“Look for the union label, when you are buying a coat, dress or blouse. Remember somewhere our union’s sewing, our wages going to feed the kids and run the house. We work hard but who’s complaining. Thanks to the I.L.G. we’re paying our way. So, always look for the union label, it says we’re able to make it in the U.S.A.”

These were the lyrics of a 1975 song by Paula Green that the International Ladies Garment Workers Union used to stimulate interest in products made by their members (as if there isn’t enough interest in ladies garments already). When I heard them however, I wasn’t thinking about clothing but politics. It seems that far too often these days we find a union label on those in elected office and that it’s increasingly becoming problematic for them.

The label certainly appeared to be firmly in place on politicians in Washington, DC when they told us that they were trying to create jobs. It seems however, that the only sector of the job market that they were interested in growing was that of union government workers. In fact, during a period of increasing unemployment in this country, the number of union represented government workers rose in 2009 by over 64,000, according to the Heritage Foundation piece, “Government Unions Win, You Lose”.

The label was likewise visible when we look back at the bailout of automakers General Motors and Chrysler. The government bypassed guaranteed debtors when reorganizing these companies, giving generous holdings of the new stock instead to labor unions.

Negotiations on health care reform saw this label firmly in place as well. The disparity of health coverage and the concept of taxing those with “Cadillac plans” was considered a crucial part to paying for the newly covered, but the president and legislators were quick to provide exception to union health care plans.

Perhaps this label is part of the reason DC politicians now enjoy some of the lowest approval ratings ever recorded, but they are not alone. Politicians in cities across the country also find themselves in a predicament related to the union label. Many over the years have heavily lobbied for and proudly proclaimed union endorsements in their campaigns to gain votes. Troubled local economies have them facing quite the conundrum now though.

Toledo for example finds itself looking at a budget deficit of over $40 million, while recognizing that the largest part of its budgets goes to the salaries and benefits of union employees. Granting generous contracts filled with high pay, copious amounts of vacation and sick time, and generous health and retirement contributions to those union employees has long been considered a sure and simple way to garner votes for these elected officials. Those currently in office instead find themselves in the unenviable position of requesting concessions from these long-time union supporters or tax relief from voters. Either could take out their frustration at the next election.

Elected officials in school districts aren’t immune from the effects of a union label. Once considered a sure path to victory in a springboard to higher office, they now appear to walk a tightrope.

Toledo is again a classic example of the dangers involved for those having to walk this path as they deal with their own projected $30 million deficit. Supporters in the Toledo Federation of Teachers explain that their members are making less than many of those in other Ohio urban school districts. Voters however, are quick to respond that teacher’s typical $53,000 per year salary is far above the median income of those funding those salaries (especially for a job which requires working 9 months per year). These elected officials therefore find themselves in the dubious position of requesting concessions and risking support of these unions, or supporting continuation of such agreements and risking the support of those who must approve tax increases to cover this deficit and re-elect them to this or higher office.

Things were different back in 1975 when this tune was written though. The Viet Nam War had ended that April with the fall of Saigon, the US automobile industry was dominant both in America and the world marketplace, and the US dollar was the standard by which all other currencies were measured. And of course, Richard Nixon had been shamed into resigning from office in August of the prior year. So perhaps it was easier back then for elected officials to wear the union label than that of a politician.

Columnist Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblowingsmoke.blogspot.com/.

As we are finding out here in Toledo however, not all the gifts that are given are well chosen, nor are all those received welcome. Oh I’m not talking about the hideous sweater that will never be seen in public, the duplicate blender that will never leave the box, or the rock hard fruitcake that will be discarded without tasting. I’m talking about gifts that are as harmful as they are horrible, as onerous as they are odorous.  For we seem to have discovered that though our mayor-that-was has now left the building, some of the poor decisions that he (and the City Councils that he led) have left us as a parting gifts continue to give in a rather horrific life of their own.

There is no exchange department anywhere where we can take back the bad behavior of the former mayor and get the city back the $150,000 payment that appears imminent in the Perlean Griffin settlement of a discrimination lawsuit, or the $300,000 Dwayne Morehead could be receiving from similarly inappropriate mayoral actions.

