6 years difference- Libertarians and Right To Work For Less

The Libertarian Party Platform in 2004

Unions and Collective Bargaining
The Issue: Government interference in the employer/employee relationship has imposed undue burdens on our economy, destroying the rights of both to contract in the free market.

The Principle: We support the right of free persons to voluntarily establish, associate in, or not associate in, labor unions. An employer should have the right to recognize, or refuse to recognize, a union as the collective bargaining agent of some, or all, of its employees.

Solutions: We oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or the imposition of an obligation to bargain. Therefore, we urge repeal of the National Labor Relations Act, and all state right-to-work laws which prohibit employers from making voluntary contracts with unions. We oppose all government back-to-work orders as the imposition of a form of forced labor.

Transitional Action: Government-mandated waiting periods for closure of factories or businesses hurt, rather than help, the wage-earner. We support all efforts to benefit workers, owners and management by keeping government out of this area. Workers and employers should have the right to organize secondary boycotts if they so choose. Nevertheless, boycotts or strikes do not justify the initiation of violence against other workers, employers, strike-breakers and innocent bystanders.

Flash forward to 2010:

Labor Markets

We support repeal of all laws which impede the ability of any person to find employment. We oppose government-fostered forced retirement. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions, and an employer should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union. We oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain.

Interesting, ehhhh?

Waiting...

Hope

The work of making a better would for our kids and grandkids is an ongoing labor of Love.

Here's a bit of hope :)

More Americans side with public sector unions than side with the Republican governors around the country who are trying to take away the union’s collective bargaining rights according to the newest Gallup poll. The poll found 48 percent agree more with the state employee labor unions, while 39 percent agree with the governors.

And young people side overwhelming with the labor unions–by a greater than two-to-one margin.

Why younger Americans so overwhelmingly back the public sector labor unions is an interesting question given that the age group is the least likely to actually be part of a public sector labor union.
Part of it could be that this has obviously become a very partisan issue, and young people tend to support Democrats, but that in itself isn’t a sufficient explanation because the partisan split among young people isn’t that large.

I have a purely personal suspicion as a member in this age group, I suspect my peers don’t buy–or are scared to let themselves believe–this “middle class in decline” argument the Republican governors are using to justify their attacks on unions. I remember one of the governors defending his actions by saying how everyone else in the middle class has slowly been paying more for health care and getting worse retirement packages, so public sector unions should. too. Basically, the argument was the rest of the middle class dream is dying, so the fair thing to do is drag the unions down with everyone else.

As a young person who eventually wants to start a family, I know sky high unemployment in my age group makes it extreme difficult to establish a career that can pay for that. This message of life getting worse and less secure for working people is our destiny is extremely bleak. Instead of being jealous of public sector unions and wanting to tear them down, young people are “jealous,” but desperately want to make sure a quality middle class lifestyle can still be available to some.

I believe there is the potential for a powerful young-progressive-labor alliance in the simple message: The future doesn’t need to get suckier for the middle class.

Today

No Respect for People or Process lll

The US Chamber of Commerce plays heavily in promoting so called "Right to Work" legislation. An organization the lobby's for corporate interests, it is the highest spending lobbyist of them all. Since its membership it is made up of corporations that lobby on their own, this is worthy of remark.

The following illustrates this organizations contempt of working people and for the democratic process:

Richard Clarke Says U.S. Chamber May Have Committed A Felony With Hacking Plot

Earlier this month, Richard Clarke, who served for both Democratic and Republican Presidents, including a stint as the cyber security czar for the Bush administration, denounced the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for plotting with a group of military contractors to hack into progressive groups. Clarke was in DC speaking at a cyber security conference hosted by Symantec. Although Clarke focused his remarks about the growing threat of global cyber terrorism, ThinkProgress spoke to the longtime public servant about the ChamberLeaks story we originally broke.

According to documents first reported by ThinkProgress, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s attorneys began working with three military contractors — Berico, HB Gary, and Palantir — to come up with a proposal to discredit groups like ThinkProgress, the SEIU, StopTheChamber.com, MoveOn.org, and others. The tactics proposed included spying on families, using malware computer viruses to steal private information, using fake documents to embarrass liberals, and creating fake identities to infiltrate their targets.

Clarke denounced the scandal in no uncertain terms. Noting accurately that the Chamber “took foreign money in the last election,” a story also uncovered by ThinkProgress, Clarke said the Chamber had potentially conspired to commit a “felony”:

FANG: Hi. You talked a lot about classifying and recognizing cyber security threats, but you mostly focused on foreign threats. I’m curious about a story that broke last month, that the US Chamber of Commerce, the world’s largest trade association, based here in DC, had contracted or attempted to contract military defense firms like HB Gary Federal, Palantir, and Berico, to develop proposals to use the same type of cyber warfare tactics normally reserved for Jihadi websites against left-wing activists, trade — labor unions, and left of center think tanks here in America. What do you think about that type of threat from a lobbyist or a corporation targeting political enemies, or perceived enemies here in the US?

CLARKE: I think it’s a violation of 10USC. I think it’s a felony, and I think they should go to jail. You call them a large trade association, I call them a large political action group that took foreign money in the last election. But be that as it may, if you in the United States, if any American citizen anywhere in the world, because this is an extraterritorial law, so don’t think you can go to Bermuda and do it, if any American citizen anywhere in the world engages in unauthorized penetration, or identity theft, accessing a number through identity theft purposes, that’s a felony and if the Chamber of Commerce wants to try that, that’s fine with me because the FBI will be on their doorstep in a matter of hours.

Listen here:
Clarke, the author of a new book called Cyber War, was right to point out that hacking into progressive groups constitutes a felony. There are a number of federal and state statutes that prohibit the theft of private computer information.

Recently, Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) formally requested documents from the NSA and Defense Department relating to contracts with two of the firms involved in this scandal, Berico and HB Gary. Nineteen other lawmakers have called for a wider investigation.

Update David Chavern, the chief operating officer of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, has responded to Clarke's comments and this post on the Chamber's blog. Claiming ThinkProgress is on an "anti-Chamber jihad," Chavern states:

In more than 70,000 hacked e-mails, not one shred of evidence was found demonstrating that the U.S. Chamber ever hired or solicited proposals from any of these security companies. No evidence was found because it doesn’t exist—it never happened.

In fact, as ThinkProgress has reported, there are over half a dozen e-mails showing that the Chamber's attorneys discussed and solicited the hacking plans from military contractors Berico, HB Gary, and Palantir. One e-mail notes that a video showing Palantir's product capability in dealing with Iran for the U.S. government had “sold the Chamber in the first place.” In November, as the military contractors prepared multiple proposals and attack plans for the Chamber, there were several meetings with both Chamber officials and attorneys for the Chamber. On November 23, 2010, a meeting was scheduled where Richard Wyatt, a top attorney for the Chamber, would be “presenting to the client.”

Sadly True

No Respect for the People or Process ll

Rule of Law? Just  a bother to our adversaries.  Rule by Fiat is the Corporatist way:

Wis. Republicans Publish Anti-Union Law -- In Apparent Defiance Of Court Order

Eric Kleefeld | March 25, 2011, 10:27PM

Wisconsin state Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R) and Gov. Scott Walker (R)

Read More

2012 elections, Peter Barca, Scott Fitzgerald, Scott Walker, Wisconsin , Wisconsin Protests, Wisconsin State Legislature

Share

Yet another shoe has dropped in the battle over Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's (R) anti-public employee union law -- with state Republican leaders now apparently defying or attempting to circumvent a court order that temporarily blocked implementation of the law.

Last week, a judge in Dane County (Madison) blocked the law on procedural grounds, ruling that a key conference committee used to advance the bill -- and to get around the state Senate Dems' walkout from the state -- had violated the state open-meetings law by failing to give proper 24-hours notice.

