Opinion A6 Monday, July 12, 2021 — DAILY REPUBLIC
calmatters commentary
A union pot calls a union kettle black
‘T
he pot calling the kettle black” is an old saying about hypocrisy, applied to someone who does something while criticizing someone else for doing the same thing. The Capitol saw a classic political example of the syndrome last week during a long and otherwise tedious committee hearing on a lengthy and complicated state budget “trailer bill.” We should all know by now that such trailer bills, which receive fast-track approval because of their supposed connection to the state budget, have morphed into political Christmas trees with ornaments of special favors to those with political pull. The measure in question, Dan Walters Senate Bill 132, is this year’s higher education omnibus bill containing dozens of provisions affecting the state’s colleges and universities and Section 67 is a favor to the unions that represent tens of thousands of non-faculty employees of the University of California. It would, in essence, block all construction at UC campuses until an ad hoc assortment of union-friendly state officials had certified that the university had maximized its employment of unionized non-faculty workers and minimized – in fact virtually eliminated – outside contractors for support activities. The issue has been percolating for years and the unions, principally AFSCME Local 3299, have obtained other favorable legislative decrees, but imposing mandates on the constitutionally independent UC system is legally difficult. “For the past six years, we have worked with the Legislature on three bills, three budget language provisions and the constitutional amendment,” Local 3299’s Kathryn Lybarger told the Assembly Budget Committee last week. “We’ve gone through policy and fiscal committees dozens of times and earned hundreds of yes votes. And yet, UC still insists on outsourcing, janitors who clean their toilets, groundskeepers who mow their grass, and cooks who prepare their food.” Section 67 is the unions’ neutron bomb. They hope a threat to shut down construction will finally compel UC to end outsourcing. UC officials obviously oppose it, saying that it would seriously impede campus improvements, including those affecting health and safety, while simultaneously declaring that they are honoring the previous decrees from the Legislature. However, the threat of halting billions of dollars in construction work has drawn sharp opposition from another group of unions with oodles of political clout, led by the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, whose members’ jobs would be affected. Dozens of union representatives expressed their implacable opposition to Section 67 during the hearing, complaining that it was unfair that one union bloc would pursue its goals at the expense of another. The hypocritical aspect of the construction unions’ opposition to the UC unions’ efforts to legislate job security for their members is that the “the trades,” as they are called in the Capitol, have been doing exactly the same thing. They have insisted that virtually every legislative bill to increase the supply of housing contain language that, in effect, requires the use of union construction workers, even though it sharply increases costs. The boilerplate language that the trades insist be included refers to a “skilled and trained” workforce that includes apprenticeship training administered by the unions. “You cannot address poverty and housing by driving construction workers and our families into poverty,” Robbie Hunter, the Trades Council president, told CalMatters recently. “It just doesn’t work.” Whether UC unions or construction unions should rely on legislative mandates to bolster their memberships is certainly debatable. However, there’s no uncertainty that the political infighting over Senate Bill 132 and Section 67 is hypocrisy in its rankest form.
CALmatters is a public interest journalism venture committed to explaining how California’s state Capitol works and why it matters. For more columns by Dan Walters, go to calmatters.org/commentary.
DAILY REPUBLIC A McNaughton Newspaper
Locally Owned and Operated Serving Solano County since 1855 •
Foy McNaughton
President / CEO / Publisher
T. Burt McNaughton Co-Publisher
Glen Faison
Managing Editor
the right stuff
What we get for what we pay: Part 3
I
have written for the past 29 subsections describes two weeks about our the powers vested in a Con537 elected federal employgress, which shall consist ees’ salaries and benefits of a Senate and a House of so we, their employers, underRepresentatives. stand their compensation. Section 2 states: “No So, let’s look at the qualificaperson shall be a Representions, the duties (job descriptative who shall not have tion) and responsibilities attained the age of twenty-five stated in the U.S. Constitution. and been seven years Jim McCully years, The overall intent and a Citizen of the United States. purpose of the Constitution of He shall be, when elected, an inhabit1787 was to replace the Articles of ant of the State he is representing.” Confederation, which proved inadeSection 3, states: “No person shall quate. The Preamble is arguably the be a Senator who has not attained the best description of the intent of people age of thirty years, and has been nine to govern themselves ever written. years a Citizen of the United States, Those 52 words clearly summarized and shall be, when elected, an inhabwhat the Founders were consideritant of that State for which he shall ing as they thrashed out the basic be chosen.” rights of citizens and responsibilities Now, let’s look at some of the most of the three branches of government. important things they actually do for Indeed, Supreme Court Associate this compensation. Section 7, SubJustice Joseph Story (1779-1845) section 1, says, “All Bills for raising wrote in his book, “Commentaries money shall originate in the House of on the Constitution,” that “. . . its (the Representatives, but the Senate may Preamble’s) true purpose is to state propose or concur with Amendments the nature and extent and application as to other Bills.” of the powers actually conferred by The House and Senate must agree the Constitution.” to a final bill before sending it to the James Madison stated in Federalpresident for signature. ists Paper No. 49: “The people are the The Congress shall have the power only legitimate fountain of power.” to assign and collect taxes . . . to pay The Preamble states: “We the debts and provide for the common People of the United States, in Order defense and general welfare of the to form a more perfect Union, estabUnited States. lish Justice, (ensure) domestic Here are other examples of what Tranquility, provide for the common they do: (1) regulate commerce with defense, promote the general Welfare, foreign nations and among our states; and secure the Blessings of Liberty to (2) borrow money on the credit of the ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain United States; (3) approve treaties; and establish this Constitution for the (4) make criminal and civil laws; (5) United States of America.” declare war; (6) arm and regulate our Article I with its 10 Sections and armed forces (the most powerful on
