Safe as Houses

I've been meaning to write up something about how absurd Rick Santelli's hissy fit on CNBC was - particularly since it's being labeled as a populist rant even though it was delivered by a Wall Street analyst on the trading floor with cheering Wall Street brokers egging him on - but Matt Yglesias has done a tremendously better job than I could ever do, so we'll go with him ...

And I just don’t think it’s the responsibility of individuals to know that all the experts, and all the conventional wisdom, are secretly wrong. All kinds of people have been buying iPhones because everyone says they’re great. And if this November, the iPhones all suddenly explode injuring tons of people, I think there’ll be a lot of blame to go around. But really just about none of that blame will land on iPhone owners—it would land on Apple and AT&T and regulators and gadget reviewers and everyone else. If not, if the people who run the country and its media don’t actually expect their pronouncements to be taken seriously, then really they ought to all quit and make way for people who take their responsibilities seriously.

This is an insanely pointless column written in the best spirit of corporate-fueled union bashing, and it's pointless because it clearly states the real reason GM is in trouble in two short paragraphs, but then opts to spend the remainder of its space needlessly villifying workers ...

The union, though, shouldn't bear the entire blame for Detroit's disaster. It wasn't the UAW that pushed GM into the home-mortgage market, where it has incurred billions in losses over the last couple of years.

Nor can the UAW be blamed for Saturn and Saab, two brands that never made money, as GM executives have recently acknowledged. What they haven't explained is why their company would keep these money-losers around for nearly 20 years.

The problem confronting the American auto industry doesn't stem from its source of labor, but rather the incredibly awful decisions made by its leaders. Over the course of roughly three decades they made systematic errors in judgement that have put them in the position they're in now ranging from where they invested their resources and where they didn't. The market evolved over time, and the leaders at GM, Chrysler and Ford didn't keep up.

As a result, they're on life support.

The workers, though?

These are workers who, in good faith, negotiated for increased wages and better benefits. They earned a quality pension plan that stated they could work 30 years and then retire (a model which parallels those methods currently employed quite successfully by the public sector). And, had it not been for the fundamentally flawed decisions made by management, these costs wouldn't be a concern.

Why should we expect workers to be forced to see their quality of life suffer - dramatically in most instances - for doing absolutely nothing wrong? Why should they see their health care and pensions sacrificed because of the poor decisions made by their employers?

Considering I'm a strong advocate for a coordinated regional approach as a means to grow our economy, the fact that Randall Abney wishes to locate his new assembly plant in Northeast Georgia is welcome news. However, I do have the same question that my friend Jeff posed in the comments ...

Why in the world is Athens-Clarke County not listed as a possible site for the plant? Why is the state Department of Economic Development working to locate this plant in a variety of counties outside its borders? Granted, it's still jobs - and we need jobs - but if it located in Athens-Clarke County, that would bring a boost of property tax revenue and, potentially, foster some economic renewal wherever it set up shop.

OK, here is where Roxanne (who is, presumably, a very nice person who means well) and I get into another argument ... but the Wingo family gave an interview regarding their financial situation and their views on compensation that the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has just published.

Here's an interesting passage that caught my attention ...

(Joe Wingo)'s 2006 salary was low compared with that of executives at a $100 million for-profit company, he said.

“I could probably make about $2 million a year in salary,” and not be out of line, he said.

He saw no difference between running a for-profit business and a nonprofit, Christian ministry like Angel Food.

“Should Christians running an organization have a different ethos of compensation? I don’t think so, because business is business. I don’t care if it’s God’s business, your business or whose business it is,” he said.

OK, I have agreements and disagreements with that from a philosophical and a theological perspective. While I don't believe Christians should necessarily have to apologize for large salaries or high profits in the private sector, I also think - as The Scriptures tell us - that such situations present numerous pitfalls for the believer. Plus, it's hard for me to imagine Jesus amending the call to follow Him and leave everything behind with 'follow me ... and be sure to stick $1.7 million in the bank for you.'

Then again, for me to offer any position on this situation will require some discernment and reading, so I'll hold off on the theological arguments for or against as of now.

Speaking pragmatically, however, Wingo's statement is pure insanity.

There is a distinct difference between running a for-profit business and a non-profit business, and it's clearly stated in the name. Non-profit organizations exist to fill a much-needed niche in our communities that won't be executed, by in large, by the for-profit sector because the market for it isn't adequate enough. Therefore, the federal government offers a tax exemption to this organizations as a compensation for filling this need with the qualifier that they don't turn an annual profit.

Now, if the Wingos wished to pursue a for-profit venture that followed their missional vision, then that's fine (and, based on their model at Angel Food Ministeries, it appears it's a viable and profitable one). I wouldn't bemoan that at all because, truth be told, it's what I do. My business specializes in providing supportive services for non-profit organizations and churches, but because I desire to be fairly compensated for what I feel is a sound and just calling, I'm incorporated as an LLC.

The Wingos didn't do that, which is why they're facing such rightful scrutiny. They've tallied high revenues, massive profits and large salaries in a manner that is more suited for a for-profit company. But they're doing it under the guise of a non-profit entity, meaning they're enjoying a tax exemption they don't deserve.

