Showing posts with label Rahm Emanuel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rahm Emanuel. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Union-busting and the Koch brothers' plans for our future


As we consider attempts by Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin to bust public sector unions, not to mention New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's constant rants against these unions in his own state, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that there is a plan afoot – a concerted effort by Republican politicians to do something that they always wanted to do but may not have previously seen a clear path to accomplish.

And, although former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has been widely credited with saying that one should never let a good crisis go to waste, it seems his best students have been Republican governors.

Yes, the economy went to rat shit because of the malfeasance of Wall Street types, leaving everyone feeling vulnerable to personal economic collapse, which, in turn, has given Republican politicians the excuse they have longed for to get rid of public sector unions.

It's pretty simple. Point to people who have bargained their salaries and working conditions in good faith, have come to agreement with their employers as part of a legitimate negotiating process, and make them a target for others who are in precarious employment situations, or perhaps unemployed.

Feed on the worst aspects of human nature, which is to say that if some people are not doing well, others, with whom they may generally occupy the same economic class, should not be doing well either. Make it sound like everyone in a public sector union is driving a luxury car and vacationing in the Riviera. Divide working people so they cannot be a threat to the power of wealth and privilege in American. Make then forget who got us into this mess in the first place and stop them from asking annoying questions. Brilliant.

What is not being talked about enough, I believe, is that the assault on public sector unions is an assault on the idea that government is an effective force for good in our society. But, in this case, it's a two-for-one sale. Attacking public sector unions is an attack on the idea of an expanded role of government but also on the idea of unions: two forces that have always been a major impediment to massive private wealth in the United States doing whatever it chooses to do (while admittedly playing that role imperfectly).

Two things that wealth and privilege hate in America: government regulating their activities and working people having their own independent base of power. Take away collective bargaining for public sector unions and you clear the way for making government smaller and destroy yet another potential oppositional force. 

The rhetoric of someone like Governor Christie is priceless. In his world, gold-plated public sector contracts are paid for by working people who don't happen to be on the gravy train. This creates the potential of working people at each other’s throats with the goal of reducing the size of government and its ability to regulate the economy while destroying unions all at the same time. Who would have thought that an economic crisis could be so useful for the power elite?

How any working people can believe that smaller government and fewer effective unions will mean that they will have more freedom and autonomy to do the things they want to do is beyond me.

Whether one wants to go back and look at John Kenneth Gailbraith's theory of countervailing power or some variant of Robert Dahl's theory of pluralism, whatever else their defects, it's pretty obvious that there is real and concentrated economic power in America and those who hope to have real freedom and autonomy had better consider how they will come together, and organize, to challenge that power. Government at times can be helpful, unions as well, as can many different kinds of social movements.

Working people who fail to organize in their own interests or fail to support others who do will wonder how it is that their piece of the pie got so small.

Reduce the size and effectiveness of government, destroy the right of people to bargain collectively, to organize politically, and you will have ceded the entire playing field to the same Wall Street hacks and their cheerleaders in the Republican Party who have grown pretty comfortable with the growing inequalities of wealth in America.

The genius of the right is that they have always been able to find ways to get working people to fight amongst themselves.

Tea Partiers may think that reducing the size of government and the power of public sector unions will lead to a utopia where everyone, even the least among us, is free to realize his or her own version of the American Dream.

The Koch brothers sincerely thank you for being so naive.

(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

Friday, January 28, 2011

The return of Rahm (or, so much for my schadenfreude)


Alas, that didn't last long.

Earlier this week, an Illinois Appellate Court panel booted ex-Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel off the Chicago mayoral ballot, ruling that he didn't meet residency requirements, but yesterday the Illinois Supreme Court put him back on again:

The unanimous decision brought a close to months of legal debate over whether Mr. Emanuel qualified for the ballot, specifically whether his time in Washington as President Obama's chief of staff meant that he had given up his residency status in Chicago, where he was born.

By Illinois state code, candidates for mayor are required to have resided in Chicago for at least one year before Election Day. Mr. Emanuel left the White House in October, and the election is Feb. 22, but Mr. Emanuel argued that he was still a Chicago resident because he owned a house here, paid taxes here, voted here, and left his most cherished possessions in the basement of his house here. 

Well, so much for my schadenfreude.

Monday, January 24, 2011

Rahm Emanuel and the meaning of schadenfreude



With only a month to go until Election Day, more than $10 million in campaign money in the bank and an overwhelming lead in the polls, Rahm Emanuel, the former White House chief of staff, was disqualified on Monday from appearing on this city's ballot for mayor.

A panel of Illinois Appellate Court justices, in a 2-1 ruling, found that Mr. Emanuel failed to meet a state code stipulating that candidates for mayor reside in the city they hope to lead for at least a full year before an election.

**********

scha·den·freu·de

[shahd-n-froi-duh]
 
–noun
satisfaction or pleasure felt at someone else's misfortune.


Origin:
1890–95; < G, equiv. to Schaden harm + Freude joy

********** 


Attorneys for Rahm Emanuel late today asked the Illinois Supreme Court to prevent Chicago elections officials from printing ballots for the Feb. 22 mayor's election without his name.

Emanuel's legal team also said they will ask the state's highest court on Tuesday to hear their appeal of a decision by an appellate court today to knock him off the ballot on the grounds he doesn't meet residency requirements.

**********

Emanuel is one of those Democrats whom I support only when the alternative is a Republican. And while I admired, once upon a time, his apparent ability to navigate Capitol Hill and get things done, and while I was fairly ambivalent about it when newly-elected Obama named him chief of staff, I was happy to see him leave the White House.

Sure, there were many successes during Obama's first two years in office, but Emanuel distinguished himself by being a determined anti-progressive, including on health-care reform. I understand the need to make deals when you're trying to get things done, but Emanuel, to me, was an obstacle, pulling Obama away from his liberal-progressive base (even if Obama himself seems to be more Emanuel-style centrist than progressive). Not much will change with Emanuel not running the West Wing, but that doesn't mean he wasn't a massive nuisance, to say the least.

He may still get the chance to inflict himself, his anti-progressive centrism, and his party-boss ways on the people of Chicago, as it may well be, as he claims, that "his time in Washington, which ended in October, was always meant to be temporary and ought not affect his legal status as a resident of Chicago," according to the Times, but, for now, let's take some pleasure in his apparent demise, or at least in his temporary misfortune.

(photo)