June 2009


Don't be hoodwinked, don't be bamboozled, don't fall for the okey-doke

Don't be hoodwinked, don't be bamboozled, don't fall for the okey-doke

If any among my dear readers have ever flicked on a light switch at midnight in a kitchen infested by roaches, they will have seen the stomach-turning sight of a room in sudden, swarming motion as hundreds of roaches scuttle for the cracks at the edges of the room. Roaches don’t like the light. They prefer to operate in the dark. The way to cure a roach infestation is to keep the light on and clean the house, throwing out nesting materials (even behind walls) and poisoning the roaches where they hide. Unfortunately, all too many people, in the face of an infested kitchen, simply shudder, turn off the light, and go back to bed. A particularly determined denier of roach-reality might prefer to paint over the light fixtures with black paint. That would hide the roaches from sight for good.

Apparently, under the Obama administration, the Department of Labor doesn’t mind roaches so much as it curses the light that reveals them and tells us, the Americans who live in the house, to go back to sleep. For instead of fostering transparency, one of Obama’s key words when running for president, the Dept. of Labor fosters opacity when it comes to what unions are doing with the money they hold on behalf of their members, just like the AFL-CIO wants.

The Indiana State Teachers Association’s Insurance Trust exists to pay benefits for disabled teachers. It has $19 million in assets against $86 million in liabilities, is the subject of a FBI investigation, and is being taken over by the NEA. The ISTA’s trust is in such bad shape because of funny business from the former executive director and the investment broker he chose to manage the trust. Most likely taxpayers will be stuck with the bill. James Sherk and Dan Lips write about the mess for NRO.

Sunlight protects against corruption and unethical practices. Congress passed the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) in the wake of scandals in the 1950s involving ties between organized labor and organized crime. Congress believed that workers had a right to know how their unions spent their dues. Lawmakers hoped that transparency would discourage kickbacks to the mob.

For over 40 years, however, the Department of Labor barely enforced the law. The disclosure forms allowed unions to list multimillion-dollar line items for “other” and “miscellaneous” expenses with no further details. In practice, the law did nothing to hold unions accountable.

Elaine Chao, President Bush’s labor secretary, made changing that a priority. Her Labor Department enacted reforms that required unions to itemize their expenses and meaningfully disclose their finances. By the end of her tenure, Secretary Chao (who now works with us as a distinguished fellow at the Heritage Foundation) had updated the LM-2 union financial disclosure form, the LM-30 conflict-of-interest-reporting form, and the T-1 forms for union trusts.

Other unions have been caught recently with their hands in the cookie jar: SEIU for instance. The Obama administration’s Department of Labor is rolling back Secretary Chao’s transparency reforms and returning to the previous, opaque standard for union financial reporting. Union members might as well look forward to their pension funds and insurance trusts going broke, just like the ISTA did. For the teeth of the LMRDA are being removed.

Is this the transparency Obama promised? Or is it the opacity his rivals saw in him? To echo the words of Obama:

Don’t be hoodwinked, don’t be bamboozled, don’t fall for the okey-doke no matter what Barack Hussein Obama may say.

Truth to power!

beaglescout-48.jpg

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

This story is a response to Amy Miller’s “Twenty-Four.” It is a story about how I became an adult.

But first, I hope you had a Happy Birthday Amy!

THE STORY

After I graduated from the college my parents sent me to, moved back to their house, and tried my hand at a few dead-end jobs I realized I had to make a change to myself and my life. I was 23, just about the same age as you, Amy. My much needed change involved moving a long way away, to Philly, with no friends or family there to support me, no place to stay past a couple of months, no money in my pocket, and no car. It was the first really important choice I made as an adult, independent of my parents’ input, and it was reckless, romantic, and stupid. But it all worked out. I found a job to help me pay off my loans, made new friends, played in a rock and roll band, and over time became who I am now.

All the worms you can eat, kids. Forever!

All the worms you can eat, kids. Forever!

Now that I look back on those days I realize that when I decided to blindly jump out of the nest, that was the beginning of a journey from the shallow and unprincipled socialist ideas that we who were educated by unionized school teachers and went to progressive churches breathed, via the ignorant and self-consciously transgressive kneejerk social leftism of my rock and roll years, to the principle based classical liberalism of a husband and father who has faced divorce and managed to keep family and marriage together.

All those years spent chasing pleasure and grasping only disappointment: It was the choice to stop chasing pleasure, embrace my family’s needs, and consciously base actions on principle, that brought happiness. But it was the choice to leave my parents’ house and risk total failure that started me on the trip.

THE MORAL

Imagine that I hadn’t been using my parents as a crutch but the government instead. What would I have had to do to get out of the nest if it was the size of the United States? Surely moving from the Midwest to Philly wouldn’t have been far enough. Even Mississippi, where I am now, wouldn’t have been far enough.

In the future will other 23 and 24 year-olds be able to find a place that is free enough for them to make their own way and become adults? I like to repeat the example of Admiral David Farragut, who shipped out as a midshipman in the US Navy at age 10 and commanded his first ship at age 12 (in the war of 1812). Will future Americans be forced to live their whole lives in an extended childhood, even longer than the already extended childhood we now call adolescence? Or will there be an opportunity for 23,18, or even 12 year-olds to make actual adult choices for their own lives? Will there be freedom or confining restraints, arbitrary limits, nonsensical mandates? Will government be a guardian of the unalienable rights with which we were created, rights that preceded and justified government, or a nagging, interfering parent we can never escape?

Or if you have studied the history of the 20th century on your own and recognize certain awful patterns in developments of the last ten years, and especially the last six months, will our own government be a boot stepping on a face for a thousand years?

beaglescout-48.jpg

Trackposted to Allie is Wired, Nuke Gingrich, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Leaning Straight Up, , Right Voices, and Nill Illigitimi Carborundum, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.