The judge's order "restrain[ed] and enjoin[ed] the further implementation" of the law, including the prevention of Secretary of State Doug LaFollette (D) from publishing the act in the Wisconsin State Journal, which acts as the state's official newspaper for the purpose of giving the public official notice of new laws -- the final step for the law to take effect. That decision is now going through an appeals process, which remains up in the air.
But now, state Republicans have had the bill published through a different office -- the Legislative Reference Bureau, which handles drafting and research for the legislature -- according to the LRB's statutory requirement to publish legislation within ten days of enactment. Interestingly, the LRB itself says that this publication does not constitute action that would put the law into effect. But the state's Republican leaders disagree. Senate Majority Scott Fitzgerald (R) says the LRB publication constitutes official publication and the insists the law will take effect Saturday.

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports:

"I think this is a ministerial act that forwards it to the secretary of state," said Stephen Miller, director of the Legislative Reference Bureau. "I don't think this act makes it become effective. My understanding is that the secretary of state has to publish it in the (official state) newspaper for it to become effective."

...

Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau) claimed it didn't matter that it hasn't appeared in the paper.

"It's published," Fitzgerald said. "It's law. That's what I contend."

Following this action, State House Minority Leader Peter Barca (D) obtained a letter from Scott Grosz, the staff attorney for the Wisconsin Legislative Council -- which offers legal advice to the LRB -- further outlining the LRB's position. Key quote:

As described above, s. 35.095 (3) (b), Stats., refers to the publication activities of the Secretary of State, rather than the publication activities of the LRB. Accordingly, while certain statutory obligations regarding publication of Act 10 have been satisfied by the LRB, the statutory obligation that relates to the effective date of Act 10 has not yet been satisfied by the Secretary of State, and at this time the Secretary's actions remain subject to the temporary restraining order issued in Dane County Circuit Court.

However, Fitzgerald is insisting otherwise, the Wisconsin State Journal reports:

"Every attorney I have consulted said this will now be law," said Fitzgerald. "It wasn't a secret. I think they left the door open for this."

As WisPolitics reports, Fitzgerald said that he had sent the LRB the letter suggesting publication:

"It became clear that this was an option and they were on equal footing with the secretary of state," Fitzgerald said.

Fitzgerald said he could not speculate what legal actions may be taken following LRB publishing the act, but he was confident the move was proper.

"It's law tomorrow," he said.

So what does this all mean? Well, it now appears that Republicans are ready to move ahead with the new law eliminating most collective bargaining rights for public employee unions, despite a court order that prevented not only 'publication' but any "further implementation" of the statute. The move is almost certain to spark yet more litigation and provide more grist for the Democratic efforts to recall Republican state Senators this year and Walker himself next year.

No Respect for the People or Process

This illustrates the mindset we good working folks are up against:

Indiana prosecutor told Wisconsin governor to stage ‘false flag’ operation

By Eric W. Dolan
Thursday, March 24th, 2011 -- 7:32 pm

An Indiana prosecutor and Republican activist has resigned after emails show he suggested Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker stage a fake attack on himself to discredit unions protesting his budget repair bill.

The Republican governor signed a bill on March 11 that eliminates most union rights for public employees.

In an email from February 19, Indiana deputy prosecutor Carlos F. Lam told Walker the situation presented "a good opportunity for what’s called a ‘false flag’ operation."

The Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism discovered the email among tens of thousands released to the public last week following a lawsuit by the Isthmus and the Associated Press.

"If you could employ an associate who pretends to be sympathetic to the unions' cause to physically attack you (or even use a firearm against you), you could discredit the unions," Lam said in his email.

"Currently, the media is painting the union protest as a democratic uprising and failing to mention the role of the DNC and umbrella union organizations in the protest," he continued. "Employing a false flag operation would assist in undercutting any support that the media may be creating in favor of the unions."

Lam resigned from his position after the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism published an article about his email.

On February 22, an alternative paper in Buffalo, New York managed to trick Walker into taking a call from their editor posing as tea party tycoon David Koch.

When the editor posing as Koch suggested planting some troublemakers in the protests, Walker responded that "we thought about that," but said it was not necessary "because sooner or later the media stops finding ’em interesting."

"My only fear would be is if there was a ruckus caused is that that would scare the public into thinking maybe the governor has gotta settle to avoid all these problems," he said.

Walker had promised to lay off 1,500 state workers if the bill to curb collective bargaining rights for public employees didn't pass.

In mid-February, 14 Democratic state senators left Wisconsin to stall a vote on the bill. There are 19 Republican senators, but the Senate needs a minimum of 20 members to be present to debate and vote on any bills that spend money.

While the 14 Democratic senators remained in Illinois, Republican state senators removed all references to spending from the bill and passed the proposal to limit public employees' collective bargaining rights.

Wisconsin citizens upset withWalker's attack on public employees' collective bargaining rights have launched a boycott campaign aimed at his campaign contributors.

Remind Folks

A Quote for Republican Stinkers In Concord

A quick quote from Ronald Reagan

But restoring the American dream requires more than restoring a sound, productive economy, vitally important as that is.  It requires a return to spiritual and moral values, values so deeply held by those who came here to build a new life.  We need to restore those values in our daily life, in our neighborhoods and in our government’s dealings with the other nations of the world.

These are the values inspiring those brave workers in Poland. The values that have inspired other dissidents under Communist domination.  They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost.  They remind us that freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.  You and I must protect and preserve freedom here or it will not be passed on to our children.  Today the workers in Poland are showing a new generation not how high is the price of freedom but how much it is worth that price.

ALEC and New Hampshire

You may ask yourself : "Self, why do this legislators that talk about free choice not feel hypocritical about letting the government reach into our workplaces, interfere with our democratically chosen unions for folks that had a choice to not apply to places that go against their beliefs?  But they wouldn't advocate for say, the minority of folks who find marijuana prohibition objectionable... They'd be the first to cry out if the Federal government messed with New Hampshire's democratic process. But Big Government dictating our working conditions? Just fine.

Ideology trumps hypocrisy for these corporate conservatives, obviously.

Our Granite State is not only being influenced by Koch money. Our legislators are also putting the wants of corporate oriented group ALEC before New Hampshire working folks needs. Conservative right wing ideology turned into state legislation for a mere 50 bucks, well, not including the bit of integrity lost as a hypocrite.

Read on:

If it seems that all of this state-by-state union-stripping legislation is coordinated ... that's because it is coordinated. Also pre-written, gift-wrapped and hand-delivered.

Meet ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, a national right-wing group that writes "model" legislation for its members. Who are its members? Republican state legislators and private organizations (think ExxonMobil).

Because ALEC is very secretive, only members get to know who its members are, what goes on at meetings, and what legislation is being authored and pushed. But sometimes the light shines through, and sometimes they own up.

About the union-busting laws, ALEC owned up. The New York Times, in the (next-to-last) paragraph of this story, fingers ALEC as the anti-union coordinating group (my emphasis throughout):

A group composed of Republican state lawmakers and corporate executives, the American Legislative Exchange Council, is quietly spreading these proposals from state to state, sending e-mails about the latest efforts as well as suggested legislative language.

Michael Hough, director of the council’s commerce task force, said the aim of these measures was not political[.]

NPR has a nice report on ALEC (h/t commenter SCLiberal):

When you walk into the offices of the American Legislative Exchange Council, it's hard to imagine it is the birthplace of a thousand pieces of legislation introduced in statehouses across the county.

Only 28 people work in ALEC's dark, quiet headquarters in Washington, D.C. And Michael Bowman, senior director of policy, explains that the little-known organization's staff is not the ones writing the bills. The real authors are the group's members — a mix of state legislators and some of the biggest corporations in the country.

"Most of the bills are written by outside sources and companies, attorneys, [and legislative] counsels," Bowman says.

