Monday, December 13, 2010

Government Unions vs. Taxpayers

See Wall Street Journal Monday, December 13, 2010 op/ed piece by Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703766704576009350303578410.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
"Government Unions vs. Taxpayers The moral case for unions—protecting working families from exploitation—does not apply to public employment"

It includes:
"Public employee unions contribute mightily to the campaigns of liberal politicians ($91 million in the midterm elections alone) who vote to increase government pay and workers. As more government employees join the unions and pay dues, the union bosses pour ever more money and energy into liberal campaigns. The result is that certain states are now approaching default. Decades of overpromising and fiscal malpractice by state and local officials have created unfunded public employee benefit liabilities of more than $3 trillion."

"First, we need to bring public employee compensation back in line with the private sector and reduce the overall size of the federal civilian work force. Mr. Obama's proposal to freeze federal pay is a step in the right direction, but it falls well short of shrinking government and eliminating the pay premium enjoyed by federal employees.
Second, get the numbers right. Government should start using the same established accounting standards that private businesses are required to use, so we can accurately assess unfunded liabilities.
Third, we need to end defined-benefit retirement plans for government employees. Defined-benefit systems have created a financial albatross for taxpayers. The private sector dropped them years ago in favor of the clarity and predictability of defined-contribution models such as 401(k) plans. This change alone can save taxpayers trillions of dollars."

Labels: ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home