As our history can attest, the popularity and influence of unions in Georgia has been traditionally lower than in places like Michigan, Ohio or Pennsylvania. The primary rationale for this, in large part, can be attributed to the fact that Georgia was an agarian-based economy through the mid-20th century that didn't feature the same need for organized labor, as well as a systematic misrepresentation by business interests of what unions actually are and what they actually do (as evidenced by a terribly ill-informed argument put forward by my father-in-law on Friday night).

So, it shouldn't as a surprise to anyone that the same Republican leadership in Atlanta that is angling to give away $1 billion in taxpayer money to corporations is also vehemently against the Employee Free Choice Act ... so much so that it's introduced a legally questionable piece of legislation aimed at preemptively rejecting EFCA before the latter is approved by Congress.

H.R. 22 would put a referendum on the ballot that would permit voters to choose on 'secret ballot' initiatives, and it's part of a coordinated attempt for states - overwhelmingly Southern conservative states - to attempt to opt out of EFCA.
 
Granted, I thought the actions of the 1860s ultimately settled a lot of the debate regarding federal jurisdiction, but it seems that some folks in the Georgia General Assembly missed that memo. Regardless, H.R. 22 is a ridiculous bill for a variety of reasons - the cost of a protracted and sure-to-lose legal argument being a key one to consider - but it's also important to realize that it's built upon, again, a blatant misrepresentation of the actual legislation.

EFCA - rather than hinder worker freedom like so many of its critics claim it will - dramatically expands the ability of workers to organize. The existing structure has been laid out by the National Labor Relations Board, and it's controlled from the top down. The employer controls the process, oversees the information that can disseminated and can influence the vote through misinformation, intimidation and coercion. Given that Georgia is a 'Right-to-Work' state, employers even have the flexibility to terminate employees who are involved in organizing process (and they can do so under the guise of insubordination or simply absorb the low cost of fines they'd incur from NRLB).

EFCA would allow for a majority-sign up where employees could form a union by simply signing authorization cards, and those cards would be validated by the federal government ... thus meaning the employer would be legally required to recognize and bargain with the union. It's not an alien concept by any means, as Cingular Wireless currently uses it for its employees.

As far as the secret ballot election non-issue, EFCA would preserve secret ballot elections if one-third of the workers opt to hold an election based on the existing model, they will be given the opportunity to do so. All EFCA does is offer an additional option via the majority sign-up.

The Republican Party - and I honestly mean this not as a criticism but more as a statement of historical record - is the party of business. Its supporters and leaders are intertwined with the various chamber of commerces, pro-business groups and have prided themselves on supporting business here in the state of Georgia. It's understandable, then, that they'd oppose legislation that would make it easier for working class citizens to organize and collectively negotiate for better wages, increased benefits and profit sharing.

Business will always be concerned about the bottom line and how much profit one can make, and, more often than not, they view labor as a commodity or line item under the 'Expense' portion of their budget rather than the men and women who execute the tasks that guide the business to a profit. The ability of employees to organize and collectively negotiate with management is a crucial step toward making sure they're not just that line item, and that their interests are valued and their stories are shared.

Via Hillary, Tim Johnson's insanely thoughtful, fact-based and comprehensive response to Priscilla Carroll's letter against sex education in Clarke County schools ...

Part of what Priscilla says is accurate. In fact, the previous School Board policy, which said that all sex education curricula would be "abstinence based," was originally intended to provide for comprehensive sex ed, with an emphasis that only abstinence is 100% effective at preventing pregnancy and STDs, but if you were not going to abstain, then various technologies were available and had various levels of effectiveness. Priscilla fought hard against that policy's adoption, but ultimately it was adopted. However, over time, District employees came to interpret "abstinence based" to mean that they could only talk about abstinence. When I told one of them that I was there for the previous battle, she said, yeah, maybe so, but her job was on the line, not mine.

Priscilla is also correct that Public Health -- based on scientific research -- has provided condoms and birth control pills to teens through Teen Matters since the early 1990s. At that time, Athens-Clarke County had the highest teen pregnancy rate in Georgia, Georgia had the highest teen pregnancy rate in the U.S., and the U.S. had the highest teen pregnancy rate in the developed world.

Read more: On sex education

Look everyone, Gov. Sonny Perdue's grandstanding!

Because rather than update and modify what is an out-of-date series of laws with regard to our unemployment insurance system and receive much-needed cash to help out the rapidly growing number of out-of-work citizens in Georgia, it's a whole lot easier to rattle the cages and score some political points.

Perhaps we should turn down the infrastructure allocations because, gosh, we'll actually have roads left behind when all the work is done.

Roads!

During last year's presidential campaign, the candidate I supported adopted 'Yes We Can' as one of his campaign slogans. It was catchy, empowering and simple.

To counter back-to-back losses in the congressional elections and a nine million vote loss in the presidential election, the Republican Party is going to opt to use 'No We Can't' as their rallying cry, thus cementing their complete disconnection from all things reality-based.

OK, here's what Don's column should have said ...

If you don't want rumors about your establishment closing, then don't write hyper-dramatic letters to the editor about the demise of locally-owned businesses!

When folks start grandstanding about how we can't possibly consider nationalizing some of the large banks that are weighing this economy down, stories like this one make me realize those same folks don't have a clue what they're talking about.

Little old ladies don't fall for Nigerian email schemes, but apparently CitiBank does.