Watching Wisconsin become the next Egypt is something I'm sure no one ever anticipated, yet, turmoil has been building due to legislation that would eliminate workers rights to bargain collectively for wages, benefits and all that good stuff. Rewind about 50 years before Wisconsin decided to allow public employees to unionize. Around that time, private sector employees were given the green light to bargain collectively. Nowadays, you don't see nearly as much of that happening. The reason: budgetary constraints. You see, private sector employees relied on private entities to pay their wages. Once all those resources were tapped, many businesses either took their companies elsewhere or folded altogether.
With public employees, it's an entirely different scenario since it's the taxpayers who essentially pay their wages. While we could just pack up and move out of state if we're unhappy with the taxes being raised, the burden just grows for everyone else. But the state is broke, so it's very clear that something has to change. Five decades ago, the economy in Wisconsin was entirely different, fully capable of sustaining public unions. Since then, however, more and more public employees have been hired and the ability of these people to bargain collectively has garnered them some of the highest quality benefits packages around. Through the years, the cost to the government has increased significantly.
Therein lies the problem. Public employee unions in Wisconsin don't negotiate salaries based upon the budget of the state government, thus growing the state's debt, which inevitably becomes a bigger burden on the taxpayers. Because of the difficulty of sustaining the salaries of public workers, there's no doubt in my mind that collective bargaining is part of the reason the state has gone so far into the red. Regardless, I totally understand the public employees' perspective in this whole debacle. They don't want to give up their ability to bargain collectively because, once they concede even just a little bit, chances are the government will expect more concessions in the future.
What I don't quite comprehend is that, because collective bargaining has been in place for 50 years, public workers believe they are entitled to it and it has become their right to join unions and fight for their benefits, wages, pensions and all that. Not necessarily. The way I see it, the only things that we're entitled to as Americans are our basic rights that were granted to us by the United States Constitution. Everything else is pretty much fair game. Truthfully, the practice of collective bargaining would not even exist were it not for the governing body of the State of Wisconsin. So, in essence, the government giveth and the government can taketh away.
I know it sounds malicious to put it in those terms, but I honestly do feel bad for union workers. Essentially, they're getting screwed over due to poor decisions that were made by the government five decades ago; it really is unfortunate and unfair. Perhaps, had the Wisconsin government heeded the warning of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who declared that "government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into public service," none of this would be happening right now.
Jennie Oemig
Staff Writer
Trempealeau County Times
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Super Waste of Money
When it comes to the Super Bowl, money is typically no object. You have people shelling out thousands of dollars for tickets, parking, memorabilia and just about anything else you can think of when making the trip to the biggest football game of the season. Then, of course, you have the fans at home who throw Super Bowl parties, throwing down uncharacteristically large amounts of money on food, alcohol and, for some, new wide-screen televisions. However, on game day, the most extravagant spending of all is revealed during the in-game breaks – commercials. While companies spend millions upon millions of dollars to get their product advertised during what has become the most anticipated commercial day in history, there are some ads that leave the masses disappointed.
Among the most talked about Super Bowl commercials this year were the Volkswagen "Force" ad with the kid dressed up as Darth Vader and the Bridgestone "Carma" commercial with the life-saving beaver. Personally, my favorite commercials this year were those that featured Doritos namely the "Pug Attack" ad when the guy is taunting the dog with a chip and eventually ends up on the business end of a glass door. Regardless, the people in this country have come to know and love Super Bowl Sunday for, not only the game, but also the entertainment value of the commercials and big-name performances. While I admittedly think this year was lacking in the performance department with the Black Eyed Peas, that wasn't even one of my biggest concerns.
Remember after Christina Aguilera butchered the National Anthem (sadly, she could have saved herself some embarrassment by just lip-syncing), there was a flyover of the stadium by four F-18 Hornets? While there are many people out there wondering why the fly over even took place since the roof of Cowboys Stadium was closed, the United States Armed Forces have been doing those flyovers for years, even at domed stadiums. It doesn't make a lot of sense in that regard, but, for me, the cost for our military to perform these ceremonial flights is what makes me question their necessity. That whole five-second flyover of the Dallas Cowboys' new stomping grounds reportedly cost the government $450,000. While no one in the stadium was actually able to see the jets, part of the intent of the flyover was to entertain the at-home audiences. Now, I don't know about everyone else, but I could have gone on with my life just as well had I not seen the jets soar across the sky before kickoff. And now that I know how much it cost, the entertainment value is lost on me.