Here's how it works: ALEC is a membership organization. State legislators pay $50 a year to belong. Private corporations can join, too. The tobacco company Reynolds American Inc., Exxon Mobil Corp. and drug-maker Pfizer Inc. are among the members. They pay tens of thousands of dollars a year. Tax records show that corporations collectively pay as much as $6 million a year.

With that money, the 28 people in the ALEC offices throw three annual conferences. The companies get to sit around a table and write "model bills" with the state legislators, who then take them home to their states.

The Arizona Send-Browns-to-Prison-for-Profit law (sorry, the "SB-1070 immigration law") is a good example. Thanks to that law, prisons-for-profit companies like Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) stand to make out like, er, banditos.

Guess who helped write that law? CCA. Guess where that law was written? In the dark bowels of ALEC:

The largest prison company in the country, the Corrections Corporation of America, was present when the model immigration legislation was drafted at an ALEC conference last year. ... ALEC's Bowman says that is not unusual; more than 200 of the organization's model bills became actual laws over the past year.

I'll say it again; these guys are playing a whole different game than we are. Thank god for their hybris. I'll have more on ALEC later. Despite their furtiveness, there's info available on them, including this by a Univ. of Wisconsin history professor (h/t a really nice blog called Dictynna's Net). Stay tuned.

Oh, here's the local hook, as a Granite State Worker I thought you'd like to know:

All legislators are cordially invited to attend an American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) information luncheon on March 21 from noon to 1:30 p.m. at Tandys Top Shelf (formerly the Capitol Grille). This event will give you the opportunity to learn more about ALEC as an organization and a legislative resource. Our scheduled guest speaker for this event is Jonathan Williams, Director of ALECs Tax and Fiscal Policy Task Force and co-author of ALECs award winning publication Rich States, Poor States. Jonathan will explain why the economic crisis has been so rough on the states, while identifying what states should do to navigate the current fiscal storm, and also what they should avoid, as well as discuss the benefits of ALEC membership. So that we can appropriately accommodate those attending, please RSPV to Rep. Gary Daniels or Rep. Jordan Ulery by March 18, 2011.

Reps. Gary Daniels and Jordan Ulery

Why employee pensions aren't bankrupting states

Nothing makes people act quickly (or be acted upon without much grousing) like a percieved emergency.

Esssh! A pension emergency!

Need clarity on pensions? Think Wall Street- the value sunk when the markets did.  If they can get their hooks into our pay though 401(k)'s replacing our defined pension plans they'll have our money to play with PLUS money managers making money of 'shepherding' our hard earned pay. So our earning will go down to the tune of their fee's.

Sweet for the elite that own the bulk of stocks:

Just another transfer of wealth from the producers (we working folks)  to the shareholders.

Why employee pensions aren't bankrupting states

Kevin G. Hall | McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: March 07, 2011 07:54:39 PM

WASHINGTON — From state legislatures to Congress to tea party rallies, a vocal backlash is rising against what are perceived as too-generous retirement benefits for state and local government workers. However, that widespread perception doesn't match reality.

A close look at state and local pension plans across the nation, and a comparison of them to those in the private sector, reveals a more complicated story. However, the short answer is that there's simply no evidence that state pensions are the current burden to public finances that their critics claim.

Pension contributions from state and local employers aren't blowing up budgets. They amount to just 2.9 percent of state spending, on average, according to the National Association of State Retirement Administrators. The Center for Retirement Research at Boston College puts the figure a bit higher at 3.8 percent.

Though there's no direct comparison, state and local pension contributions approximate the burden shouldered by private companies. The nonpartisan Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates that retirement funding for private employers amounts to about 3.5 percent of employee compensation.

Nor are state and local government pension funds broke. They're underfunded, in large measure because — like the investments held in 401(k) plans by American private-sector employees — they sunk along with the entire stock market during the Great Recession of 2007-2009. And like 401(k) plans, the investments made by public-sector pension plans are increasingly on firmer footing as the rising tide on Wall Street lifts all boats.
Boston College researchers project that if the assets in state and local pension plans were frozen tomorrow and there was no more growth in investment returns, there'd still be enough money in most state plans to pay benefits for years to come.

"On average, with the assets on hand today, plans are able to pay annual benefits at their current level for another 13 years. This assumes, pessimistically, that plans make no future pension contributions and there is no growth in assets," said Jean-Pierre Aubry, a researcher specializing in state and local pensions for the nonpartisan Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

In 2006, when the economy was humming before the financial crisis began, the value of assets in state and local pension funds covered promised benefits for a period of just over 19 years.

At the bottom of Aubry's list is Kentucky, which would have enough assets to cover 4.7 years. Other states do much better: North Carolina local government pensions are funded to cover 19 years of promised benefits; Florida's state plan could cover 17 years; and California's plans about 15 years.

"On the whole, the pension system isn't bankrupting every state in the country," Aubry said.


States having the biggest problems with pension obligations tend to be struggling with overall fiscal woes — New Jersey and Illinois in particular. Many states are now wrestling with underfunding because they didn't contribute enough during boom years.

Most state and local employees government across the nation have defined-benefit plans that promise employees either a percentage of their final salary during retirement or some fixed amount. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that 91 percent of full-time state and local government workers have access to defined-benefit plans.

Several states_ including Florida, Georgia, Ohio, Colorado and Washington_ have adopted competing defined-contribution plans, or a hybrid plan that provides government employees both a partial defined benefit in retirement and a supplementary defined-contribution plan.

Defined-contribution 401(k) plans divert on a tax-deferred basis a portion of pay, generally partially matched by the employer, into an account that invests in stocks and bonds. In 1980, 84 percent of workers at medium and large companies in the U.S. had a defined-benefit plan like those still predominate in the public sector. By last year, just 30 percent of workers in these larger companies were covered under such plans.


Defenders of the public pension system say anti-government, anti-union elected officials and interest groups have exaggerated the problem to score political points, and that as the economy heals, public pension plans will gain value and prove critics wrong.

"There's a window that's closing as market conditions improve and interest rates rise, the funding of these plans is going to look better than depicted by some," insisted Keith Brainard, the director of research for the National Association of State Retirement Administrators in Georgetown, Texas.


Critics of public sector pensions paint the problem with a broad brush.

"Unionized government workers have tremendous leverage to negotiate their own wages and benefits. They funnel tens of millions of dollars to elect candidates who will sit across from them at the negotiating table," said Thomas Donohue, the chief executive of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in a Feb. 24 blog post. "This self-dealing has resulted in ever-increasing wage and benefit packages for unionized government workers that often far outstrip those for comparable private-sector workers."

In a Feb. 23 radio interview, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., called federal stimulus efforts to rescue the economy "essentially a federal bailout of public employee unions." Nunes described money owed to state pensioners as a crisis "about ready to happen."

Except that two out of every three public-sector workers aren't union members.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in January that 31.1 percent of state public-sector workers were unionized in 2010, compared with 26.8 percent of federal government employees. The highest percentage of unionization, 43.3 percent, was found in local government, where police officers and firefighters work. Teachers can fall into either state systems or local government.


Ironically, in Wisconsin, where Republican Gov. Scott Walker is trying to weaken public-sector unions and reduce pension benefits, he's exempted police and firefighters, who are among the most unionized public employees. And Wisconsin's public-sector pension plan still has enough assets today to cover more than 18 years of benefits.


The most recent Public Fund Survey by the National Association of State Retirement Administrators showed that, on average, state and local pensions were 78.9 percent funded, with about $688 billion in unfunded promises to pensioners. Critics suggest that the real number is at least $1 trillion or higher, using less-optimistic market assumptions.

The unfunded liabilities would be a problem if all state and local retirees went into retirement at once, but they won't. Nor will state governments go out of business and hand underfunded pension plans over to a federal regulator, as happens in the private sector. State and local governments are ongoing enterprises.

