10A • MONDAY, MARCH 14, 2011
SALISBURY POST
GREGORY M. ANDERSON Publisher 704-797-4201 ganderson@salisburypost.com
ELIZABETH G. COOK
CHRIS RATLIFF
Editor
Advertising Director
704-797-4244 editor@salisburypost.com
704-797-4235 cratliff@salisburypost.com
CHRIS VERNER
RON BROOKS
Editorial Page Editor
Circulation Director
704-797-4262 cverner@salisburypost.com
704-797-4221 rbrooks@salisburypost.com
LETTERS
OPINION
The Monday forum
Salisbury Post My Turn: Bruce La Rue
TO
THE EDITOR
The spectacle in Wisconsin I
Does public back shortsighted cuts? Republicans say voters elected them with a mandate to spend less. Right now they’re interpreting that mandate to mean the state’s education budget should be cut by $760 million in 2011-12, which follows cuts of more than a half billion over the past two years. Would someone please conduct a solid public opinion poll to test that hypothesis? I think N.C. voters are more willing to sacrifice for public education than the politicians give them credit for. I think most of us realize that what’s being considered in Raleigh is short-sighted and will cost us dearly down the road in terms of a generation less well equipped to contribute to society. If the Republican want to stay in charge, I think they need to be smarter about interpreting their mandate. — Doug Swaim Charlotte
Ugly power grab in Wisconsin The trampling Wednesday of the democratic process in Wisconsin shows that Gov. Scott Walker and the Republicans have been lying throughout this entire process and that the opposition has been telling the truth. None of the provisions that attacked workers’ rights had anything to do with the budget. Indeed, in order to move their agenda in the face of a united opposition, Wisconsin Republicans took out everything in the bill that had anything to do with the budget. All that was left to vote on was stripping public workers of their right to collective bargaining and authorizing the governor to fire any public employee who resists. The agenda to roll back workers’ rights being advanced by right-wing ideologues who control state legislatures in Wisconsin, Ohio, and even right here in North Carolina is exposed for what it truly is — an ugly, naked power grab designed to kneecap their political opposition and reward their wealthy corporate benefactors. For shame! — Russell Bennett Salisbury
Letters policy The Salisbury Post welcomes letters to the editor. Each letter should be limited to 300 words and include the writer’s name, address and daytime phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity and length. Limit one letter each 14 days. Write Letters to the Editor, Salisbury Post, P.O. Box 4639, Salisbury, NC 28145-4639. Or fax your letter to 639-0003. E-mail: letters@salisburypost.com
Common sense
(Or uncommon wisdom, as the case may be) Where secrecy or mystery begins, vice or roguery is not far off. — Samuel Johnson My experience in government is that when things are non-controversial and beautifully coordinated, there is not much going on. — John Fitzgerald Kennedy
“The truth shall make you free”
Campaign laws still too lax N.C. disclosure calendar leaves loopholes ALEIGH — When critics say that there is too much money in politics, politicians often respond that the problem is inadequate disclosure of the source of the money. And when the critics complain about lack of disclosure, the politicians say … Well, they don’t say much. Right now, a group called the N.C. Coalition for Lobbying and Government Reform wants more updates on who is giving to whom in the North Carolina General AsSCOTT MOONEYHAM sembly. Jane Pinsky, the coalition’s director, says the current campaign finance reporting schedule is inadequate, that it doesn't allow North Carolinians to see who is trying curry favor with legislators in the lead up to the legislative session. State law doesn’t allow legislators to take contributions from the executives of businesses that employ lobbyist, of their political action committees, during the legislative session. The reason behind the law is rather obvious: At some point, policymakers decided that it might not look so good for a legislator to be taking a donation from Executive X on one day and voting for a bill that favors his or her company on the next. The prohibition, though, typically leads to a flurry of donations leading up the start of the legislative session in late January, even though another general election is 22 months away. A recent report from Democracy North Carolina showed po-
R
Neither House Speaker Thom Tillis nor Senate leader Phil Berger seem in too much of a hurry to respond to the criticism about the reporting schedule. litical action committees gave state legislators more than $240,000 from November’s election though the end of the year. Almost all the money went to Republicans. It seems the folks looking for influence needed to make up some ground with the new party in power. The state’s campaign finance reporting schedule requires that
donations made during that time period be disclosed in mid-January. What won’t be disclosed until July 29 are any of the donations that occurred during the first three weeks of January, when pre-legislative session fund raisers reach their peak. Of course, by late July, legislators hope to be out of Dodge, or Raleigh, as the case may be. So, anyone trying to draw any connections between donation and legislative action will be left to reconstruct something easily dismissed as long-gone history. The problems with the state’s campaign finance reporting schedule aren’t confined to the current reporting period. As general elections near, North Carolinians get a look at four-and-a-half months’ worth of donations just eight or 10 days before casting their vote. Donations from July through mid-October are only reported during the final week of October. By then, most voters have already made up their minds. But that is how the politicians — Democrats and Republicans — like it. Neither House Speaker Thom Tillis nor Senate leader Phil Berger seem in too much of a hurry to respond to the criticism about the reporting schedule. Berger did say he’s willing to look into quarterly reporting in election and non-election years. A more comprehensive look at all of the flaws in the reporting system and schedule is probably in order. But not if you prefer keeping the influence game from public view. • • • Scott Mooneyham writes about state government for Capitol Press Association.