After being called out on the cost, the military rebutted, saying that the Super Bowl flyovers are figured into the Navy's annual budget and deemed training exercises. Don't get me wrong, I understand the purpose of training exercises, but I have a hard time accepting the fact that the government spent nearly a half a million dollars on fuel, personnel and who knows what else to fly the jets to Arlington, Texas, from Virginia Beach, Va., to perform said training. I mean, just imagine the hundreds of different ways that money could have been used to better the nation and the economy. On second thought, don't. It might make you sick to your stomach.
Jennie Oemig
Staff Writer
Trempealeau County Times
Among the most talked about Super Bowl commercials this year were the Volkswagen "Force" ad with the kid dressed up as Darth Vader and the Bridgestone "Carma" commercial with the life-saving beaver. Personally, my favorite commercials this year were those that featured Doritos namely the "Pug Attack" ad when the guy is taunting the dog with a chip and eventually ends up on the business end of a glass door. Regardless, the people in this country have come to know and love Super Bowl Sunday for, not only the game, but also the entertainment value of the commercials and big-name performances. While I admittedly think this year was lacking in the performance department with the Black Eyed Peas, that wasn't even one of my biggest concerns.
Remember after Christina Aguilera butchered the National Anthem (sadly, she could have saved herself some embarrassment by just lip-syncing), there was a flyover of the stadium by four F-18 Hornets? While there are many people out there wondering why the fly over even took place since the roof of Cowboys Stadium was closed, the United States Armed Forces have been doing those flyovers for years, even at domed stadiums. It doesn't make a lot of sense in that regard, but, for me, the cost for our military to perform these ceremonial flights is what makes me question their necessity. That whole five-second flyover of the Dallas Cowboys' new stomping grounds reportedly cost the government $450,000. While no one in the stadium was actually able to see the jets, part of the intent of the flyover was to entertain the at-home audiences. Now, I don't know about everyone else, but I could have gone on with my life just as well had I not seen the jets soar across the sky before kickoff. And now that I know how much it cost, the entertainment value is lost on me.
After being called out on the cost, the military rebutted, saying that the Super Bowl flyovers are figured into the Navy's annual budget and deemed training exercises. Don't get me wrong, I understand the purpose of training exercises, but I have a hard time accepting the fact that the government spent nearly a half a million dollars on fuel, personnel and who knows what else to fly the jets to Arlington, Texas, from Virginia Beach, Va., to perform said training. I mean, just imagine the hundreds of different ways that money could have been used to better the nation and the economy. On second thought, don't. It might make you sick to your stomach.
Jennie Oemig
Staff Writer
Trempealeau County Times
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Don't Alienate the Voting Public
Every year around Election Day, we hear so many commercials and paid advertisements insisting that our vote is important and that everyone should get to the polls and cast their ballot if they want to see change. So, why then, is the State of Wisconsin moving forward with legislation that will require all voters to present photo identification at the polls? While presenting a photo ID is necessary while carrying out various tasks, such as filling prescriptions, writing checks or boarding a flight, I don't understand why it should become a necessity when it comes to voting. If I were to venture a guess, I'd say the Wisconsin government will only further alienate the voting public by implementing this law.
Off the top of my head, I can think of three groups of people who will be negatively impacted by this legislation: the elderly, the poor and college students. Many elderly people who don't drive any longer have no need for a driver's license(my grandmother never had a driver's license and never drove a day in her life). With most of these individuals already living on a fixed income, it seems arrogant of the government to tell them they need to purchase a photo ID in order to vote, something they've done for decades without such requirements. Then, you have low-income families that are barely making it as it is. Most of them don't have vehicles because they cannot afford them and use public transportation to get from A to B. Their vote is just as important as anyone else's, yet, most will likely give up that right because they won't have proper identification to cast their votes. If I had a choice between purchasing a Wisconsin photo ID and putting food on my table, you'd better believe my family would come first.
Last, but certainly not least, you have the college student faction – kids who will someday become the leaders of this nation. These are the people we should be encouraging to vote, not discouraging them by making more regulations. In Wisconsin, students are considered residents of the state if they live on a UW campus for the majority of the year, which most do. I attended UW-River Falls and there were oodles of students attending the institution due to its excellent education program and its close proximity to their homes in Minnesota. However, with this new Wisconsin Voter Photo Identification Act, those students will not be able to cast their vote unless they acquire a Wisconsin ID. That's just ridiculous, if you ask me. Not only are these students paying more tuition due to reciprocity to get an education at a college of their choosing, but our government is going to require them to purchase an ID card if they wish to vote in Wisconsin? Something just doesn't add up. Perhaps, college IDs should be considered an acceptable form of identification at the polls.