There is nowhere to go to get back the thousands of dollars spent on mayoral showers, COSI, and the the Erie Street Market; or the millions spent on a Marina District project that has stalled like a fifteen year-old Yugo with a cracked block and a dead battery.

And then there are those lovely gifts that appear in daily discussions of how the city will climb out of the financial morass that it now finds itself in, the contracts that have been negotiated with Toledo’s unions.

We all remember how the former mayor’s gift of rejected contract terms in a 1995 negotiation led an arbitrator impose even greater costs to the city as a result. We know that this present has for years had the city paying pension pick-ups and health care premiums that no private sector employer grants their employees. That same mayor gave similarly at the office in 2009, balancing the city’s last budget at the cost to every subsequent year with a “temporary” pick up of pension and health care costs by employees in exchange for 6.5 vacation days through the end of the 2009 fiscal year and a 3.5% raise beginning on January 1, 2011. This contract gives even more to Toledo, as fire and police are now eligible for substantial payments for accumulated overtime, sick time, and holiday pay (accumulations again that are far in excess of those allowed to those working in the non-union private sector). And at a time when the city is estimated to be well over $40 million in debt, these payments could reach a cost of $3 million.

There are also less visible but equally troublesome gifts from the former mayor that keep on giving. There is the mistrust between Toledo and its neighboring communities, a situation that will be little helped if laws are passed that eliminate reciprocity for taxes paid by those living in Toledo but working elsewhere. There is the mistrust between Toledo and the unions now being asked to actually sacrifice, but held back by a combination of their own greed and the city’s propensity of for years finding money for anything it wanted in places no one knew about. Finally, there is the mistrust between Toledo and its few remaining taxpayers, who after watching years of greed, ignorance, and fiscal stupidity are being asked yet again to dig into their pockets to pay off the bills of past extravagance on the part of the city’s former first giver.

Oh, before I forget there is one further amusing, but nevertheless expensive gift left behind by the previous administration that gave the incoming mayor little choice but to replace the carpeting in his 22^nd floor office. It appears that the former mayor’s dog Scout left behind some stains from his own little gifts to the city (though perhaps they were comments on the goings on there).

Yes, no matter how much we would like it to be otherwise, some of the gifts that we get in life, especially here in Toledo, just keep on giving.

Columnist Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblowingsmoke.blogspot.com/.

(Some may take offense that city workers have been assigned roles of apparent immaturity, but this will presently be explained.)

As family budgeting goes, these parents did a lousy job. (Admitting you have a problem is usually the first step in solving it.) Though saving money during good times for the potential of lean ones ahead is considered a priority of good budgeting, this family chose instead to spend every dollar coming in.

While apparently living within its budget (though sometimes accounts had to be creatively balanced to do so) whenever Mom or Dad really wanted something extra, money was always found to get it. When financial peril finally loomed on the horizon however, such news was largely ignored, as were the lifestyle changes that might be required to deal with it.

Little thought was given to an accurate electronic system for keeping track of the money coming and going from the various family accounts. One was discussed often enough, but Mom and Dad could never agree to spend the money for it and seemed content with one person keeping a ledger; even though this inefficiency had them discovering lost money in the seat cushions frequently ( and some would say conveniently).

No thought was given to the rising cost of utilities. In a misguided sense of charity, the family instead chose for years to pick up its indigent neighbor’s tab (COSI), as well as that of a market whose rent failed to cover even its own light bill. Recent practices to turn off unnecessary lights are worthy, but neither they nor the kickbacks of power companies will provide enough help.

No thought was given to other real estate investments that were questionable even when the market was strong. Now that the bottom has fallen out, all that’s left are a few decent properties and a lot of marginal ones in a market where few are buying. Payments, interest, and upkeep on them are a constant drain on cash flow and an unnecessary burden. They can and should be sold off; but the small profit achieved will not be enough to address this year’s gap, let alone the growing chasm in the years ahead.

