Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker Didn't Campaign on Union-Busting

February 28, 2011 RSS Feed Print

One defense Republican Gov. Scott Walker and his allies have conjured up in trying to explain that his union-busting is in fact something other than union-busting is the assertion that he is merely fulfilling campaign promises. “The simple matter is I campaigned on this all throughout the election,” he has said. Most national political reporters, not having actually covered the Wisconsin gubernatorial election, might be inclined to take the governor at his word. Fortunately for journalists and news-consumers alike, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel partners with the website PolitiFact, meaning that Wisconsin politics is under a greater an especially powerful microscope.

PolitiFact looked at Walker’s claim that his extreme power grab was just part of his campaign agenda. They rated it as “false.”

[See photos of the Wisconsin protests.]

Walker certainly campaigned on the broad idea of getting health and pension concessions from public workers, PolitiFact found, but he never broached the idea of rolling back their collective bargaining rights. In fact, the group notes, when he talked about such concessions it was in the context of ‘asking state workers’ to make concessions, in negotiations--not trying to unilaterally extract such concessions. [Read the U.S. News debate: Should public sector workers have collective bargaining rights?]

PolitiFact sums up:

Walker contends he clearly "campaigned on" his union bargaining plan.

But Walker, who offered many specific proposals during the campaign, did not go public with even the bare-bones of his multi-faceted plans to sharply curb collective bargaining rights. He could not point to any statements where he did. We could find none either.

While Walker often talked about employees paying more for pensions and health care, in his budget-repair bill he connected it to collective bargaining changes that were far different from his campaign rhetoric in terms of how far his plan goes and the way it would be accomplished.

There is of course a difference between campaigning and governing. The fact of omitting a specific policy from one’s campaign agenda doesn’t make it illegitimate. But by claiming to have campaigned on the proposal, Walker is trying to frame it as being a voter-endorsed policy, which it is not. [See 10 things you didn't know about Scott Walker.]

Tags:
state budgets,
Wisconsin,
2010 election,
politics,
labor,
republican party

Reader Comments Read all comments (45)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

It is lunacy to expect any candidate to have his/her plans completely formulated before they are elected. While the exact plan was not detailed, the general direction clearly was.

Scott Walker ran on cutting the deficit and requiring concessions from public employees to help him. He vowed to slash pay and benefits for public sector unions. Anyone familiar with Walker's efforts to balance budgets as Milwaukee county executive understood that collective bargaining requirements made his task nearly impossible. And while the specific collective bargaining proposal in the budget repair bill was not a regular line in his stump speech, it was also no secret that he would make significant changes to Wisconsin's collective bargaining rules.

In a Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article on August 30, 2010, Ryan Murray, a policy adviser for the Walker campaign, explaining Walker's plan to revamp public health insurance, said, "The way the proposal would work is we would take the choice (of health insurers) out of the collective bargaining process.” Does taking the choice out of CB mean ending CB for health care? The reporter certainly seemed to think so. "Murray said school districts often have some of the most expensive health benefits in Wisconsin and could receive cheaper insurance through the state if they didn't have to negotiate with unions about who would insure their members."

What was clear to the reporter was also clear to the teachers' unions, who reacted to the report thusly: "Our members oppose taking away their rights to collective bargaining, so they would definitely raise their voices against it," said Christina Brey, a spokesman for WEAC.

So a top Walker adviser made an on-the-record comment that both a reporter and a union representative understood as meaning an end to a part of collective bargaining. And another teachers' union, the American Federation of Teachers, found Murray's comment so threatening that they included it in a flyer warning teachers to vote against Walker who, they claimed, wanted to "void parts of labor contracts."

Later, in a Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article that ran on October 29, 2010, just three days before the election, Richard Abelson, head of the local AFSCME chapter, said, "The premise is still that they want to bypass collective bargaining and adopt wages and working conditions through the budget process."

Even after the election, following a Dec. 7, 2010 Walker press club forum appearance, Abelson was quoted in the Journal-Sentinel, "His union-busting attitude shouldn't surprise anybody."

If Scott Walker did not campaign on the specific collective bargaining proposal in his budget repair bill, it was no secret that Walker would be proposing dramatic changes to the state's relationship with its employees — changes he made clear would include collective bargaining.

Ally of WI 12:46PM April 20, 2011

Public employees still pay taxes just like everyone else, so when you say they are paid by the taxpayers . . that includes them as well. You really have to work to find those who don't pay taxes by law. And public employees are much like their private sector counterparts . . people. People who see their government officials plan and waste money decade in decade out and pit the people against each other. So, how many homeless politicians have you ever seen, how many suffer with the people?

Yes, I believe in fairly planned budgets, employees should give back to fairly ensure sound budgets, especially if it truly avoids layoffs and outsourcing.

And on layoffs, having never been laid off, do you still collect unemployment compensation as provided by the government? How does joblessness affect taxes, local economics, those things that having income impact? Just asking.

Xavier of VA 7:03AM March 12, 2011

You're kind of splitting hairs here. He did campaign on reforming pensions and healthcare as you admit in your article. He is now trying to curtail collective bargaining rights for public unions on those issues which have direct effects on the budget. People are deluding themselves if they believe that there is only a short term fix to a fiscal crisis. Prudence demands that the long term should not be ignored simply because it's easier to fix the short term. If that were the case then we would just tax ourselves into oblivion. Fortunately, reality exists, and as such collective bargaining rights for public workers regarding healthcare and pensions needs to go because it has put a stranglehold on the state's budget. It's time that the free ride ended.

Shawn of CA 7:17PM March 09, 2011

Robert Schlesinger

Robert Schlesinger

Robert Schlesinger is managing editor for opinion at U.S. News and World Report, overseeing all opinion editorial content. He is the author of White House Ghosts: Presidents and Their Speechwriters. E-mail him at rschlesinger@usnews.com. Follow him on Twitter: @rschles.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

Obama's Mixed-Bag Week

The Obama camp can celebrate Dick Lugar defeat, but should worry about the Scott Walker recall.

Mary Kate Cary

Obama Attacks as Economic Cliff Looms

The president can't afford to talk about the economy, but with a 2013 fiscal time bomb approaching, the rest of us can't afford not to.

Latest Video

advertisement