The flow of employees into retirement matches up with population trends in states, with Northeastern states with declining populations, particularly Rhode Island, seeing more stress on their pension systems than Southern and Western states, where there's been vibrant population growth.


Another misperception tied to the pension debate is that while the private sector has shed jobs during the economic crisis, state and local government employment has grown — and pensions along with it.
Since September 2008_ when state and local government employees numbered 19,385,000 and the economic crisis turned severe — the governments' payrolls shrunk by 407,000, to 18,978,000 this January,
according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

When calculating from December 2007 _ the month that the National Bureau of Economic Research determined was the start of the Great Recession _ state and local government employment has fallen by 703,000 jobs amid a downturn that cost the nation more than 8 million jobs overall.

"The down economy has had an effect, and the loss of employment outside the public sector has created a contrast" said Brainard, of the National Association of State Retirement Administrators.

Also fueling backlash is the perception that state and local workers don't contribute to their own retirement funds the way private sector workers do.

Three states have non-contribution public pension plans _ Florida, Utah and Oregon. About a third of Connecticut state workers don't contribute to their pensions, while most new employees do. Missouri until recently had a non-contribution policy for state workers, as did Michigan until 1997. Michigan workers hired before 1997 still don't pay toward their pensions, and some teachers in Arkansas don't have to contribute toward theirs. Tennessee doesn't require contributions from most workers and employees in the state higher education system.

Those notable exceptions aside, most states require employee contributions. The midpoint for these contributions for all states and the District of Columbia is 5 percent of pay, according to academic and state-level research. That contribution rate climbs to 8 percent for the handful of states whose workers or teachers are prohibited from paying into the federal Social Security program.

By comparison, private-sector workers shoulder a bit more of the burden. 

In its data for 2010, Fidelity Investments, the largest administrator of private-sector 401(k) retirement plans, showed employee contribution rates in its plans averaged 8.2 percent of pre-tax pay.

Separately, the Employee Benefits Research Institution estimates that most private-sector employers match up to 50 percent of employee contributions up to the first 6 percent of salary.

The utility or burden of either type of retirement plan depends on whether the plan is measured by what it delivers to an individual, or by how much it delivers to all workers receiving retirement benefits from their employer.

"It really comes down to what you are attempting to do," said Dallas Salisbury, the president of the nonpartisan Employee Benefit Research Institute.


Viewed through the lens of an employee, defined-benefit plans are more cost-effective at providing a pre-determined level of benefits to an employee. But the shortcoming of these plans is that they reward seniority. For workers with a shorter tenure, they're far less generous in retirement.
This fairness issue is one reason why 401(k) plans have grown steadily in prominence since the mid-1980s. From the payroll perspective of an employer, these defined-contribution plans produce at least some retirement income for the greatest number of employees, and the plans can move with employees who change jobs.

ON THE WEB
BLS data on unionization
Research on pensions, budgets
Projections of pension funding
How long states can fund their pensions
Public Fund Survey Scorecard

 They are trying to pull a fast one.

Happy Saint Patricks Day!

Happy Saint Patricks to you!

I grew up with a tradition of taking a moment to recollect on this day, to think about those who came before, leaving family and home to cross the sea and start a new life.

I'm a working class guy. Have classic Irish American worker roots.

Solidarity!

Koch in New Hampshire

These folks have signed onto the Koch program Americans For Prosperity- Here's a video that will  offer you a bit of flavor concerning these folks:

Explains a bit about them and their anti worker stance. Think shareholder profit via corporate profits. Think corporate control of the election process versus Democracy.

Realize they are beholden to rich folks out of state. Sort of wrecks that whole "Independent New Englander" stance that is cultivated here.

AFP New Hampshire

• AFP New Hampshire Home
• AFP New Hampshire Blog

AFP NATIONAL BLOG

RELATED ITEMS

AFP New Hampshire, Anti-Tax Pledge Signers

US Senate
Kelly Ayotte
Jim Bender
Bill Binnie
Ovide Lamontagne


Congress, 1st District
Rich Ashooh
Peter Bearse
Bob Bestani
Frank Guinta
Sean Mahoney
Kevin Rondeau


Congress, 2nd District
Charlie Bass
Bob Guida
Jennifer Horn
Howard Wilson


Executive Council
James Adams
Raymond Burton
Dan St. Hilaire
Peter Spaulding
Christopher Sununu
Dave Wheeler


State Senator
Peter Angerhoffer
Jack Barnes, Jr.
Jeb Bradley
David Boutin
Tom DeBlois
Rebecca C. Fee
Jeanie Forrester
Jim Forsythe
John Gallus
Fenton Groen
George Hurt
Gary Lambert
Jim Luther
Chuck Morse
Russell Prescott
Andy Sanborn
Nancy Stiles
Fran Wendelboe
Raymond White
Chris Wood


State Representative
Harry Accornero
Patrick Abrami
Henry Ahern, Jr.
Donald C. Andolina
Jason Antosz
Kevin A. Avard
Gary S. Azarian
Brett Bacon
Mike Ball
J. Gail Barry
Robert E. Barry
Omer Beaudoin
Joseph W. Bendzinski
Jerry Bergevin
D.J. Bettencourt
Regina Birdsell
Spec Bowers
Bruce R. Breton
Charlie Brosseau
Kevin J. Brown
John Burt
Harriet E. Cady
Alan Cail
Kathleen Cusson-Cail
Andrew Carroll
Anne Cartwright
John Cebrowski
Norma Greer Champagne
Gene Charron
Gene G. Chandler
Cathy Clair
Jean Coffey
Howard Coffman
Seth Cohn
Tim Comerford
Guy Comtois
William Condra
Timothy Copeland
Steve Cunningham
Romeo Danais
Gary Daniels
Duffy Daugherty
Russell C. Day
Cam DeJong
Susan DeLemus
James E. Devine
Shaun Doherty
Steven Doyle
Joe Duarte
Robert Duquette, Jr.
Garret Ean
Pamela Ean
Susan Emerson
Larry Emerton
Duane Erickson
Bob Fesh
Joseph Fleck
Elliot Finn
Robert Fredette
David N. Fullerton
Larry Gagne
Gary A. Gahan
Laura Gandia
Marilinda Garcia
Edmond Gionet
Robert Greemore
Mary E. Griffin
Joseph Hagan
Bob Haefner
Peter T. Hansen
Ken Hawkins
James F. Headd
John Hikel
Dick Hinch
JR Hoell
Dee Hogan
Frank Holden
Robert Hull
Win Hutchinson
Robert E. Introne, Jr.
Daniel Itse
Kyle Jones
Laura Jones
John A. Kalb
L. Mike Kapler
Phyllis M. Katsakiores
Karen Keegan-Hutchinson
Walter Kolodziej
Dave Knox
Joseph F. Krasucki
Kenneth Kreis, Sr.
Edita Kucmas
Peter Kucmas
Neal M. Kurk
Gary Lambert
Chester Lapointe
Mark G. Larochelle
Kirsten Larsen
Kathy Lauer-Rago
D. L. LeBrun
Roland LeFebvre
Vivian L’Heureux
Mark Lindsley
Marie Lozito
Linda Luhtala
Robert Luther
Hardy Macia
Leigh Macneil
Andrew J. Manuse
Dick Marple
Cory R. Mattocks
Donna Mauro
Harry McClard
Donald McClarren
John McDonnell
Carrie McGee
Carol McGuire
Dan McGuire
Charles McMahon
Robert Mead
Harry C. Merrow
Charlie Moore
Brian Murphy
Richard Nalvanko
Cliff Newton
Jeanine M. Notter
William O’Brien
Bill O’Connor
Jeffrey Oligny
Richard Olson, Jr.
Barry Palmer
Stephen Palmer
Jim Parison
Robbie Parsons
Betsey Patten
Michele Peckham
Laurie Pettengill
Leo P. Pepino
Paul Pinette
Sue Polidura
Russell T. Ober III
Katherine Prudhomme-O’Brien
Dave Randlett
Dennis Reed
Kevin E. Reichard
Skip Reilly, Sr.
Frederick C. Rice
David Robbins
Beverly T. Rodeschin
Milton Russell
Mark J. Samsel
Laurie Sanborn
Marie N. Sapienza
Troy Saunders
Steve Schmidt
Victoria Schwaegler
Brian Seaworth
Bill Sharp
Roy Shoults
Thomas Simmons
Molly Smith
Steven Smith
William Smith
Tony F. Soltani
Gregory Sorg
Connie Soucy
Kathleen Souza
Charles Sova
Scott Spaulding
David J. Starr
Philllip Straight
Dathleen Stroud
Greg Surbey
Elaine Swinford
Daniel Tamburello
Robert Tarr
Kyle Tasker
Jack Thorsen
Franklin Tilton
Bill Tobin
Amos R. Townsend
Norman Tregenza
Timothy Twombly
Linda Uluhtala
Karen Umberger
Steve Vaillancourt
Moe Villeneuve
Carol Vita
Lou Vita
Jim Waddell
Mark Warden
Colette Worsman
James C. Webb
Charles F. Weed*
David Welch
Gary Wheaton
Randall Whitehead
Steve Winter