Certainly no thought was given to the biggest part of the family budget and perhaps its biggest problem. The sad fact is that these parents let the kids convince them (sometimes under threats) to raise allowances year after year until they’ve reached what now might be considered an exorbitant level. With all the other benefits Mom and Dad provided, it appears that this behavior has now produced a rather spoiled brood. And while doing so may have kept peace in the family and made the job of parenting easier to keep, there’s little doubt that it contributed to an unhealthy budget and showed laziness on the parent’s part.

Recent efforts to convince the kids to live on less have met with little success, as spoiled children tend to ignore most of life’s hard truths and throw tantrums when attempts are made to force them to look. (And whichever parent came up with the idea that every time one kid got something, that the others could demand it as well by yelling “me too” should have just been smacked.)

The Mom and Dad that are here today may not be entirely responsible for this year’s budget crisis (though many in Council have been around long enough to bear some blame), but nothing short of an extraordinary effort will now save this family from the dire budget straits they find themselves in.

What we do know from looking at this picture however, is that there appears to be little agreement on who will sacrifice, how much they will sacrifice, and how the family will survive if someone doesn’t do so soon. We likewise know that if something doesn’t change, there is going to be real trouble in this family. And while the kids insist that Mom and Dad simply need to ask their bosses (those “hard working American families” that politicians love to talk about) for more money to make sure that nothing in the family’s lifestyle changes, it appears far from sure that these employers will be amenable to doing so.

Columnist Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblowingsmoke.blogspot.com/.

After playing in these political minor leagues, many move on to a larger field of play, where the rules remain the same. Congressmen want to become Senators, Senators who can’t have the Oval Office seek to become governors, and governors believe that the nation would be better served with them in the Senate or running the country rather than their state.

Keeping the players straight has become more than confusing, with only two things appearing consistent:

1. No matter what job a politician holds, they’re always angling for another.

2. The process only ends (and that only in recent history) with the position of president; as running for office after leaving this job seems the only way to demean it.

There are always good reasons for this, as these politicians happily explain to us. “I want to be able to serve more of the people,” is a common call. “The experience gained at my current position will allow me to serve the voters in the new role I seek,” is another play regularly used. “People have approached me to bring my voice to a greater audience,” is my favorite short yardage call, since its use to announce an exploratory committee always achieves the desire result of the continuation of play.

Of course, none of those who wish ‘only to serve the public good’ are interested in resigning their current position in the game in order to run for the new one; and while many concede that the time consuming process of running for office will cause suffering to their family, few will admit that performance of their current job will likewise suffer by running for the next.

And who’s to blame them? We’re the ones who allowed the concept of part-time citizen service to become a full-time occupation. We’re the ones that allowed the position of elected representative to become a corporate ladder to climb. We’re the ones that allowed government to become so massive that we must now maintain a standing army of politicians to do a job once served by a militia, and so lucrative that the siren song of power and money sings seductively in the ear of every foot soldier seeking promotion.

Where once there were little more than stipends to cover the expenses involved with the burdens of office; now there are lavish salaries, benefits, and pensions that are the envy of the voters they serve. Where once politicians lived on paltry recompense and attempted to make an indecent living through reimbursement for favors granted, most now live quite well on salaries they voted for themselves and bank such supplemental income. (Am I the only one who has noticed how many millionaires have been created through long service in the national legislature?)

Even the recent imposition of “term limits” at some positions in an attempt to divert this apparently undeniable call of nature does little to prevent these salmon from swimming upstream. For rather than concern themselves with the letter of such laws, they circumvent their spirit in a game of political musical chairs.

How many leave office until forced to by age, legal accusation, or too many fumbles in front of angry voters? How many politicians leave the game to accept a challenging private sector career, begin a new business, or find some other way to earn an honest living? How many leave the non-stop search for higher office even in the midst of a dire family crisis?

Since it is we that have allowed the rules of this once noble game to become so perverted, it seems rather silly now to complain about those playing by them, so I won’t. I do wish however, that if these political players are going to race around the field faster than a football team in a no-huddle offense during a two-minute drill, that someone would at least create a simpler way to identify which position they play.

