Recently in FRAUD Category
Were the results in Massachusetts, which seem nuts to a sane man, attributable to satisfaction with the way things have been going?
Pre-election polls in Massachusetts (as well as elsewhere) showed great unease over the debt and the deficits and the unaffordable expenditures being run up in Washington.
And who could be happy with the past few years of deficit spending and higher taxes delivered by the Patrick administration and the one-party Democratic legislature?
The outlook for a turn to some fiscal sanity looked good for awhile in both states, but in the end the spenders prevailed.
Evidence is piling up that the major reason for the unexpected success of the Democrats was the all-out effort of public unions to keep their gravy trains running. In doing so, public employees through their unions were working against the interests of a great segment of taxpayers who pay their salaries.
According to what we were told, the appearance of Democratic poll watchers on the Cape at every precinct desk to check off who votes was new, another indication of how involved public union personnel were in the state campaigns. The same is true of the strangers who appeared at polls to hold Patrick and Keating signs alongside the locals.
It appears that in many of these cases they were public union employees deployed from their home towns to towns where they would not be known. A public records request to Town Hall for copies of authorizations for poll watchers was answered with the statement that Massachusetts regulations do not require any show of identification or authorization for a poll watcher. The party should attempt to identify the sources of the 24,000 or so foot soldiers which the Democratic Party said it had on the ground. Were they paid for their work and by whom? Did they take the day off or did they get their regular pay? In other words, did taxpayer dollars in some part pay for the Democrat machine?
Here's how it works: Democrats approve fat public union contracts and pension and healthcare benefits for public union employees. Republicans and independents rightly complain they are unaffordable for taxpayers, are too generous and outstrip what private sector counterparts earn. Public unions jump in at election time to help those Democrat politicians who keep their high salaries and benefits flowing. States and local governments across the country are reeling with public employee costs, but voters have not found a way to blunt their power where Democratic politicians in control.
Even in our supposed nonpartisan towns unionized public employees have the power to force votes that are hurtful to the people of the towns. Take the budget vote in 2009 in Chatham, coming just after the economic and market collapse of late 2008. The vast majority of taxpayers were suffering badly. Despite that, the Town Manager, eager to have public employees do his bidding, signed a three-year fire union contract in October 2008 averaging increases of between 5-7% per year.
At the subsequent town meeting, as urged by the Town Manager, ALL regular town employees received increases averaging about 6% plus increases in pension and health care benefits. The bloc of town employees, their relatives and friends, 400 plus, was large enough to ram the budget through even though the overwhelming majority of voters not connected to town employees were financially stricken and at least half were living on less than the base salary of the average full time Chatham town worker. Their votes of protest were not enough to prevent the ripoff. Today, this balance of power continues to be more often than not the situation in Cape towns. Unionized town employees can control town meetings, especially where their compensation is at stake.
And now that public union muscle is being deployed on behalf of Democratic candidates statewide to keep the public employee gravy trains running. The taxes taxpayers pay are used to grow government to employ yet more people and to make it possible for Democrats to reward the faithful with handouts and benefits to keep them voting Democrat.
The Boston Globe published two stories how public unions, mostly in the Boston area, shepherded those on government payrolls and those enjoying government benefits to the polls. The result was a Democratic turnout that rivaled 2008 and bridged the "enthusiasm gap", wiping out Republican hopes of victory. See here and here. To be sure, there were some victories here and there, with the paltry Republican representation in the legislature increasing to34 or so, out of 200.
The Lawrence Eagle-Tribune editorialized that it wasn't just a Boston phenomenon and suggests that dark days lie ahead for Republicans.
I think Brown's election to the Senate in January actually made it tougher for Republicans last Tuesday.
Not because of anything he has said or how he has voted, but because his election woke up the Democratic machine in the state. And when that machine is awake and functional, calling in favors and "reminding" its troops how to vote, there is virtually nothing a paltry Republican minority can do about it. Party chairman John Walsh said the Democrats had 20,000 volunteers on Tuesday knocking on doors, driving people to the polls and manning phone banks. You think Republicans had anything close to that?
Of course they don't. Republicans are largely working families with real jobs or seniors with aching backs.
Boston's Mayor Menino brags about his machine. How many in the machine actually work for the city and one way or another were paid for their election effort by tax dollars?
And it appears there were "helpers." ACORN-type community organizations were active in housing projects offering food to residents to get them to go to the polls, driving them there and in some cases wielding the voting pen in the polling booth. No police observers lifted a finger. Read about what has all the appearances of massive voting fraud in Massachusetts.
With good reason FDR, who promoted unions and collective bargaining in the private sector, had reservations about public unions. He believed that public employees worked for the whole people, not the government or its administrators and that public unions should act accordingly. That clearly hasn't happened, as public employees work against the interests of large segments of the people they are supposed to serve..
JFK's executive order, in gratitude for union support in his razor-thin election in 1960, gave federal employees the right to organize. In 1966 Rhode Island became the first state to do the same for state and local government employees. As a result, we have disastrous fiscal situations in Rhode Island and the other states that followed its lead, including, of course, Massachusetts. 21 states, to the benefit of their citizens, do not allow government employee unions.
(Democrats in the Congress now nearing its end sought to enact a law that would force ALL states to permit public employee unions; the bill has stalled and with Republlicans in control of the House in the 112th Congress will go nowhere. Read the sordid story in this article, which talks about Maryland, but it could be describing the situation in Massachusetts.)
Even though it will be impossible to succeed, Republicans in the legislature should file and aggressively push a bill to repeal the law that authorizes public unions. Doing so may wake up citizens to how out of balance the compensation of public employees now is. Unionized public employess are being rewarded with taxpayer dollars far more handsomely than their private sector counterparts. The dues employees pay to their unions are in effect used against the taxapayers who are the source of the money in the first place. Since there is only so much money to go around, these rich salaries and benefits are also jeopardizing the vital services governments are supposed to provide.
The crushing force of public union involvement seen in the 2010 election will be deployed in 2012. What can Republicans do to counter this force, which in large part is funded by monies that in the first instance come out of taxpayers' pockets?
These unions have forced contracts on their states, localities, and school boards which provide for ever higher wages, benefits, and pensions. Even now, teachers are on strike in a suburb of Pittsburgh because they feel a 4.5 percent annual wage increase is inadequate.
The House must create a federal bankruptcy procedure for states that cannot make ends meet requiring — as in corporate bankruptcies — that state governments abrogate all their union contracts. The new state bankruptcy procedure should offer all states — and through them, their localities, counties, and school boards — the ability to reorganize their finances free of the demands of their union agreements.
California is first in line and shows how grave the peril is as a result of years of paying and promising public employees too much. California is paying out $40 million a day for unemployment benefits and it's all money borrowed from the federal government. Something's got to give. The money or the will to fund will run out. It can happen here.
Email This | DIGG This | del.icio.us | Facebook | Stumble It
The perfidy of the Turks succeeded. Israel was condemned for defending itself against terrorists by the UN, the EU and all Muslim countries. Obama even supported a UN investigation, which will yield the usual anti-Israeli result. They could write the report before the "investigation."
How can you make the people of the world understand how the anit-Israeli forces in the world led by the media are feeding information upside down, inside out? Parody is one way and some Israelis, led by the brilliant Caroline Glick, quickly prepared the video below, which had been seen by more than three million people before YouTube took it down because of a phony copyright violation protest from a Muslim sympathizer. Have a few laughs as you appreciate the truth that's being conveyed.
Email This | DIGG This | del.icio.us | Facebook | Stumble It