t has been a remarkable, eyeopening experience watching the events in Wisconsin unfold over the past few weeks. If we learn nothing else from the actions of the politicians and unionists, we cannot help but come away with the conclusion that the vast majority of these folks have become so insulated and entrenched in their version of business as usual they are oblivious to the perception they convey to the rest of the nation. I realize unionism is a large influence in the lives of otherwise clearthinking people. I am also aware that, for an alarming number of members, unionism is a religion. Moreover, that danse macabre which involves the upand-down jabbing of pickets is their sacrament. At one time, the strike was their sacrament, but the advent of contracts with no-strike clauses has led to a rethinking of strategy. Hard-core unionists, still reeling from years of concessions and a decline in membership, defiantly insist that the back of management’s hand is stinging from the impact of labor’s cheek. One of the most amazing elements of the Wisconsin spectacle was the departure of one party of the legislature in order to avoid a vote. Is this the example we wish to set for the next generation? Shall we teach them that if they know they will fail a test, then stay home and avoid the Bruce La Rue confrontation. lives in Mt. Ulla. Should we keep the team on the bus (or drive them over the state line) rather than play a game we expect to lose? If Republicans had pulled this stunt, they would have been portrayed as evil, spineless, cowardly poltroons. The Democrats get a pass. Meanwhile, the public sector unionists in Wisconsin are convinced that taxpayers should gratefully festoon their selfless, devoted public employees with generous wages, healthcare and pensions. Any attempt to require an employee to contribute to the costs of his or her own long-term well-being results in such gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands as to close down the schools. Having doctors sign off on bogus sick-leave forms is a nice touch. The next time a student attempts this ruse, the schools have no moral authority to admonish the miscreant. There should be no public sector unions. By definition, the public sector workers are protected by an armada of labor laws, many of which are the results of the sacrifices made by the truly courageous pioneers of the labor reform movement who, unlike their modern-day sycophant counterparts, performed without a net. Many of the early activists died for the cause. They deserve better than to have their efforts melded into some neo-socialist movement. Curiously, unions have never created their own companies, despite an apparent insight as to how firms should be run. If unionists were sincere about their philosophies concerning relations between management and labor, they long ago would have formed large manufacturing and service organizations in their own image. Instead, they latch onto established organizations that have invested money in the operation, whereas the union brings no food, yet demands a place at the table. Nowhere else in nature do we witness parasites exhibiting disdain and resentment toward their hosts, only to claim greed when they finally run the host out of town. When organized crime does it, we call it extortion. When organized labor does it, we call it collective bargaining. Gov. Scott Walker is to be commended for his actions. Not only is he making the difficult decisions (it’s called leadership) to balance his state’s budget, he has revealed the unions’ true agenda. I doubt that he could ever have imagined that simply doing the job for which he was elected would lead to a national debate over taxpayer-funded labor unions. History will be kind to this gentleman.
Is it your turn? “My Turn” columns should be between 500 and 700 words. E-mail submissions are preferred. Send to cverner@salisburypost.com with “My Turn” in the subject line. Include your name, address, phone number and a digital photo of yourself.