Columnist Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblowingsmoke.blogspot.com/.

Columnist Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblowingsmoke.blogspot.com/.

Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblowingsmoke.blogspot.com/.

If it passes the Senate and as signed into law by the President, it would bring the total costs of such packages in this country to just over $1 trillion dollars. Now I know that a trillion dollars is not what it used to be these days, but shouldn’t one question the spending of yet another $75 billion when such spending during the prior two years of some $939 billion saw unemployment go from an average of between 5% and 7.5% in 2008 to 10% as we begin 2010.

Many will say that without these stimulus packages, the situation could have been much worse. On the other hand, the point could equally be made that without these stimulus packages, the situation could have been much better as well. The truth of the matter is that since both previous stimulus packages sailed through Congress with nary a hiccup and were quickly implemented, we don’t know what effect their lack would have had on the economy. We do know however that many businesses still proceeded to lay off workers as cost cutting measures after the stimulus, contributing to the rising unemployment rather than reducing it. We also know that the money steered to the banks (and things that became banks) in order to free up money lending, did not in fact do so.

If history has shown us anything, it is that similar funding and projects attempted by FDR during the Great Depression, while they did produce some magnificent monuments to profligate government spending, did nothing to promote long term economic growth or alleviate a similar economic situation. Further, many historians and economists believe that the excessive spending and regulation done by the federal government (and the debt incurred) prolonged the agony of the period far beyond what it would have been if left alone.

So we must ask ourselves, what it is that’s hindering the economic growth and the creation of jobs in this country. Could it be uncertainty over the level of employee regulation and obligation under the health care legislation currently in conference in Congress? Could it be additonal uncertainty about “cap and trade” legislation lined up right behind it, legislation that at this point permits no real understanding of the impact on the costs of doing business in this country? Could it be concern over the rising cost of energy in this country and the yet unknown costs to business that will be mandated by the EPA’s decision to force monitoring and regulation of the production of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases?

Could we say that the actual situation be even more insidious and far more dire, with both the last and current Administrations proving themselves all too willing to bail out the speculators and banking interests in this country? Could it be that far too many of those making the decisions about the regulation of the financial industry in Congress and those performing a similar role in the monetary policy in this country are products of the very system that created the current crisis, or rational to believe that those formerly involved either in management or lobbying position in the banking industry are those best able to keep their former friends and employers in check?

What we can say however, is that if we are to continue to use the automotive example that government and the media have presented for the last two plus years to describe this rather poor attempt to manipulate and control economic recovery in this country (regardless of the methods and motives), then perhaps we need to complete the analogy. If you have a car that regularly needs to be jump started in order to keep it going, you would at the least replace the battery to solve the problem. You might even consider replacing the car to eliminate the problem once and for all. What you would not do however, is continue to jump start an improperly functioning vehicle in the vague hope that the problem would simply go away.

Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblowingsmoke.blogspot.com/.

Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblow ingsmoke.blogspot.com/.

Many assumed that the 4th of July would have been the first to fall victim to government intervention, with the little interest these days in freedom and the total disrespect with which the Constitution is held (mostly by politicians). Some thought it was going to be President’s Day that would be the winner, since it sometimes appears that only one of the presidents really counts these days, the current one. Some even thought that it would be Thanksgiving, but PETA refused to sign off on the continued abuse of turkeys, and few if any feel that they have much to be thankful for these days anyway.

In the end however, it was Christmas that first fell under government control. Long considered a marginal holiday at best because of its religious connotations (though some say that these have become so inconsequential lately that they are hardly worth bothering about), it was undoubtedly saved in the end however by the government’s requirement for continued rampant consumerism in this country (a requirement that is in large part a demand of our creditors in the Chinese govt). Considered now a holiday “too big to fail”, Christmas will now become the first of the new government sponsored holidays.

