Tuesday, March 1, 2011

Majority in Poll Back Employees in Public Sector Unions

By MICHAEL COOPER and MEGAN THEE-BRENAN
Published: February 28, 2011

As labor battles erupt in state capitals around the nation, a majority of Americans say they oppose efforts to weaken the collective bargaining rights of public employee unions and are also against cutting the pay or benefits of public workers to reduce state budget deficits, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.


Labor unions are not exactly popular, though: A third of those surveyed viewed them favorably, a quarter viewed them unfavorably, and the rest said they were either undecided or had not heard enough about them. But the nationwide poll found that embattled public employee unions have the support of most Americans — and most independents — as they fight the efforts of newly elected Republican governors in Wisconsin and Ohio to weaken their bargaining powers, and the attempts of governors from both parties to cut their pay or benefits.


Americans oppose weakening the bargaining rights of public employee unions by a margin of nearly two to one: 60 percent to 33 percent. While a slim majority of Republicans favored taking away some bargaining rights, they were outnumbered by large majorities of Democrats and independents who said they opposed weakening them.


Those surveyed said they opposed, 56 percent to 37 percent, cutting the pay or benefits of public employees to reduce deficits, breaking down along similar party lines. A majority of respondents who have no union members living in their households opposed both cuts in pay or benefits and taking away the collective bargaining rights of public employees.


Governors in both parties have been making the case that public workers are either overpaid or have overly generous health and pension benefits. But 61 percent of those polled — including just over half of Republicans — said they thought the salaries and benefits of most public employees were either “about right” or “too low” for the work they do.


When it came to one of the most debated, and expensive, benefits that many government workers enjoy but private sector workers do not — the ability to retire early, and begin collecting pension checks — Americans were closely divided. Forty-nine percent said police officers and firefighters should be able to retire and begin receiving pension checks even if they are in their 40s or 50s; 44 percent said they should have to be older. There was a similar divide on whether teachers should be able to retire and draw pensions before they are 65.


The nationwide telephone poll was conducted Feb. 24-27 with 984 adults and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for all adults. Of those surveyed, 20 percent said there was a union member in their household, and 25 percent said there was a public employee in their household.


Tax increases were not as unpopular among those surveyed as they are among many governors, who have vowed to avoid them. Asked how they would choose to reduce their state’s deficits, those polled preferred tax increases over benefit cuts for state workers by nearly two to one. Given a list of options to reduce the deficit, 40 percent said they would increase taxes, 22 percent chose decreasing the benefits of public employees, 20 percent said they would cut financing for roads and 3 percent said they would cut financing for education.


The most contentious issue to emerge in the recent labor battles has been the question of collective bargaining rights. A proposal by Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin to weaken them sent Democratic state lawmakers out of state to prevent a vote, flooded the Capitol in Madison with thousands of protesters and sparked a national discussion about unions.


The poll found that an overwhelming 71 percent of Democrats opposed weakening collective bargaining rights. But there was also strong opposition from independents: 62 percent of them said they opposed taking bargaining rights away from public employee unions.


Phil Merritt, 67, a retired property manager from Crossville, Tenn., who identifies himself as an independent, explained in a follow-up interview why he opposed weakening bargaining rights for public workers. “I just feel they do a job that needs to be done, and in our country today if you work hard, then you should be able to have a home, be able to save for retirement and you should be able to send your kids to college,” he said. “Most public employees have to struggle to do those things, and generally both spouses must work.”


The one group that favors weakening those rights, by a slim majority, was Republicans. Warren Lemma, 56, an electrical contractor from Longview, Tex., said states did not have the money to pay for many benefits that state workers enjoy.


“Retirement benefits should not be taken away from those about to retire, but the system should be changed for the people starting to teach just now,” said Mr. Lemma, a Republican. “And the only way the system will change is to do something about unions and their control, and the only way to do that is to take away collective bargaining.”


The poll found that 45 percent of those surveyed said they believed that governors and state lawmakers who are trying to reduce the pay or benefits of public workers were doing so to reduce budget deficits, while 41 percent said they thought they were doing so to weaken unions’ power.


Although cutting the pay or benefits of public workers was opposed by people in all income groups, it had the most support from people earning over $100,000 a year. In that income group, 45 percent said they favored cutting pay or benefits, while 49 percent opposed it. In every other income group, a majority opposed cutting pay or benefits: Among those making between $15,000 and $30,000, for instance, 35 percent said they favored cutting pay or benefits, while 60 percent opposed it.


Labor unions, including private sector labor unions, are seen as less influential now than they were three decades ago. The poll found that 37 percent of those surveyed believe that labor unions have “too much influence” on American life and politics, while 48 percent said they had the “right amount” or “too little” influence. In a 1981 poll, by contrast — soon after President Ronald Reagan fired striking air traffic controllers — 60 percent of those surveyed said unions had “too much influence.” Of course, union membership has declined since then.



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/us/01poll.html?_r=2&hp

Regulators Reject Proposal That Would Bring Fox-Style News to Canada

As America's middle class battles for its survival on the Wisconsin barricades -- against various Koch Oil surrogates and the corporate toadies at Fox News -- fans of enlightenment, democracy and justice can take comfort from a significant victory north of Wisconsin border. Fox News will not be moving into Canada after all! The reason: Canada regulators announced last week they would reject efforts by Canada's right wing Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, to repeal a law that forbids lying on broadcast news.


