Exchequer

50 Wisconsins

There are 49 more Wisconsins waiting to erupt. At least half the states are positioned to be bankrupted by their government-employee pension systems, but even the best-governed states are facing insolvency because of a factor that is mostly beyond their control: Medicaid. It’s interesting that the first battle is being fought in Wisconsin, but that is mainly because Illinois, the true-blue embodiment of fiscal imprudence, has basically surrendered without a fight.

What does this mean for near-term politics? Leave it to USA Today to get it exactly wrong:

In last year’s congressional elections, AFSCME, the largest public-employee union, gave $2.2 million to Democrats and $10,000 to Republicans, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan group that tracks money in politics. In 2008, AFSCME, founded in Wisconsin in 1932, spent $2.3 million opposing Sen. John McCain, Obama’s Republican opponent.

Union support will be vital to Democrats next year, especially in battleground states such as Wisconsin, to offset the flow of corporate funds into campaigns allowed by a 2010 Supreme Court decision. Last year, 11.9% of U.S. workers were represented by unions, down from 20% in 1983, the Labor Department says.

“Offset the flow of corporate funds.” This is the old “Big Business Backs Republicans” canard. It is not true. It has not been true for a long time. It would be difficult to find any Big Business sector that backs Republicans as lopsidedly as unions back Democrats. (And let me remind you for the 11,000th time that Barack Obama & Co. were carried to power on a wave of Wall Street money, with Goldman Sachs leading the way.)

For instance, take the software industry, a very big business indeed. Out of the five biggest recipients of the software racket’s political money in 2009–10, all five were Democrats: Patty Murray, Suzan DelBene, Barbara Boxer, Charles Schumer, and Harry Reid.

What about the mortgage bankers and the real-estate gang, a.k.a. the Committee to Reinflate the Bubble? Three out of five of the bankers’ top recipients in the last cycle were Democrats — Paul Kanjorski, John Adler, and Barney Frank, purported scourge of the banking world. The real-estate lobby’s top recipients were three Democrats — Schumer again, Alexander Giannoulias, and Kirsten Gillibrand — one independent trying to defeat a Republican — Charlie Crist — and one Republican — Carly Fiorina.

What about the fine gentlemen of the private-equity industry, fighting tooth and talon to defend the carried-interest tax rules that give them an enviably low tax rate? Their top dogs were Democrats Schumer (again!) Gillibrand (again!), Reid (again!) Michael Bennet, and one Republican, Mark Kirk.

Republicans do kill with dentists and coal miners. (Although Democrat Joe Manchin was the blacklung lobby’s No. 2 recipient.)

When people scream about the wicked evil corporations and their influence in Washington, they usually are really talking about the FIRE businesses — that’s finance, insurance, and real estate. Taken together, these industries do, at the moment, slightly favor Republicans, though their two largest recipients were — see if you can guess — Schumer and Gillibrand, again and again. But it is a myth that Republicans own Wall Street, or that Wall Street owns Republicans. As Open Secrets puts it: “The sector contributes generous sums to both parties, with Republicans traditionally collecting more than Democrats. Yet in the past two election cycles, bankers have suddenly shifted their cash toward Democrats.” But look at the charts for 1990 through 2010: hardly a runaway advantage for the Republicans, and nothing like the 220-to-1 advantage the Democrats enjoy when it comes to treasury-raiding union goons like AFSCME.

The narrative of Wall Street vs. Labor in the race to buy political influence is a false one. As often as not, Wall Street and Labor are on the same side, as they were when they helped elect Barack Obama.

What do Wall Street titans and Wisconsin government employees have in common? Above-average incomes, for one thing, and tight relationships with government that help them to maintain them. You bailed out the first gang of miscreants in 2008, and a lot of them came back for more. You bailed out the second gang of miscreants under the stimulus, and a lot of them are coming back for more, too. And they will keep coming back for more until one of two things happens: A. There’s no money left, or B. We stop them.

My money’s on A. Where’s yours?

—  Kevin D. Williamson is a deputy managing editor of National Review and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism, just published by Regnery. You can buy an autographed copy through National Review Online here.

Most Popular

Film & TV

Knives Out Takes On the Anti-Immigration Crowd

Since the beginning of the Obama era, the Left has broadcast two contradictory messages on the subjects of race and immigration. The first is that a so-called Coalition of the Ascendant will inevitably displace white Americans as the dominant force in the country’s politics and culture. The second is that ... Read More
Film & TV

Knives Out Takes On the Anti-Immigration Crowd

Since the beginning of the Obama era, the Left has broadcast two contradictory messages on the subjects of race and immigration. The first is that a so-called Coalition of the Ascendant will inevitably displace white Americans as the dominant force in the country’s politics and culture. The second is that ... Read More
From left: Harvard University's Noah Feldman, Stanford University's Pamela Karlan, University of North Carolina's Michael Gerhardt, and George Washington University's Jonathan Turley testify before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, December 4, 2019.

The Impeachment Eye Test

To put it mildly, the 1960s were not notorious for juridical modesty. They might compare favorably, though, to Wednesday’s episode of “The Lawyer Left Does Impeachment” at the House Judiciary Committee. Oh, I have no doubt that the three progressive constitutional scholars spotlighted by Democrats yearn in ... Read More
From left: Harvard University's Noah Feldman, Stanford University's Pamela Karlan, University of North Carolina's Michael Gerhardt, and George Washington University's Jonathan Turley testify before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, December 4, 2019.

The Impeachment Eye Test

To put it mildly, the 1960s were not notorious for juridical modesty. They might compare favorably, though, to Wednesday’s episode of “The Lawyer Left Does Impeachment” at the House Judiciary Committee. Oh, I have no doubt that the three progressive constitutional scholars spotlighted by Democrats yearn in ... Read More
Culture

The Absurd Crusade against the Salvation Army

We all know some individuals who are so obviously good and kind that we are certain if anyone were to dislike them, that's all we would need to know about the person. We would immediately assume he or she is a bad person. To hate the manifestly good is a sure sign of being bad. Such is the case regarding the ... Read More
Culture

The Absurd Crusade against the Salvation Army

We all know some individuals who are so obviously good and kind that we are certain if anyone were to dislike them, that's all we would need to know about the person. We would immediately assume he or she is a bad person. To hate the manifestly good is a sure sign of being bad. Such is the case regarding the ... Read More
White House

Nancy Pelosi’s Case

Further to the post below, a couple of thoughts on Nancy Pelosi’s statement yesterday. She said this near the beginning: During the constitutional convention, James Madison, the architect of the Constitution, warned that a president might betray his trust to foreign powers which might prove fatal to the ... Read More
White House

Nancy Pelosi’s Case

Further to the post below, a couple of thoughts on Nancy Pelosi’s statement yesterday. She said this near the beginning: During the constitutional convention, James Madison, the architect of the Constitution, warned that a president might betray his trust to foreign powers which might prove fatal to the ... Read More