Rumor in fact has it that the next stimulus package will contain a massive bailout for Santa Claus and his North Pole workshop. This traditional home of Christmas, staffed by “little people” once inappropriately called elves, will soon find its operation taken over by the new “Christmas Czar” in the Administration. (No names have yet been confirmed,but Jim Carey has been mentioned. His experience of an appearance in two recent Christmas movies is said to have been the telling factor in the selection …) In spite of the fact that this so-called North Pole operation is outside of the borders of the US, it expected that this czar will have much to say on improving current working conditions there (currently very cold), more livable wages for the staff (currently gingerbread cookies), and management salaries (Santa appears to work for free, but apparently receives a hefty bonus of milk and cookies at many of the homes he stops at on Christmas Eve).

In addition, many of the traditions of this holiday are expected to change in the coming years in order to meet what will be far stricter government regulations.

• Reindeer diet and treatment will now be strictly monitored, as accusations of long hours on Christmas Eve and apparent “flying” behavior have been reported in the past.

• Santa himself will go on a strict diet as a model to the children that he serves and in the hopes of reducing obesity in this country.

• The “Naughty and Nice” list will be abandoned, as such judgmental behavior inhibits self-esteem in our young.

• Toys will not so much be distributed to children as much as redistributed, with toys being taken away from those judged with too many and given to those more needy.

• Far stricter regulations as to decorating will be forthcoming, though probably not available for 2009 in the hopes of creating a more “green” holiday.

• Speaking of green, the use of live trees as decorations will be immediately banned; as the concept of raping the earth by cutting down trees merely to serve as home decorations is hardly in the spirit of a government holiday.

• Religious practices surrounding this holiday will not be banned (at least not yet). They will however be strictly regulated and limited; and will receive no government support of any kind.

It is hoped that under the enlightened leadership and guidance of this “Christmas Czar” and with these new regulations in place, that everyone will have a greener, a more egalitarian, and a more politically correct government Christmas.

So while it might seem a bit early to do so, let me be one of the first to wish you a Happy (government) Holiday!

Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblowingsmoke.blogspot.com/.

Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblowingsmoke.blogspot.com/.

The questions are extremely important ones, since America appears no longer to be the manufacturing giant of its past, nor can it remain the world consumer of recent years that those that have replaced it now require.

While thus involved, they might also consider that sad fact that America is increasingly a country that abhors the very competitive spirit that it once sought to foster and that was once the defining principle of its economic growth. One could reasonably now ask how a nation can expect to compete when in so many ways it seeks to eliminate competition?

Dodgeball has been banned because it causes a few bruises (like life doesn’t) and because more importantly, it can cause low self-esteem. Red pencils can no longer be used to correct papers because red is a color that carries negative connotations (you know, like this is wrong). Neither A’s nor F’s can be handed out for classroom work because its unfair to set one classmate above another and because pointing out work that’s substandard might hurt little Johnny or Jill’s feelings. T-ball has replaced baseball for the youngest so that everyone can get a hit and feel good about themselves; not that it matters, since no one is supposed to be keeping score anyway. And at the end of the season everyone gets a trophy no matter what they’ve done in order to foster a healthy self-image.

Many will point out that while all of the above is true, we still have a strong competitive spirit exhibited through sports. Football, Baseball, Basketball, Soccer, and Hockey continue to exist as amateur sports for our children as they go through the educational system in the hopes of fostering a spirit now largely absent from their academic life. Sports likewise exist on a professional level in this country for us to champion the true spirit of competition.

Increasingly however, both the college and professional ranks are accepting an influx of foreign players. Pick your sport of choice and you can name the top foreign born stars that are becoming a increasing part of it.

Additionally, we find a strong movement to remove such athletic activities from our schools’ curriculums, claiming that little money remains for such extra-curricular activities with education budgets already stretched beyond the breaking point. We spend thousands of dollars per pupil to educate our youths (much of it apparently to meet government guidelines), leaving little or nothing left to instill a competitive spirit either academically or athletically. At the college level, progressive professors continue to complain about diversion of funding from more academic pursuits to athletics in spite of the fact that most college programs are self-supporting.