Canada's Radio Act
requires that "a licenser may not broadcast....any false or misleading news." The provision has kept Fox News and right wing talk radio out of Canada and helped make Canada a model for liberal democracy and freedom. As a result of that law, Canadians enjoy high quality news coverage including the kind of foreign affairs and investigative journalism that flourished in this country before Ronald Reagan abolished the "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987. Political dialogue in Canada is marked by civility, modesty, honesty, collegiality, and idealism that have pretty much disappeared on the U.S. airwaves. When Stephen Harper moved to abolish anti-lying provision of the Radio Act, Canadians rose up to oppose him fearing that their tradition of honest non partisan news would be replaced by the toxic, overtly partisan, biased and dishonest news coverage familiar to American citizens who listen to Fox News and talk radio. Harper's proposal was timed to facilitate the launch of a new right wing network, "Sun TV News" which Canadians call "Fox News North."

Harper, often referred to as "George W. Bush's Mini Me," is known for having mounted a Bush like war on government scientists, data collectors, transparency, and enlightenment in general. He is a wizard of all the familiar tools of demagoguery; false patriotism, bigotry, fear, selfishness and belligerent religiosity.


Harper's attempts to make lying legal on Canadian television is a stark admission that right wing political ideology can only dominate national debate through dishonest propaganda. Since corporate profit-taking is not an attractive vessel for populism, a political party or broadcast network that makes itself the tool of corporate and financial elites must lie to make its agenda popular with the public. In the Unites States, Fox News and talk radio, the sock puppets of billionaires and corporate robber barons have become the masters of propaganda and distortion on the public airwaves. Fox News's notoriously biased and dishonest coverage of the Wisconsin's protests is a prime example of the brand of news coverage Canada has smartly avoided.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr/fox-news-will-not-be-moving-into-canada-after-all_b_829473.html?ref=fb&src=sp

A National ID Card For American Citizens? Get Ready – The Real ID Act Goes Into Effect On May 11

For a moment, imagine a future where you are not able to drive a car, get on a plane, get on a train, vote, enter a federal building, open a bank account or get a job without a national ID card. You don't think that could ever happen in America? Well, you might want to brush up on the Real ID Act because it is going to go into effect on May 11, 2011 unless something is done to stop it.  When I first learned this, I was absolutely stunned.  After all, wasn't the Real ID Act supposed to be "dead"?  A few years ago state legislatures across the nation were in an uproar over this law.  The Department of Homeland Security was forced to delay implementation of it several times.  But now it is back.  You see, this is what the federal government often does.  They will try to push something very unpopular through, and if they meet resistance they will "play dead" until the uproar has died down and then they will come right back and implement it anyway.  This is what is happening with the Real ID Act.


As of May 11, all driver's licenses across the United States will be required to conform to federal national security standards.  In essence, our licenses are now going to be federalized.


Yes, this is really happening.  A Fox News article from a couple weeks ago confirmed that these "national ID cards" will be required to board airplanes and enter federal buildings....


States must be in compliance by May with the regulations laid out in the 2005 REAL ID Act. The law, a recommendation of the Sept. 11 commission that investigated the 2001 terror attacks, creates a national security standard for state-issued identification cards to be used for purposes like boarding airplanes and entering federal buildings.


Isn't that great?


Now security goons will be able to ask us for our "papers" just like they used to do in Nazi Germany and the USSR.


Back in 2008, former U.S. Representative Bob Barr wrote the following about how not having one of these new national ID cards will automatically strip us of some of our most fundamental rights....


"A person not possessing a Real ID Act-compliant identification card could not enter any federal building, or an office of his or her congressman or senator or the U.S. Capitol. This effectively denies that person their fundamental rights to assembly and to petition the government as guaranteed in the First Amendment."


Of course the Department of Homeland Security insists that the Real ID Act is just here to "help" us and to make life "better" and "more secure".  According to their website, some of the goals of the Real ID Act are "to help prevent terrorism, reduce fraud, and improve the reliability and accuracy of personal identification documents."


But is this really what we want America to become?


A nation where we are constantly passing through checkpoints and where security goons are constantly checking our national ID card?


What kind of liberty and freedom is that?


Eventually these national ID cards will likely be required for virtually every single interaction that we have with the federal government.


Can you imagine the kind of power that the federal government will have to watch us and track our activities if this thing gets fully implemented?


The more you really think about the notion of a national ID card for Americans the more repulsive it becomes.


Eventually, without a "Real ID" you will not be able to be hired by most employers.  So in essence, you will be required to get the permission of the federal government before you can work.


Without a "Real ID", your ability to travel will be greatly restricted.  Eventually there will be very few modes of public transportation that you will be able to use without having a national ID card.


And what if you lose your national ID card?  Talk about a headache!


Hey, eventually they might just decide to solve that problem by putting a microchip directly into our hands.


Wouldn't that be convenient?


Can you see where all of this is headed?  Many of the people that are attempting to implement this thing may have "good intentions", but we all know what they say about "good intentions".


We do not need a national ID card to have a nation that is safe and secure.


Please contact your representatives in Washington D.C. and let them know that you want the Real ID Act repealed once and for all.


If we put up with a national ID card, then the Obama administration will be emboldened to try to implement the "universal Internet ID" that they have been talking about.


The sad truth is that America is no longer "the land of the free".  The government has decided that in order to keep us "safe", everything that we do must be watched, tracked, traced, recorded and controlled.


It doesn't matter whether the Democrats are in power or if the Republicans are in power - every year the United States becomes even more like a prison camp.


Hopefully the American people will wake up and will realize that this is not what our founding fathers intended.


So what do you all think about the coming implementation of the Real ID Act?  Please feel free to leave a comment with your thoughts below....


http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/a-national-id-card-for-american-citizens-get-ready-the-real-id-act-goes-into-effect-on-may-11