its intended purpose has left citizens virtually in the dark or fending for themselves when under attack (like I said before, the police do not really protect). Several Indiana cities are the latest municipalities to the pull the plug on streetlamps in an attempt to save money. Notice in the article below how the Mayors of the cities say nothing of cutting programs or personnel to meet budget deficits.
In Topeka, Kansas is so broke that the District Attorney may not prosecute domestic battery cases. It just so happen that Topeka like Harrisburg, Pennsylvania is a capitol city. Perhaps the DA and the police should worry less about cases like drug abuse, which is an individual choice to ruin their life.
St. Croix County Transvestite
Posted by: | CommentsOne thing I can’t quite figure is how you can support a position of smaller government, but you don’t want to cut the number of non-worker, worker government employees. The Walker budget is based on the notion of cutting the budget without giving a number of non-worker, workers the heave-ho. If you cut government without axing employees then it would mean the non-worker, workers would do even less non-working, work.
The St. Croix County Board under the leadership of self-proclaimed conservative Daryl Standefur continues to hire government non-worker, workers despite a soft hiring freeze, which means it does not exist. The latest non-hiring freeze of non-worker, workers happened this week when the Board approved the hiring of a County Administrator. I didn’t even know we were missing one!
It appears we have not had a non-worker, worker County Administrator or manager for the last six or seven months. It is hard to tell you are missing something when you don’t miss it in the first place. It’s like missing the warm touch of a hot girl that you no chance of getting within 5 yards of anyway.
Now I wonder what this new administrator is going to do for me that I didn’t miss in the first place and why the taxpayers need to pay for his salary. Word has it that he is responsible for creating budgets and seeing that the other government non-worker, worker department heads stay within financial limits. That sounds like a pimp trying to make sure the whores look respectable.
The only people going to benefit from the hire of the non-missed, non-worker, worker County Administrator is Daryl Standefur and the nursing home residents that sit on the County Board. Is it not the responsibility of an elected Board to devise a budget and to make sure the non-worker, workers stay within its limits? Read More→
Do Not Stand on Principle
Posted by: | Comments
A Dane County judge reaffirmed her recent restraining order regarding the Wisconsin Budget Repair Bill that requires government employees in the state to contribute into health and pension plans plus restricting the ability to bargain benefits. In issuing her second stay of the law, the judge upped the ante by indicating any eventual ruling concerning open meeting laws may not come until the end of May. The timing is obvious as it comes after the election of a State Supreme Court Justice and the recall efforts against eight Republican Senators. The Governor and the GOP controlled legislature have several options to avoid a potential block of the legislation.
Upon reconvening the legislative session this week, the Assembly and Senate could simply pass the bill again; though I would certainly add the police and firefighters to the original bill. At least one Democratic Senator has pledged not to run for the border, which set up the present claim in court now. From what I have gathered, the Governor is reluctant to introduce the bill again on the principle that the court has no jurisdiction concerning the rules of the Senate. Read More→
Attention Government Employees (State, County, Local)!
Posted by: | CommentsThere is a saying, “If you build it they will come.” Well, let me toss out a likely corollary: If you rob them they will leave!
Jimmy John is bolting from Illinois and this should be a clear message to all of the looters masquerading as patriotic citizens by singing the National Anthem down in Madnes-ville. Jimmy boy is headed for Florida, and the family is already there..
My message to any and all, if you continue to insist that you’re entitled to your pay and benefits but I am not entitled to the fruits of my labor, I will leave you to your cheese headed brick and mortar, lord of the flies, non-material, non-profit world “where rivers run with milk and coffe, where wine spurts from rocks at their command, where pastry drops on them from clouds at the price of opening their mouth..(Ayn Rand)” of monopolized and coerced “education.”
Jimmy: “I could absorb this and adapt,” Liautaud tells his hometown paper, the Champaign-Urbana News-Gazette, “but it doesn’t feel good in my soul to make it happen,” he says. “My family and I are out of here.”
Left Brain, Right Brain
Posted by: | CommentsAdmittedly, I am not as eloquent as the towncrier. I do, however, have some observations from the Hudson School Board listening session over the matter of teachers engaging in an illegal walkout two weeks ago. Instead of speaking on the subject matter of the walkout, I decided upon entering the room to observe. I received more of an education than expected. The following is a summary of last night.
The Superintendent reported that on any given day an average of 59 teachers call out absent for a variety of reasons. With nearly 350 teachers in the district, the number of daily absences equates to almost 17% of the teaching force. No business could ever operate with that type of absentee rate. Considering the cost of hiring a substitute plus paying the regular teacher’s pay for the day, the tab to taxpayers must be significant (This will be further investigated).