It sometimes seems that the entire education process is bent on drilling little more than a few government approved facts and figures into the heads of our young at the expense of teaching them how to survive. Intent on instilling a positive self-image and self-esteem, the educational process has lost sight of providing them with the ability to withstand the rigors of a dog-eat-dog world once they leave that all too soft academic life.

And while we “older folk” tend to write them off as mostly useless nonsense, thank goodness for bad old video games. For awful as they might be, they appear to be the last place left where someone can win, lose, perform on an equal footing with their peers, and yes, even suffer the consequences of their actions.

Perhaps the young are telling us something by their demand for such “toys”. Perhaps there is some genetic root to the competitive spirit within human beings that these toys appeal to. Perhaps, left with fewer outlets for a drive to compete that is increasingly stifled in this country, the demand for such “entertainment” is simply a cry that will not be denied.

The rest of the world has not failed to notice. Countries around the world where competing is still a necessity for survival and who have for years sought competitive advantage over the United States have taken note of the change here. If we are to prove ourselves able to compete in this world of the future in both the realm of ideas and the sweat of producing, if we are to win in the game of world economics, we might first try to return to teaching those who follow us the spirit of competition.

Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblowingsmoke.blogspot.com/.

Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblowingsmoke.blogspot.com/.

Mike Bell will be the new mayor in Toledo and he seems a decent guy who may do a decent job. Before anyone begins bragging that Toledo is finally throwing out the Democratic politics that have ruined its reputation and economy for the last 30 years however, let’s remember that Mike was a life-long Democrat that ran as an Independent. Before we start celebrating that happy days are here again and that change has finally come to this city, let’s see what he actually does in his newly won job.

Mr. Bell will have his work cut out for him, getting his hands on the wheel of theTitannic on the Maumee after it struck the iceberg. He may need patience in attempting to right this sinking craft over the next four years. He gets a city budget that deficit that looks like the local side of the scoreboard of a Detroit Lions or Cleveland Browns football game. He likewise gets a City Council that is a glowing example of “more of the same” to fix it with. McNamara, Sarantou, Ludeman, and Copeland will all either be staying in or returning to Council, and the only debate (I’m assuming that a recount of such a close vote will be called for) is which two of the three all but tied candidates Steel, Martinez, and Gerken (excuse me, Taylor-Gerken) they will be joined by. If you will pardon me, it often appears that City Council in Toledo is some kind of extended family, and to my mind one that just might have been doing just a bit too much inbreeding.

Having thus insulted Council, I will give them credit for recently standing up to the nonsense of outgoing Mayor Finkbeiner in recent months. While I would like to leave it at that, I must also point out that they spent millions of dollars to buy more of the trash cans that appear to be falling apart far more quickly as expected, in a solid waste policy that appears to do little more than protect the contracts of city solid waste workers; but hey, the only alternative was to privatize the entire trash system and save taxpayers some real money.

On a state level however, Ohio stepped up to the plate in almost typical fashion, and against its own best interests. Issues 1, 2, and 3 all passed with significant margins of victory. My interpretation of events is:

• Voters know that the state is broke but wants to borrow money to do a good thing. OK, I know that we all want to honor the people who put their lives on the line for this country, but one could ask whether this is good fiscal policy or good timing. If this is a good idea (something open for serious debate) perhaps it would have been better left for a better economy.
• Voters are concerned that a whack-job animal rights group is about to attack our farms, so they execute of the brilliant strategy of … surrendering before the battle. We know nothing about what this new government bureaucracy is going to do, who will be in it, or what real power they will have over us; but we now feel safe from a enemy that is saying that it will attack anyway.
• Voters have approved a constitutional monopoly to build casinos in four cities in the second worst economy (subject to debate) in the 20th century. Setting aside the lack of disposable income that has already had a huge impact on casinos across the country, voters still have to live with notion that they have placed their principles up for sale, and perhaps far too cheaply.

Woody Allen (of all people) once said, “More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.” I don’t know which path the electorate has placed us upon with these recent choices, but I hope that we have shown better wisdom than is readily apparent. Democracy has won once again in this country, but voters unfortunately may have lost.

Tim Higgins blogs at http://justblowingsmoke.blogspot.com/.