If not, I think the state should issue these students – and the rest of the citizens who don't have proper identification – Wisconsin identification cards, free of charge, so they may vote. After all, it is our God-given right and people shouldn't have to pay the government in order to exercise that right. Granted, there has been talk of the state government providing the IDs at no cost, but, when you take into account the condition the economy is in, I'm not sure that would be entirely feasible. Another thing that frustrates me is the way in which this new bill will eliminate same-day voter registration. Are you kidding me? There are so many people out there who register on the day they cast ballots that it would be a travesty to do away with that convenience. Instead, everyone will have to remember to get all of their information to the state weeks in advance. With the busy schedules people have, it seems ludicrous to expect people to have to remember that, too.
Though the Photo Identification Act is, more or less, a way to cut down on voter fraud, I have a feeling it will cut down on the number of voters at the polls, instead. Sure, people should do their civic duty and make sure they have all their ducks in a row prior to Election Day, but it's becoming way too much of a hassle, if you ask me. Maybe, instead of adding more rules and regulations, the state should try to make it easier for the voting public to carry out its role in our democracy.
Jennie Oemig
Staff Writer
Trempealeau County Times
Off the top of my head, I can think of three groups of people who will be negatively impacted by this legislation: the elderly, the poor and college students. Many elderly people who don't drive any longer have no need for a driver's license(my grandmother never had a driver's license and never drove a day in her life). With most of these individuals already living on a fixed income, it seems arrogant of the government to tell them they need to purchase a photo ID in order to vote, something they've done for decades without such requirements. Then, you have low-income families that are barely making it as it is. Most of them don't have vehicles because they cannot afford them and use public transportation to get from A to B. Their vote is just as important as anyone else's, yet, most will likely give up that right because they won't have proper identification to cast their votes. If I had a choice between purchasing a Wisconsin photo ID and putting food on my table, you'd better believe my family would come first.
Last, but certainly not least, you have the college student faction – kids who will someday become the leaders of this nation. These are the people we should be encouraging to vote, not discouraging them by making more regulations. In Wisconsin, students are considered residents of the state if they live on a UW campus for the majority of the year, which most do. I attended UW-River Falls and there were oodles of students attending the institution due to its excellent education program and its close proximity to their homes in Minnesota. However, with this new Wisconsin Voter Photo Identification Act, those students will not be able to cast their vote unless they acquire a Wisconsin ID. That's just ridiculous, if you ask me. Not only are these students paying more tuition due to reciprocity to get an education at a college of their choosing, but our government is going to require them to purchase an ID card if they wish to vote in Wisconsin? Something just doesn't add up. Perhaps, college IDs should be considered an acceptable form of identification at the polls.
If not, I think the state should issue these students – and the rest of the citizens who don't have proper identification – Wisconsin identification cards, free of charge, so they may vote. After all, it is our God-given right and people shouldn't have to pay the government in order to exercise that right. Granted, there has been talk of the state government providing the IDs at no cost, but, when you take into account the condition the economy is in, I'm not sure that would be entirely feasible. Another thing that frustrates me is the way in which this new bill will eliminate same-day voter registration. Are you kidding me? There are so many people out there who register on the day they cast ballots that it would be a travesty to do away with that convenience. Instead, everyone will have to remember to get all of their information to the state weeks in advance. With the busy schedules people have, it seems ludicrous to expect people to have to remember that, too.
Though the Photo Identification Act is, more or less, a way to cut down on voter fraud, I have a feeling it will cut down on the number of voters at the polls, instead. Sure, people should do their civic duty and make sure they have all their ducks in a row prior to Election Day, but it's becoming way too much of a hassle, if you ask me. Maybe, instead of adding more rules and regulations, the state should try to make it easier for the voting public to carry out its role in our democracy.
Jennie Oemig
Staff Writer
Trempealeau County Times
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
What About The Children?
Learning about the struggles that the Independence School District is going through in terms of funding has made me realize how the decaying public education system is cheating the youth of this nation of their futures. In recognizing this, I have some serious concerns regarding the way in which our state government prioritizes funding for certain entities. When you think about it, kids going through the public school system across the state are, in essence, the future of Wisconsin. If they are not provided the proper education they rightfully deserve, chances are the state will suffer – likely in more ways than one.