Getting rid of Pensions?

Wall Street craps the bed and we 'should' lose our pensions? Did we ask the states to gamble our retirement money for their profit?

401(k) plans enrich the financial sector, costing us  "management fees"- while they profit from playing with our savings we suffer the risk of losing our life savings in a market 'downturn'...

Every where I look I see it coming down to the corporate shareholders benefit versus that which benefits the actual workers, the producers of goods and wealth.

The the game is tilted to the shareholders.

Republicans' Next Move: Get Rid of Pensions Altogether
Some states, like Wisconsin, are asking state employees to contribute more to their pension plans, but others are just scrapping them.
Robert Hiltonsmith | March 11, 2011 |

The battle over public-sector unions is, at least in part, a battle over benefits: From Wisconsin to New Jersey, public-sector unions are among the last employees who can expect to retire with defined pension plans. Wisconsin, where a political showdown just resulted in reduced bargaining rights for public employees, is expected to release new estimates on state pensions next week, according to The New York Times. The state will likely ask employees to contribute more money to their plans and make other concessions.

But other states have an even more radical proposal: Get rid of pensions, which guarantee benefits, and replace them with 401(k)-type savings-and-investment plans. Earlier this week, Kansas lawmakers held a hearing on a bill to switch state employees hired after 2012 to a 401(k) system -- a move at least six states have already made and that Florida, Oklahoma, North Dakota, and Virginia are also considering. Kansas Republicans praised the bill, arguing that the state's pension system, currently facing a $7.7 billion shortfall, is unaffordable and that public workers don't deserve benefits unavailable to most private-sector employees.
The shortfall in Kansas' pension, like those in most states, was largely the result of the worst decade in the history of the stock market. As recently as the year 2000, the state's pension was 88 percent funded, a level that the Pew Center on the States, which tracks state pensions, considered adequate. The Center for Economic and Policy Research calculates that 85 percent of the pension shortfalls in states in the past decade were caused by this historically low economic performance. The rest of the hole in Kansas' fund opened up after state legislators decided not to increase contributions when benefits were raised in the early 1990s. Clearly, state pensions, Kansas' among them, are not unaffordable under normal economic conditions.
Furthermore, switching future employees to a 401(k)-type plan won't decrease the current pension shortfall by a dime, given that it only encompasses benefits promised to current and past employees.

But the real problem with getting rid of pensions isn't that it won't close state budget gaps. Most important, it would eviscerate retirement security for some of the few remaining workers who have any. Whereas pension plans -- in which contributions are pooled and invested in relatively safe, slow-growing funds -- come with the state guarantee that a retired worker will maintain a certain income, individual retirement-savings plans come with inflated Wall Street management fees and no protection from a sudden market downturn. They put workers' livelihood in the hands of financial managers who, if the financial collapse is any indication, too often make risky bets for short-term gain.

Why are 401(k)-type plans such a bad idea for public and private employees alike? First, they're expensive. The exorbitant fees charged by firms that manage 401(k) accounts can cost workers a quarter or more of their retirement savings. Over a lifetime, these fees can add up to more than $70,000 in losses for the average worker. Fees are levied on employers' matching contributions as well. If states switch to 401(k)-type plans, these costs will be shouldered by taxpayers.

401(k)s also place the burden of the multitude of risks that come with saving for retirement entirely on the backs of workers. Those forced into individual-retirement plans risk losing their savings in a market crash, investing so conservatively that they ensure themselves anemic returns, contributing too little to their plans, outliving their savings, and more. Public employees already earn less than they would if they worked in the private sector. It seems particularly unfair to ask those who are already sacrificing in order to serve the public to shoulder the entire burden of providing for retirement, as well.

The other argument Republicans make -- that public workers don't deserve benefits that aren't available to many in the private sector -- is ludicrous on its face. Why should the misfortune of private-sector workers driven into risky, inefficient 401(k)-type retirement savings plans be extended to public employees, just for the sake of parity? The point should be to improve retirement for all instead of competing in a race to the bottom. State pension benefits are by and large modest: The average benefit in Kansas, for example, was a meager $14,213 per year in 2006. Shouldn't we be fighting to ensure that everyone has the possibility of a secure, dignified retirement, rather than trying to bring down some of the last workers who do?

In the wake of the worst recession in living memory, states and localities are facing a host of real budgetary issues. But let's all recognize that states switching to 401k-type plans won't solve a single one of them.

We are what is good about America- we used to be called "We the People"

'Nuff Said

   I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.
-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to the Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin (1802)

Straight talk from a Librarian!

A Library worker from Maine pointed out the truth about what is going on across the nation as tax cuts are given to the wealthy among us and the loss of revenue is made up for by cutting services to working people and those less fortunate.

Mr Bush did it. Mr Obama just did it. The houses of Congress are used to doing it, median worth of a freshman Senator is around 4 million dollars, of a freshman Congressman around 575 thousand dollars- the taxcuts work for them on a bunch of levels.

Quid pro quo. We the People just don't have the cash the rich minority have, obviously, in our political culture you get what you pay for...

Published on Wednesday, March 9, 2011 by Portland Press Herald (Maine)

Maine Librarian's Pointed Budget Message Hits the Mark

by Bill Nemitz

Some might have looked at the long lines of people waiting to testify on Gov. Paul LePage's proposed budget and decided it wasn't worth it.

After all, you can wait hours for your turn to speak.

And when they finally do invite you up to the microphone, you get only three minutes.

Kelley McDaniel, who got the attention of lawmakers during a budget hearing Wednesday, is an award-winning librarian who also connects with students at Portland’s King Middle School. And while there may be strength in numbers, it's easy to wonder after a while whether those weary legislators on the Appropriations Committee -- or any of us, for that matter -- are truly capable of absorbing all that testimony over one full day, then another, then another ...

I got that feeling Wednesday afternoon as I sat at my desk with headphones on, listening online as a seemingly endless procession of Maine citizens decried all that's wrong with the governor's $6.1 billion spending package for the next two years.

Some, understandably, sounded nervous.

Others apologized in advance because they had colds.

Still others, bless them, tried to cram too many words into too little time and had to be gently coaxed into conclusion by Sen. Richard Rosen, R-Bucksport, the committee's co-chair.

Then along came Kelley McDaniel of Portland -- No. 48 on the day's speaker list.

She's a part-time librarian at King Middle School -- and a very good one at that.

