[Wisconsin Governor Scott] Walker’s 2011 reforms, known as Act 10, removed the ability of public unions to collectively bargain for benefits and required that unions be recertified every year by a majority of all members. The law ended the government’s role as the union’s automatic dues collector, and in 2015 Wisconsin also became a right-to-work state.
Given a choice for the first time, workers have left the union in droves. A recent analysis by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel found that since 2011 the state has seen the largest decline in the country in the concentration of union members in the workforce. By 2015 union members made up some 8.3% of workers in Wisconsin, down from 14.2% before Mr. Walker’s reforms. The Badger State has some 187,000 fewer union members than in 2005, and the Milwaukee Teachers’ Education Association has lost some 30% of its members.
Unions still have clout but they must now operate on the same footing as other groups that represent member interests—such as trade associations—by providing services in exchange for financial support. [Emphasis added.]
Wednesday, November 30, 2016
From The Wall Street Journal, Opinion, "Wisconsin’s Reform Lesson: Scott Walker’s union reform has yielded huge political benefits:"
Posted 11/30/2016 10:41:00 AM
A comment I posted on Arnold Kling's askblog on December 1, 2012, "The Tax Deduction for Charitable Contributions:"
A problem with charitable deductions is that it is focused on organizational structure and not actions. If I invite and feed a poor person in my house on Thanksgiving, the tax deduction is not available. If I donate food or money to a food bank or church that feeds the same person on Thanksgiving, I get a deduction.A reader of askblog posted a reply that enhanced my comment:
I get a deduction for giving money to the Red Cross, but do not get a deduction for donating blood to the Red Cross.
If I grocery shop or cook a meal for a needy, ill senior in my neighborhood, no deduction, If I donate to a community organization that has volunteers who do the same thing, I get a deduction.
Charitable deductions are a disincentive to community and social responsibility.
When there is suffering, such as the Haiti earthquake, do we need a tax deduction to motivate us to send money, food, and other items? Of course not.
Let’s eliminate the charitable deduction. If the government takes too much money from us so that we cannot donate as much as we would like to charities, let’s fight for lower taxes and not more deductions.
Rick Weber on December 3, 2012 at 6:49 am said:
Your point about structure is spot on! A deduction (or credit) is a subsidy (so we get more charity, which is nice) but access to that subsidy requires organizations to meet the unavoidably bureaucratic rules of the subsidizer. The outcome may result in less effective output than if there were no subsidy at all, in addition to any number of adverse unintended consequences such as an increase in the relative cost of directly touching someone’s life.
Posted 11/30/2016 12:49:00 AM