Spittleless Politicians, Apathetic Constituents and Collective Bargaining

Rosemary here. I am a Republican because I am a social conservative.  But I'm a Catholic social conservative, and I believe that social justice is code for ... social justice.  I do not believe that the smallest unit of any just society is the individual, it is the family. Economically, I am not a capitalist, I am a distributist, which makes me a subsidiarist.  A subsidiarist is a person who believes that all matters concerning the family must be addressed at a level of governance that is as close to the family as possible.  One of the largest of all the issues addressing the family is education, and to our detriment, we have put spittleless politicians in charge of the education of our young.  These erstwhile public servants began having acute cases of dry mouth at the local level, and kicked the can up and up and up, so now we have policies and mandates decided at ever higher levels of government.  And I have to lay some of this blame on my own doorstep.  Since I homeschooled my children, I did not show up at town meetings concerning the town budget, a huge percentage of which goes to education.  I wanted to stay below the radar.  I forgot that what was decided at those meetings affected my family in the form of taxation, in the form of education decisions being made for the children of my neighbors and for my children’s friends.  Shame on me on that score.

What does any of this have to do with collective bargaining?  A whole lot.  When it comes to public employee unions, like the teachers’ unions, it is our politicians or their surrogates making the deals when negotiating contracts.  The political environment is such that politicians are constantly campaigning.  Politics is institutionalized “people pleasing.”  It has less to do with public service than with an affable, well-meaning, benevolent, condescending consolidation of power.  When a public employee union comes to the table, our elected officials do not negotiate, not really.  Democrats say “Yes, yes, a thousand times yes!” and Republicans say, “No, wait … what … you’re going to walk out?  You’re going to tell the press …. What?!!  Damn you …. Okay.” And at the local level, it is often “hale fellows, well-met, let’s rubberstamp this thing and head to the bar.” This is an oversimplification of the kabuki dance that happens behind closed doors, but you get the picture.

So … Wisconsin.  What amazing political theater we’ve been witnessing over the last week and a half.  At fist glance, I would sympathize with Governor Walker.  He made no bones about what he would do when elected, and with an abundance of spittle, he got right down to it.  As it turns out, it’s just well-staged union busting.  Collective bargaining is a big headache for everyone, even the Democrats.  It makes politicians say “Yes!” or “Okay” to spending more and more and more money.  It makes them mandate things no one can pay for. It makes them do things they maybe should not be doing.  It makes their mouths so dry, they cannot possibly say “No” or “Not this year” or “We can’t afford it.”  So, let’s take away the very thing that makes a union a union … collective bargaining.  That solves the problem, and makes democracy a safe Neverland  where politicians never have to grow up, where they get to posture and glad-hand and backroom-deal to their hearts’ content.


I am not a fan of what teachers’ unions have brought to the table over the last twenty years.  I hate tenure for K through 12 teachers.  I think some of the curriculum decisions that have been made in the past two decades have been ridiculous. I intensely dislike the notion of incompetent teachers getting the pay that should be going toward the process of hiring and keeping promising, young teachers … but union busting is not the answer.  The unions brought this stuff to the table, but it was the politicians who said ‘yes.’ The public employee unions are willing to make concessions in order to help with the fiscal problems afflicting the state of Wisconsin. Taking away collective bargaining is an injustice and it would make the unions as top-heavy as government.  Taking away collective bargaining would funnel the process of gaining benefits and raises for workers away from the local level, away from the very people affected.  If the money isn’t there, it’s up to the town council or state or federal legislators to say so.  If the process becomes messy and contentious and the press cries “FOUL” and the unions cry “UNFAIR” and some politicians cry, “WE’RE BROKE” and other politicians cry, “PEOPLE WILL SUFFER” its all to the good if collective bargaining is still in place. If the answer is a political “no”, then justice has not been totally mangled to deliver that answer.

In closing, here are a couple quotes from Pope John Paul II’s encyclical Centisimus Annus (1992):

" . . . The freedom to join trade unions and the effective action of unions . . . are meant to deliver work from the mere condition of 'a commodity' and to guarantee its dignity."

" . . . The right of association is a natural right of the human being . . . Indeed, the formation of unions cannot . . . be prohibited by the state because the state is bound to protect natural rights . . ."

Got spittle?

(Speaking of spittle, gumption, audaciousness, etc. you have to see this video of the “vote” on the bill to bust the unions.  Keep your eye peeled on the timeclock.  It made me ashamed to be a Republican.)