She drove to Augusta with her 11-year-old daughter, Aedin, in tow because Aedin is on King Middle School's debate team, loves politics and dutifully met her mother's condition that she write a letter to each of her teachers explaining why listening to her mom testify at a state budget hearing was at least as important as a day in school.

Talk about a teachable moment.

If politics these days is all about what the experts call "driving the message," McDaniel spent all of her precious three minutes in the fast lane.

She told the committee that she recently won a national "I Love My Librarian" Award from the Carnegie Corp. and The New York Times -- an honor that included a check, made out to McDaniel, for $5,000.
"I plan to report that money on my income tax and I expect to pay taxes on it," she told the lawmakers. "Even though I donated the money in its entirety to the public middle school where I work."

You heard that right.

She gave the whole five grand, after taxes, to her school. If you live in Portland, that's your school, too.
It was only the beginning.

McDaniel said she's "happy to pay those taxes" because the way she sees it, taxes are "like membership dues" for being a citizen of this great state.

She said that while she gets lots of things (education, health and safety, arts and recreation) in exchange for those "dues," she realizes "I may not personally benefit from everything that tax money is used for."

She has no problem with that. As McDaniel put it, "I try to trust that elected officials will spend money to the best benefit of society and not just to a handful of individuals."

Then, without missing a beat, she turned her attention to the budget.

She talked about how, over there, the budget contains $200 million in tax cuts -- including an expansion of the estate-tax exemption from $1 million to $2 million -- that largely would benefit Mainers who aren't exactly scraping to get by.

And how, over here, that loss of state revenue is more than offset by $413 million in various curtailments on benefits earned by retired state workers -- many of whom, like McDaniel has at King Middle for the past 11 years, served long and nobly in Maine's public schools.

Observed McDaniel, "I don't understand the rationale for this proposal."

She said she doesn't buy the idea that the tax cuts, putting significantly more money back into the pockets (or portfolios) of Maine's wealthy, will stimulate the economy.

Citing reports from the Congressional Budget Office, McDaniel said "the best way to stimulate the economy is to give modest increases to the poor. Wealthy people tend to hold on to their money, while poor people tend to spend it as they get it."

Then McDaniel, as those experts might say, "re-framed the issue."

"I don't think it's a moral decision, because taking money from people who don't have much money and giving it to people who have more money than the people you took it from seems, well, greedy," she said. "Greed is frowned upon in every major world religion -- and I don't think agnostics and atheists look too kindly upon it, either."

She wondered aloud, "Is this about a quid pro quo? A gift from elected officials to wealthy people who have donated, or will donate, to election and re-election campaigns?"

Finally, as the clock wound down, McDaniel dropped the hammer.

"It's not economically sound. It's not morally sound. And I think you know that," she said. "I would be embarrassed to support something so ludicrous -- taking from the poor to give to the rich.

"Maybe you're testing us, checking to see if we, your constituents, are really paying attention, really listening," she continued. "I hope that's what's going on, because the alternative involves me losing faith in representative government, in democracy and in you, the elected officials."

Not once did her voice waver.

Not once did she cross the line between on-point and off-the-wall.

And not once did she sound like she was feeling sorry for herself.

Truth be told, McDaniel decided to testify in honor of her stepfather, a retired high school social studies teacher who, like so many in this state, struggles to fit rising health care costs into a painfully fixed income.
After McDaniel finished, the packed hearing room erupted into applause. Rules being rules, Chairman Rosen reminded them that cheering is not allowed.

But as McDaniel gathered her daughter for the ride home to Portland, a proud young Aedin said she noticed something about her mother's testimony that she hadn't seen with the other speakers.

"All of the people on the committee -- they weren't on their computers or looking at their papers while you were talking," Aiden told her mother. "That's because you were using your teacher voice."

A teacher voice.

Now more than ever, it's worth a few minutes of Maine's time.

Koch Brothers and US Chamber of Commerce

A pertinent article gleaned from the 'net

Koch Brothers and US Chamber: Polluting Our Earth and Our Democracies

Wisconsin Workers and Enviros Everywhere Face Same Enemy

by Bill McKibben

Among other truths made completely clear by the showdown in Wisconsin: the outsized role of the Koch brothers in American politics.(Photo by Steve Rhodes.)
Charles and David, the third and fourth richest men in America, first gained notoriety in the fall, when a remarkable expose by Jane Mayer in the New Yorker showed how they'd funded not only the Tea Party but also the hydra-headed campaign to undermine the science of global warming, all in the service of even more profit for their oil and gas business.

But it was in Wisconsin that the down-and-dirty details of their operation began to emerge -- they'd not only funded the election campaigns of the governor and the new GOP legislature, but also an advertising effort attacking the state's teachers. They'd helped pay for buses to ferry in counter-protesters. We were even treated to the sight of new Governor Scott Walker fawning over them in what turned out to be a hoax phone call. The Kochs are right up there now with the great plutocrats of American history, a 21st century version of the robber barons.

The trouble is, they don't care. And they don't really have to care. Their business is privately held and answers to no one. Last week their spokesman said they would "not step back at all ... This is a big part of our life's work. We are not going to stop." So those of us who care about things like the climate will need to go on tracking them. But we'll also need to pay attention to their ideological twin, the Pepsi to their Koch. It's the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Unlike the Koch brothers, everyone's heard of them. That's because there's a chamber of commerce in almost every town in America -- they're the local barbers and florists and insurance guys, the folks who arrange the annual chili cook-off or the downtown Christmas lights. You know why Lindbergh's plane was called the "Spirit of St. Louis"? Because it was paid for by the by St. Louis Chamber of Commerce.

But that's not the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The U.S. Chamber is a hard-right ideological operation, which provides massive funding to conservative Republicans, including the new GOP majority in Wisconsin. If you want a sense of just how far right: Glenn Beck held a telethon on their behalf, and donated $10,000 of his money. "They are us," he said -- and an executive of the chamber called in to thank him. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce spent more money lobbying in 2009 than the next five biggest players combined; they spent more money on politics than either the Republican or Democratic National Committees. They're the biggest elephant in the jungle.

Despite their claim to represent three million American businesses, more than half their budget comes from just 16 companies. They don't have to identify them, but it's pretty easy to guess who they might be, since the chamber has devoted much of its time to thwarting any effort to control carbon emissions. For instance, they filed a brief with the EPA demanding they not fight global warming because "populations can acclimatize to warmer climates via a range of behavioral, physiological, and technological adaptations."

And here's the thing: Unlike the Kochs, the Chamber has some real vulnerabilities. Though thanks to the Supreme Court they can keep their secret flow of money going, their credibility depends in part on the idea that they're representing all those millions of businesses. That's why we've launched a big nationwide campaign: "The U.S. Chamber Doesn't Speak for Me." Businesses big and small are already joining in -- a thousand in the first week -- making the case that in fact capitalism can adapt to new sources of energy. Capitalism's great virtue, after all, is supposed to be nimbleness and flexibility.

Those of us who work on climate change have spent years trying to figure out why Congress pays no attention to what's clearly the most dangerous issues the earth faces. For years we thought we simply needed to explain the crisis more skillfully. But in the last year the truth is becoming clearer: Hidden in the shadows are the guys with money who pull the strings. We need to illuminate those shadows, with the Kochs and even more with the U.S. Chamber.

A Main Street Contract for the American People?

Gleaned from the Web:

Time for a Main Street Contract for the American People

by Rose Ann DeMoro

The ongoing battles in the streets and capitols in Madison, Columbus, Lansing, Indianapolis, and other American cities make it clear that the lines are no longer just drawn, they are exposed.
There are two Americas. One where Wall Street gets bailouts, and another where public schools and safety net programs get slashed.

Where the wealthy elite get tax cuts extended and estate taxes removed, while working people see their retirement plans, health coverage, pay, and bargaining rights gutted. Where people who rob banks go to prison, but bankers who rob people get bonuses and bail outs.