First of all, the declining funding from the state level will, unfortunately, mean that school districts will need to be dissolved or consolidate with other districts. Teachers will lose jobs and will seek employment in other states. Due to larger student-teacher ratios, grades and test scores will suffer, meaning students will not get the education they need to prosper in the future and thus hampering their success in the college and in the work force. And when those individuals decide to start a family, I wouldn't be surprised if they would seek to have them schooled in a state in which their children can get a quality education. So, in reality, what the Independence School District is dealing with will, ultimately, be an obstacle that many other schools will encounter if the state continues to cut funding.
Believe me, if I were a parent, I would be calling my legislators constantly to gripe about how wrong these cuts are and how harmful they will be our children. While I am on board with Gov. Scott Walker's plan to bring the business climate in Wisconsin back up to par, it seems that other areas of need are being shoved on the backburner. What's even scarier is that one Wisconsin legislator, Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, has proposed eliminating funding for 4-year-old kindergarten. That's insane. When every year of a child's youth counts – particularly when it comes to learning – it's hard to fathom that people actually think cutting such programs would be beneficial on any level.
What I think really needs to happen is our representatives in government should help contribute to saving our schools. Maybe, instead of taking health insurance, perhaps, they might consider taking a stipend. Or maybe just plain, old, goodhearted charity would be appreciated. I'll bet if each of the elected officials and justices for the state of Wisconsin donated a portion of their salary to the education fund, it would be genuinely appreciated. When Gov. Walker served as the Milwaukee County Executive, he voluntarily reduced his salary to save money, which makes me wonder if he would be willing to consider doing the same thing in his new role. It certainly would give constituents some newfound respect for politicians – and government in general. At last check, the salary for Wisconsin's governor ranked 19th in the nation. Add to that the fact that our Chief Justice makes over $150,000 a year (and the six associate justices each make about $144,000 per year), it's no wonder state expenses are exceeding its revenues.
But, I digress; something needs to change; we can't just keep pretending that referendums that increase taxes for the general public will continue to solve this problem. A great deal of families are already struggling as it is. And cutting funding to schools is about the worst thing any state government could do. Here's hoping there is some semblance of light at the end of this dreary tunnel and that politicians in Madison will begin to see the error in their ways – hopefully, sooner, rather than later.
Jennie Oemig
Staff Writer
Trempealeau County Times
First of all, the declining funding from the state level will, unfortunately, mean that school districts will need to be dissolved or consolidate with other districts. Teachers will lose jobs and will seek employment in other states. Due to larger student-teacher ratios, grades and test scores will suffer, meaning students will not get the education they need to prosper in the future and thus hampering their success in the college and in the work force. And when those individuals decide to start a family, I wouldn't be surprised if they would seek to have them schooled in a state in which their children can get a quality education. So, in reality, what the Independence School District is dealing with will, ultimately, be an obstacle that many other schools will encounter if the state continues to cut funding.
Believe me, if I were a parent, I would be calling my legislators constantly to gripe about how wrong these cuts are and how harmful they will be our children. While I am on board with Gov. Scott Walker's plan to bring the business climate in Wisconsin back up to par, it seems that other areas of need are being shoved on the backburner. What's even scarier is that one Wisconsin legislator, Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, has proposed eliminating funding for 4-year-old kindergarten. That's insane. When every year of a child's youth counts – particularly when it comes to learning – it's hard to fathom that people actually think cutting such programs would be beneficial on any level.
What I think really needs to happen is our representatives in government should help contribute to saving our schools. Maybe, instead of taking health insurance, perhaps, they might consider taking a stipend. Or maybe just plain, old, goodhearted charity would be appreciated. I'll bet if each of the elected officials and justices for the state of Wisconsin donated a portion of their salary to the education fund, it would be genuinely appreciated. When Gov. Walker served as the Milwaukee County Executive, he voluntarily reduced his salary to save money, which makes me wonder if he would be willing to consider doing the same thing in his new role. It certainly would give constituents some newfound respect for politicians – and government in general. At last check, the salary for Wisconsin's governor ranked 19th in the nation. Add to that the fact that our Chief Justice makes over $150,000 a year (and the six associate justices each make about $144,000 per year), it's no wonder state expenses are exceeding its revenues.
But, I digress; something needs to change; we can't just keep pretending that referendums that increase taxes for the general public will continue to solve this problem. A great deal of families are already struggling as it is. And cutting funding to schools is about the worst thing any state government could do. Here's hoping there is some semblance of light at the end of this dreary tunnel and that politicians in Madison will begin to see the error in their ways – hopefully, sooner, rather than later.
Jennie Oemig
Staff Writer
Trempealeau County Times
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)