Didn't they see it coming?

Talk of the bailout plan for the Big 3 has been in the news for almost a week now and I've been wanting to say something about it since the first time I heard about it so here it is:

They got $25 billion back in September for R&D and now they want another $50 billion on federal loans. Half of that would go to retooling their factories because the geniuses running these companies thought that the SUV craze would last forever even amid the rise of gas prices and the increasing sales of more efficient foreign cars. There has been talk about building more fuel efficient vehicles for years and year and yet they continued to make these gas guzzlers and didn't bother with fuel efficiency and hybrids. That's besides the point though. Let them retool, save jobs pay us back our tax money with interest.
The big problem is the other half of that $50 billion. It's going to pay for union benefits. Us tax payers are going to pay for union benefits. According to Bloomberg:

United Auto Workers says it wants $25 billion to help fund the union- run retiree health-care trusts being started in 2010.

Why should we pay for this? Because they can't afford it. Common sense would then ask why would they have this health care plan if they can't afford it. If they can't afford to pay for it maybe they should adopt one that they can instead of using our tax money to pay for it. In a perfect world I guess...
Can you imagine if the EFCA passes and it becomes easier for unions to take over? How many businesses are we going to have to bail out because they can't afford union demands and how many are just going to close down because the government doesn't see them fit for saving. Common sense tells me that this is just not the best idea.

Moving on. Camille Paglia has this to say about Sarah Palin:

How dare Palin not embrace abortion as the ultimate civilized ideal of modern culture? How tacky that she speaks in a vivacious regional accent indistinguishable from that of Western Canada! How risible that she graduated from the University of Idaho and not one of those plush, pampered commodes of received opinion whose graduates, in their rush to believe the worst about her, have demonstrated that, when it comes to sifting evidence, they don't know their asses from their elbows.

Liberal Democrats are going to wake up from their sadomasochistic, anti-Palin orgy with a very big hangover. The evil genie released during this sorry episode will not so easily go back into its bottle. A shocking level of irrational emotionalism and at times infantile rage was exposed at the heart of current Democratic ideology -- contradicting Democratic core principles of compassion, tolerance and independent thought. One would have to look back to the Eisenhower 1950s for parallels to this grotesque lock-step parade of bourgeois provincialism, shallow groupthink and blind prejudice.

I like Sarah Palin, and I've heartily enjoyed her arrival on the national stage. As a career classroom teacher, I can see how smart she is -- and quite frankly, I think the people who don't see it are the stupid ones, wrapped in the fuzzy mummy-gauze of their own worn-out partisan dogma. So she doesn't speak the King's English -- big whoop! There is a powerful clarity of consciousness in her eyes. She uses language with the jumps, breaks and rippling momentum of a be-bop saxophonist. I stand on what I said (as a staunch pro-choice advocate) in my last two columns -- that Palin as a pro-life wife, mother and ambitious professional represents the next big shift in feminism. Pro-life women will save feminism by expanding it, particularly into the more traditional Third World.

Read the whole article it's really good.

And now I'm going to study. The book I'm reading tonight is infuriatingly biased but that is a post for another day.

Employee Free Choice Act

How many of you have heard of the Employee Free Choice Act? I heard the name once, can't even remember when, and then it was brought up to my attention by a lawyer. She said to look it up and what I found scared me.

Basically right now to unionize, before a private vote, there has to be a card check in which 30% of employees sign the card. Get 30% then there is a secret vote and if there is 50% +1 votes in favor of unionizing then it happens and the company and union negotiate terms of a contract until both sides come to a mutual agreement.

Under the EFCA the private vote will be done away with. It would be enough just to get 50% +1 during a card check campaign. What does that mean? That means that people could be harassed by their company and by the organizers, they will not have the opportunity to vote in private. How many people will really vote the way they want if they will be voting in public, open to scrutiny from not only their employers but also their fellow employees and reps. from a labor union. It will be taking the choice away from the employees.

Second, if they get the 50% +1 then the company has 120 days to agree to an initial contract before going to binding arbitration, the results of which neither the company or the employees will be able to appeal and will be valid for 2 years.
So again how exactly is it fair to let a third party decide what the terms of the contract that the company and employees have to abide by. They don't have a vested interest in either side.

Personally I feel that this can change business as we know it. I fear that it's going to financially ruin many companies, not only make it to where they can hire less people because of how much money they have to pay in comp and bens. but since they have to make up these loses somewhere prices will go up.

This is just a very general overview as I see it. For more information check out The Heritage Foundation.
It's really long but you can skim trough it and get a lot of very good information on this piece of legislation.

And who is for this?

Well, from the Obama campaign's position on the economy:

Labor

Obama and Biden will strengthen the ability of workers to organize unions. He will fight for passage of the Employee Free Choice Act...* Ensure Freedom to Unionize: Obama and Biden believe that workers should have the freedom to choose whether to join a union without harassment or intimidation from their employers. Obama cosponsored and is strong advocate for the Employee Free Choice Act, a bipartisan effort to assure that workers can exercise their right to organize. He will continue to fight for EFCA's passage and sign it into law.

From the Obama Campaign position on fighting poverty:

Ensure Freedom to Unionize

Barack Obama believes that workers should have the freedom to join a union without harassment or intimidation from their employers. Although an estimated 60 million Americans would join a union if given the opportunity, companies too often evade employment laws and deny workers the opportunity to organize and advocate for their rights. Obama is a cosponsor and strong advocate for the Employee Free Choice Act, a bipartisan effort to make the unionization process more transparent and increase penalties on companies that violate employee rights. He voted in favor of the legislation this year and will continue to fight for its passage. Obama also will fight to make the card check process more common and less difficult.

By the way this legislation would increase the penalties for unfair labor practices committed by employers during organizing but not for unions.

Statement of Senator Barack Obama on the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2007:

Passing this legislation will mark the most meaningful action in years to restore the right of workers to organize for fair treatment, but we must go further and also pass the Employee Free Choice Act. Workers should be free to choose whether they want to join a union without fear of intimidation, coercion, or threats to their livelihoods. This bipartisan effort would make the process of organizing less vulnerable to employer violations by requiring card-check recognition and increasing penalties on employers that violate the law.

And he thinks that they will not be coerced in an open vote? Really?

This all comes off as hostile to free enterprise and like government interference with private companies. This is going to make us even less competitive in the world markets (Hello, Detroit and the American auto makers who are closing plants left and right, heavily unionized!) and most likely kill more jobs.



No it is not that simple!