The lesson the uprisings can be heard in the voices ringing out from the hundreds of thousands marching in the snow, sleeping in the Capitols, and jamming the streets.
It wasn't public workers or high school students or single mothers on Medicaid who plundered public treasuries or caused the meltdown on Wall Street. Talk of shared sacrifice is hollow when all the blame and concessions are forced on working families and those who can afford it the least.

The attack on collective bargaining and unions was always part of a larger game for politicians like Scott Walker, other governors, many in Congress, and their legion of corporate sponsors, to escalate the transfer of our nation's wealth and resources to the bankers and the other elites.
Our challenge as a nation - the vast majority of Americans who built this country and strive to sustain it - is to transform the story line of who is to blame for this crisis, and how to solve it.

And to change, once and for all, our priorities to become a more just society.

Nurses in particular know this well. Their voices are heard in every community, their social responsibility profound. Their refrain is 'we brought you into the world, now we are going to fight for you, for your quality of life, for your children, for our future.'

It's time for a Main Street Contract for the American People.

Every American should be entitled to:

• Jobs at living wages, with a new national policy based on re-investing in America.
• A good, affordable education.
• Guaranteed healthcare for all.
• A secure retirement, with the ability to retire in dignity.
• Decent shelter and protection from hunger.
• The right to collectively organize.
• A just taxation system where corporations and the wealthy pay their fair share.
• Restoring the promise of our founding - life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all.

If it sounds like the Second Bill of Rights envisioned by President Franklin Roosevelt, that's just a reminder of how far we as a nation still have to go, how far our democracy has been hijacked and corrupted, and how imbalanced our priorities have become.

The American people, not Wall Street, deserve their own economic renewal package. It's time to reclaim our country. And we will.

Seven lies about public-sector workers

Lifted from the web:

Seven deadly lies about public-sector workers

Petrino DiLeo counters the myths about greedy government workers with the facts.

March 10, 2011

 
Large numbers of Wisconsin residents have stood up to the attacks on public-sector workers
 
BY NOW, we've heard the talking points spouted countless times. There's a new bunch of greedy haves in America who live the good life at the expense of the rest of us, taking unfair advantage of their political connections to loot the public treasury.

Only according to these claims, it's not the bankers who benefited from trillions of dollars committed by the U.S. government to Wall Street bailout, only to turn around and pay themselves billions in bonuses. Instead, the new "haves" are public-sector workers--and the "have-nots" are those in the private sector, and anyone who pays taxes.

Turn on Fox News at any hour of the day, and you're likely to hear well-paid pundits in designer suits railing about the greed of teachers, sanitation workers, social workers, firefighters, bus drivers and every other kind of government worker.

These public employees, we're told, are richly compensated and have gold-plated benefits. And if we don't cut their wages, slash their benefits and destroy their pensions, states and municipalities across the country will be forced into bankruptcy.

It's all utter nonsense. There is a pension crisis, but it's not because benefits for most public-sector workers are too generous. And when it comes to deficits, the lion's share of the shortfall at the state level--by some estimates, the deficit for the 50 states will total $140 billion in 2011--is a function of tax breaks and giveaways to the wealthy and corporations, and a direct result of decreased revenues stemming from the recession.
In reality, the deficits and pension crisis are being used as an excuse to go after compensation and benefits that public-sector workers have won through their unions. The U.S. ruling class has successfully reduced the level of unionization in the private sector to single digits, and as a result, private-sector workers have worse benefits than their brethren in the public sector.

But rather than view this as an indictment of the chipping away of working-class living standards, it's being used as an excuse to double down on the attack on workers--by going after the remaining strongholds of organized labor in the U.S.

Here's a look at the myths about public-sector compensation and government deficits--and the facts you need to dispel them.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Myth Number 1: Public-sector workers are paid better compensated than private-sector workers.
The right wing never tires of trotting out figures showing that public employees are paid more than private-sector workers--one favorite statistic has public-sector employees earning 13 percent more than private-sector workers. Just last week, USA Today had a story claiming that public workers in 41 states earn higher average pay and benefits than those in the private sector.

The big trick with all of these "studies" is that they compare apples and oranges. They don't adjust for any other factors, such as age, years of experience or level of education. Just to name one such factor, 48 percent of government workers have college degrees versus 23 percent of private sector employees--and that naturally leads to higher average compensation.

When these other factors are adjusted for, studies show that the pay of public-sector workers has actually dropped relative to private-sector employees with the same level of education. As Reich points out:

Compare apples to apples, and you'd see that over the last 15 years, the pay of public-sector workers has dropped relative to private-sector employees with the same level of education. Public-sector workers now earn 11 percent less than comparable workers in the private sector, and local workers 12 percent less. (Even if you include health and retirement benefits, government employees still earn less than their private-sector counterparts with similar educations.)

The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) reached the same conclusion--wages and salaries of state and local employees are lower than those for private-sector employees with comparable education and work experience. A Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) report, meanwhile, estimates that public sector workers earn 4 percent less.

In Wisconsin specifically, the EPI estimates that state workers are under-compensated by 8.2 percent compared with private-sector workers.

When it comes to total compensation, including benefits, the data is harder to parse. But according to the CEPR, at most, the public and private sectors are equal. Their study found that "'management, professional and related' workers in the private sector receive, on average, $48.19 per hour in total compensation, almost exactly the same as the $48.15 per hour in the state-and-local sector."

And far from being "gold-plated," most pension benefits are downright modest. According to Reich, after a career with annual pay averaging less than $45,000, the typical newly retired public employee receives a pension of $19,000 a year--hardly comparable to the golden parachutes that the parasites on Wall Street enjoy.

And for about 30 percent of state and local workers, "a substantial portion of government pension expenditures only offset lost Social Security earnings," according to the CEPR, because these employees are excluded from the federal government's retirement system.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Myth Number 2: Public-sector workers contribute nothing towards their benefits and pensions.
Part of Scott Walker's approach in Wisconsin has been to claim that everyone needs to sacrifice, and all he's asking is for public-sector workers to contribute more toward their benefits and pensions. In effect, he claims that public-sector workers are getting something for nothing.

But in fact, public-sector unions have negotiated for a part of workers' compensation to go toward better benefits and pensions. They accepted lower wages in the present in exchange for having some compensation put toward health care and retirement costs. So asking them to "contribute more" is, in reality, asking them to accept a pay cut.

As journalist David Cay Johnston put it in an interview on Democracy Now!:
Americans don't seem to get this. All of your compensation is earned. It's not just your cash wage. If you work for a private employer, and you get a paid vacation, that's not a gift from your employer. You earned it...These are negotiated contracts. And how the money flows, whether it goes through the worker's paycheck and then to the pension and to the insurance company, or it goes directly to the insurance company or the pension plan, is irrelevant to the total cost...

[T]he fundamental important point here is the workers earned this. And so the governor really wants to cut their wages. And instead of saying, "I want to cut the wages of these people," he has used this false argument.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Myth Number 3: Inflated public-sector pension benefits are the cause of deficits at the state and municipal level.
Pension contributions in their entirety amount to less than 4 percent of state spending currently. The National Association of State Retirement Administrators puts the figure at 2.9 percent, while the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College puts the figure at 3.8 percent.

Overall, Robert Reich reports that taxpayers are directly responsible for only about 14 percent of public retirement benefits. The lion's share of benefits comes from contributions made by workers themselves.
And in Scott Walker's Wisconsin, the state isn't even facing the kind of fiscal crisis that plagues some other states. Walker is claiming that the state is facing a $137 million deficit this fiscal year--far smaller than many states. And a number of analysts believe Walker is inflating the shortfall--based on a Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau report that estimated the state would have ended the fiscal year with a positive balance, if not for corporate tax breaks that Walker pushed through as his first act in office.