Earth); and (7) confirm presidential and judicial appointments. There are many other duties listed in our Constitution but the three main responsibilities for our congressional employees are to introduce bills and resolutions, offer amendments, and serve on committees. Members of the House of Representatives represent on average 700,000 citizens. Two senators represent their entire state. Article 2, Section 1 states: “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four years . . . .” There are three sections and 10 subsections describing the duties, powers and authorities of this office. The president appoints ambassadors, department heads, commissions, all officers of the armed forces and has the power to pardon for all offenses committed against the United States, among other powers. Subsection 5 states: “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President . . . .” The only other requirements are that a person must be at least 35 years old and have been a resident within the United States for 14 years. The same requirements hold for the vice president. Are they doing the jobs well? More next week. Jim McCully is a member of the Solano County Republican Central Committee, Vacaville resident and former Northwest Regional vice chairman of the California State Republican Party.
commentary
Infrastructure bill part of rickety politics
T
on the infrastructure bill he political maneuvering about infrastrucas a reason to pare down or ture is getting pretty walk away from the second strange, what with Presspending bill that Sen. Bernie ident Joe Biden first cheering Sanders, the Budget Commita bipartisan bill, then threattee chairman, is preparing. ening to veto it, and then One theory for Biden’s taking back the veto threat behavior, based on both news in the span of two days. reports and some discussions When the action on stage Ramesh Ponnuru with Senate aides, is that the gets hard to follow, it can be White House was taken by helpful to review the main surprise when the biparticharacters and their motivations. san group reached a deal, felt obliged The 21 bipartisan dealmakers to endorse it and then got scorched in the Senate want to see their bill by progressives. To appease them, passed not just because they think it he blurted out that he would not sign would improve the country’s roads the bipartisan bill without signing and bridges but because it would the second one “in tandem.” But that reduce the likelihood that Congress infuriated the moderate Democrats, will take two other steps: passing a so he had to backtrack. Democratic bill that spends addiHouse Speaker Nancy Pelosi is tional trillions on child care and still keeping the pressure on the modraises taxes, and weakening the erates, though, saying she will not filibuster. allow the House to vote on the biparSenate majority leader Chuck tisan bill until the Senate has passed Schumer had planned to spend June the partisan one. It’s a strategy that building the case against the filibuswill require stubbornness. ter, as The New York Times reported. It will take weeks to convert the He would advance one piece of bipartisan agreement into legislaappealing-sounding legislation after tive language. Drawing up Sanders’ another – especially a bill that would bill and getting it through procedural supposedly “protect voting rights” – hurdles will take months. Democrats and then blame their demise on the do not yet agree even on the price tag: excessive use of the tactic. He has floated $6 trillion, while Sen. The infrastructure deal foiled Joe Manchin has talked about $2 trilthis plan. The Senate ended its June lion. Even in today’s Washington, work with a demonstration that a sig- that’s a big difference. nificant number of Republicans are Most congressional Republicans willing to legislate, not just obstruct, are watching the Democratic infightand that the chamber can work ing from the sidelines. They oppose without having to change its rules. both spending bills. Progressives and most Senate They think we have been spendDemocrats, meanwhile, worry that ing quite enough money over the past the moderate Democrats in the bipar- two years as it is – COVID legislation tisan group will point to any success alone has added more than $5 trillion
to the federal debt – and also want to deny Biden legislative victories. They don’t believe our infrastructure is crumbling, and they are skeptical that federal infrastructure spending will go where investments would do the most good. They are right about that, by the way. It’s true that the American Society of Civil Engineers says that we are in dire need of more spending on infrastructure. If there’s a National Society of Barbers, it probably thinks we all need more haircuts. And Congress is not exactly laser-focused on using an infrastructure bill to maximize the country’s productivity. Getting a win for Biden, stopping him from getting one, influencing the debate over the filibuster: These are the type of considerations that are on the top of legislators’ minds. Unsurprisingly, then, much of the negotiation has turned on arbitrary spending levels and not, say, on which projects deserve funding and which do not. Polling suggests that the public likes the idea of infrastructure spending but doesn’t see it as a high priority. Democrats decided to make it a top issue, and now they are running the risk that by holding out for everything, they will get nothing. If the bipartisan infrastructure deal fails, it won’t be because the Senate is dysfunctional. It will be because the Democratic Party is. Ramesh Ponnuru is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He is a senior editor at National Review and a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