The room decidedly listed toward the teachers that had held a rally before the meeting. But why let the teachers speak at all. It was their actions that caused the listening session in the first place. This was a chance for the ordinary citizen to express their opinions on the walkout. The teachers already told the public how they felt when they decided to protest instead of teaching. The question was not a matter of whether they violated the contract. By making an apology, Scott Ellingson admitted guilt in a coordinated sickout or walkout. If that point was clear, then why have the teachers speak. I believe the teachers know all too well that the throng intimidates citizens with children in the school who may face grade retribution for an outspoken parent. Teachers are government employees and therefore, in a different classification than the public. Obviously through the years the teachers, the board of education, and the administration have formed the trinity where it is difficult to see any oversight.
After listening to the comments and how the speakers approached the subject matter of the illegal teacher walkout, it donned on me that the different sides of the chasm are really from different universes. The room was literally divided between the left brain and the right. In terms of arithmetic, the logical side sees 2+2=4 or 4=2+2 or 4-2=2, which then allows other calculations such as multiplication and division.
The emotional side looks at the same equation as 2+2 (depending on my emotions)=3 or 3=2+3(on a bad day) or 3-2 (when I am really stressed)=6. Not only do the laws of math change upon the situation, but more pertinent so do the laws governing contracts and human interaction, which includes economics. This is why it makes sense to Scott Ellingson when he writes in the paper about the economic stimulus that comes from you being taxed out of your wallet and into his pocket.
The parameters of the speeches were restricted to the topic of the walkout and limited for three minutes. The moderator on several occasion warned teachers and supporters about crossing the line of topic. The 2+2=5 crowd talked about the Bishop of a local church, the United Nations, quality education, and most of all the stresses they face. Teachers for some reason believe their occupation is a unique stress factory. We heard how they could not sleep, eat, or stay on task because of the oppressing stress endured over the Walker bill. The inference was clear; we walked out because our emotions could not be controlled (2+2=10). The walkout was not their fault. The Governor inflicted such emotional distress that they had no choice but to break the terms of their contract. Furthermore they do not merit consequences for the illegal walkout because they are entitled to different rules than the rest of society.
Read More→
What Interests Does a Candidate Represent?
Posted by: | CommentsIn a discussion with an acquaintance the other day, she touched on the topic of politics and the importance of the Massachusetts race for US Senate. Granted it is interesting how a special election in the heart of Democrat country could see a Republican win and thus kill any attempts to pass a socialized medicine healthcare bill. Her comments illustrated a problem facing taxpayers in the state of Wisconsin. People will spend hours talking about national politics and vote in droves for the election of federal offices, but nary will a whisper be heard about local candidates.
Local spring elections barely draw enough voters to the polling place that would fill up a good size movie theater. Yet county, city and school district taxes are a sizeable chunk of a person’s over all tax burdens. I recently attended a gathering of nearly 50 people at a private residence to hear a Congressional candidate speak. Imagine how many would show up to listen to a person running for school board or city council; maybe a handful.
Even though most yawn at the mention of local elections, an organization exists that is willing to put its money and manpower into candidates for local offices. Despite the economic hardships faced by many, local governments and school districts across Wisconsin have increased the tax burden over the last year. In the area where I live, both the county and the school district raised their portion of the property tax by nearly 9%.
Such actions have left many questioning the mindset of local elected officials. How can they vote to increase taxes in time like this and offer raises to government employees while at the same individuals are losing their jobs or their homes; why government does not suffer the same fate of the recession?
The answer may be found in the contents of an envelope going out to each of the candidates for the county board. The letter came from the offices of AFSCME, the government workers union. The opening sentence should send alarm bells to taxpayers about the true nature of local elections.
Dear Candidate for St. Croix Supervisor,
The AFSCME PEOPLE committee of the 3rd CD is considering endorsements for the Spring election of the ST. Croix County Board of Supervisors.
The committee decides locally who the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees will support in the upcoming election…
The letter then invites the candidate to be part of an interview process beginning with an enclosed questionnaire.
As part of the candidate interview process, we have enclosed an AFSCME questionnaire.
The second page of the letter deals with personal information including email, phone numbers, and details of the candidates campaign treasury (where they can mail the checks).
On the next couple of pages the union asks eleven support/oppose questions. No surprise the first handful of inquiries dealt with opinions on collective bargaining and” living wages”. The next set dealt with the idea of privatization, Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR), and increasing the tax burden on wealthy individuals and businesses. One curious question dealt with the time of board meetings. Currently St. Croix County Board meetings are held during the day time when many taxpayers are at work, and therefore, find it difficult to exercise their Constitutional right to address grievances toward government. It is highly doubtful that government union employees are concerned that those who pay their wages and benefits are shut out of the process.
I find this letter from AFSCME and others like it very disturbing on several fronts (WEAC sends out similar invitations to school board candidates). The founding principles of the republic established a hierarchy of power. The Creator endowed the individual with rights. Government was a creation of the people, and thus subservient to the citizenry. In layman terms, the people are the true employers of government workers.
The very strong implication of the people’s representative having to interview with government employees flips the hierarchy and the foundations of the country on its head. By submitting to an interview with the government union, a politician puts the government on equal or superior footing with its creator. Liberty cannot exist under such a system. Read More→