So turning around and attacking public-sector workers is a pure bait-and-switch. Walker chose to make the deficit worse, and then use it as an excuse to go after public workers. This is the case even though total salaries and compensation in the last budget were just 8.5 percent of the entire state budget.

In addition, the Wall Street casino contributed to budget deficits in ways you never hear about. Crashing the economy in and of itself ripped gaping holes into government budgets. Overall, state and local government non-interest revenues fell from a peak of $1.48 trillion in 2008 to $1.41 trillion in 2009 and $1.43 trillion in 2010. Revenues dropped to less than 10 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product for just the third time since 1992. At the same time, state and local expenditures have decreased from a peak of $1.68 trillion in 2008 to $1.63 trillion in 2009 and $1.62 trillion in 2010.

A new International Monetary Fund study concluded that half of the increases in budget deficits around the world are due to collapsing tax revenues--and a further large share is due to interest payments on old debt. Less than 10 percent is due to discretionary public spending.

As is always the case in an economic slump, the recession--which brought with it wealth destruction, high rates of unemployment and increased reliance on social programs--caused a decline in revenues and increased spending on some services.

In addition, bad financial advice also hurt municipalities. In August, the New York Times reported how a credit deal negotiated by JPMorgan Chase that went bad has left the Denver school system paying much more in interest and fees than it originally anticipated--and potentially facing a $81 million termination fee, which is equal to 19 percent of its annual payroll.

The Denver schools aren't alone. According to estimates by the Service Employees International Union, over a two-year period, state and local governments paid banks $28 billion to get out of credit deals gone bad.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Myth Number 4: Public-sector benefits pensions shortfalls are the result of pensions being too generous.
The shortfalls in public-sector pension funds currently amount to about $1 trillion, according to a Pew Center on the States study--as of the end of fiscal year 2008, states had $2.35 trillion set aside to pay for workers' retirement benefits, and they owed $3.35 trillion in total benefits.

This is another statistic that gets thrown around a lot. But what's rarely pointed out about that figure is the timeframe for the shortfall. As Dean Baker points out in a CEPR paper, "The total shortfall for the pension funds is less than 0.2 percent of projected gross state product over the next 30 years for most states. Even in the cases of states with the largest shortfalls, the gap is less than 0.5 percent of projected state product."
In fact, if there were no contributions to any state pension funds at all, on average, with the assets on hand, state pension plans would be able to pay out benefits at their current level for 13 years.

And while it is true that there is a $1 trillion shortfall in pensions over the long term, the real question is how that shortfall came about. There are two main reasons--and neither has anything to do with payouts from the system.

By far, the single biggest contributor to the shortfall was the stock market crash from 2007 to 2009. According to Dean Baker, "If pension funds had earned returns just equal to the interest rate on 30-year Treasury bonds in the three years since 2007, their assets would be more than $850 billion greater than they are today."

Further, Baker points out that another $80 billion is a result of states cutting back on contributions to pension funds as a result of the downturn. States also cut back on mandated contributions based on making assumptions that the investment returns of the funds themselves would more than cover the contributions. When the exact opposite occurred, a massive shortfall emerged seemingly overnight.

That process has been exacerbated now by some states deliberately underfunding pensions. For example, in New Jersey, where the state has a $53.9 billion unfunded pension liability, Gov. Chris Christie skipped the state's required $3.1 billion payment last year.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Myth Number 5: The corporate tax rate is too high.
Another favorite tactic of the right wing is to point at the corporate tax rate of 35 percent and complain that the U.S. is making itself uncompetitive globally by slapping businesses with onerous rates of taxation. Moreover, governors often claim that raising taxes on corporations or the wealthy in their state will only serve to push companies to relocate. As a result, businesses are being given a free pass.

But corporations have found plenty of ways to evade paying taxes--sometimes entirely. According to left-wing economist Rick Wolff, in New York state:

In 2010, personal income taxes raised $34.8 billion; sales and excise taxes raised $12.2 billion; and corporate and business profits taxes raised $6.6 billion. Not only do businesses pay a very small portion of the state's total tax take, but business taxes rose less than the other two kinds over the last decade. From 2000 to 2010, personal income taxes rose 50 percent, sales and excise taxes rose 24 percent, and corporate and business taxes rose the least, 20 percent.

Overall, a study by three academic accountants at Duke, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of North Carolina found that corporations, on average, pay a total rate of taxation--combining federal, state and local taxes--of less than 30 percent. And more than one-quarter of firms paid an effective tax rate of less than 20 percent.

General Electric, for example, had an effective tax rate of just 14.3 percent in the last five years, according to a recent New York Times report. The same report showed that in the same time period, Boeing paid a total tax rate of 4.5 percent, Yahoo paid 7 percent, and Southwest Airlines paid 6.3 percent.

According to Wolff, "Corporations repeated at the state and local levels what they accomplished federally. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, corporations paid taxes on their profits to states and localities totaling $24.7 billion in 1988, while individuals then paid income taxes of $90 billion. However, by 2009, while corporate tax payments had roughly doubled (to $49.1 billion), individual income taxes had more than tripled (to $290 billion)."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Myth Number 6: States and municipalities are broke, so there is no other choice but to cut.
The $140 billion in state budget shortfalls is a drop in the bucket compared to the resources that were lined up when the financial system was in crisis. All told, more than $14 trillion in loans, bailouts and guarantees was put at Wall Street's disposal. States need 1 percent of that amount to wipe out their collective deficits completely.

Moreover, when the financial system was in crisis, the Federal Reserve Bank transferred about $1.5 trillion in bad debts from banks onto its balance sheet--an increase of nearly three times from $800 billion to $2.25 trillion.

Meanwhile, the Fed continues to lend money to Wall Street at interest rates of 0 percent. So why couldn't the same deal be extended to states and municipalities?

As of the end of 2009, the total net worth of U.S. households was $54.2 trillion, of which 87 percent is concentrated in the richest 25 percent of households--down from a record of $65 trillion in 2007, but still nothing to sneeze at. Meanwhile, non-financial corporations are sitting on an estimated $2 trillion in cash-on-hand, an all-time record. That works out to $7,000 of cash for every man, woman and child in the country--sitting unused in the bank accounts of big business. And those figures don't include the money locked away in private equity funds, hedge funds, investment banks and other kinds of institutional investments.

So why can't some of this wealth be taxed to help out the state governments claiming poverty?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Myth Number 7: The demands for reduced public-sector workers' wages and pensions is about "shared sacrifice"--everyone needs to cut back.
Conservative economic commentators and politicians alike hammer relentlessly at the idea that the country is "broke," and it's only fair that public workers should chip in.

But apparently, shared sacrifice doesn't apply to Wall Street executives. Back in 2008, when George Bush's Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson was trying to sell Congress on approving the the $700 billion Wall Street bailout program, he argued vociferously that limiting executive compensation would be "impractical."
As Andrew Ross Sorkin wrote in Too Big To Fail, Paulson said that banks "would have to renegotiate all of their compensation agreements, a process that could take months, preventing them from accessing the program. As one of Paulson's deputies, Neel Kashkari, claimed, "It's impossible for us to go to hundreds of banks across the country and have them renegotiate all their employment contracts...It's just going to take too long; it's impossible. So if they have golden parachutes, physically, we can't do it."

Yet three years later, what was supposedly impossible to accomplish on Wall Street is being demanded of government workers in virtually every state and city in the country.

The bankers won their battle to retain huge compensation packages by claiming that it was "unrealistic" to rip up previous agreements. Yet when it comes to public-sector workers--who earn a fraction of what the banksters do--we learn that renegotiating salaries and benefits is the only realistic option.

In the end, what these myths and facts make clear is that the attack on public-sector workers is the latest facet of an assault against the U.S. working class. We should reject the attempts to pit private-sector workers against public-sector workers--and insist that insofar as deficits need to be funded, the rich should be made to pay first.