We give you the good polls, we give you the bad polls.
With political battles over state budgets and collective bargaining still playing out to varying degrees in Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana, Maine, and several other states, 48% of Americans say they agree more with the unions in these disputes, while 39% agree more with the governors. Thirteen percent favor neither side or have no opinion. …
A few subgroups of Americans show particularly broad support for unions in these battles. Democrats give unions their highest support, at 70%, followed by young adults — those aged 18 to 34 — at 61%. A majority of residents in the East, 52%, favor unions, the only region to cross the 50% support threshold.
Similar percentages of men and women take the unions’ side (46% and 50%, respectively); however, women are significantly less likely than men to favor the governors (33% vs. 45%) and significantly more likely to have no opinion.
Governors who engage in these fights have their work cut out for them. It might help to emphasize that the governors are standing with the taxpayers, most of whom are not in unions. And it would definitely help to emphasize that all of these battles focus exclusively on government worker unions — unions of bureaucrats, in a lot of cases.
Meanwhile, the Democrats in Wisconsin have filed the first recall against a Republican state Senator. That election will be an opportunity to state clearly just what is and is not being done, and why.
Election Day for state Supreme Court Justice David Prosser is April 5th. Prosser gives the Republicans a one-vote majority on that court.
I think if you change the wording to ask if they support PUBLIC EMPLOYEE Unions as opposed to just Unions, I think the results would be different.
I think Walt C makes a very good point. And it should be pointed out that even though eight out of ten ‘union households’ support unions, the percentage of union households in this country is around 10%. However, the Obama administration is making a gigantic effort to build up unions as a co-constituency with the DNC and this isn’t being met with any Tea Party fervor. Guess the old folks are just too tuckered out!
And, of course, the only “war” that matters is the message war.
The GOP campaigned on jobs and now all we see are partisan overreaching as usual. The GOP never seems to learn.
“governors are standing with the taxpayers”
snicker…heh…ho, ho….BWAH HAH HAH HAH!
Hoo boy, thats a good one.
Thanks for the midday comedy.
It’s been my contention for some time that this isn’t about budgets, at least not exactly. The problem is that the Republicans have a public perception problem. Walker’s attacking the Unions the way he is largely because membership in them, in many job sectors in Wisconsin government, is involuntary, and consequently contributions to the Democratic party are more or less involuntary also. Many (probably most) Union members won’t agree to their union dues being spent on political campaigns, if they are asked…so the Unions don’t ask, and most people don’t go to the trouble of protesting. The Unions make the protest itself onerous enough that this drives away some who would otherwise protest, so that more of the money can be spent on the political causes that are significant to the Unions.
If Union membership is *allowed* but the collective bargaining rights are curtailed, that’s one thing. But Union membership being voluntary, with the option of *not* belonging to the Union also on the table, means a lot of people will opt out. Estimates vary, and the only way we’ll really know for sure is if Walker’s allowed to push this through. Once it happens, though, the Democrats will have significantly less money, and perhaps 2010 won’t be a fluke. That prospect has Democrats terrified. Without their indirect public subsidies, they’ll have to operate on a more or less level playing field, with the media cheering them on from the sidelines.
As a corollary, the question of why the Unions are so energized to contribute money to the Democrats is interesting. They aren’t, really, but the leadership is enerized to keep membership up, which of course only happens because the laws governing organization of the workers are written favorably by Democrats. The Union leadership, as a result, can pay itself $250,000+/year, with awesome benefit packages and all-expenses paid junkets to vacation destinations. In addition, they’re regularly honored by local Democrats as upstanding citizens, and privately there’s a lot of ass-kissing. If Union membership isn’t mandatory, if the individuals can decide to join the Union or not…then the salaries are going to be much harder to justify, if not impossible to pay, and the other benefits are going to be seriously curtailed. So if Walker gets his way, the way of life of Union leadership in Wisconsin will be changed, and not for the better…so of course they oppose this, bring in protesters from out of state, threaten people’s lives, etc. They’re fighting for their very livelihoods.
If Walker wins, a lot more is going to change than just collective bargaining.
“As a corollary, the question of why the Unions are so energized to contribute money to the Democrats is interesting. They aren’t, really, but the leadership is enerized to keep membership up, which of course only happens because the laws governing organization of the workers are written favorably by Democrats.”
They aren’t, but they are? The critical point that honest folks must point out is the inherent corruption between Democrat politicians and Public Sector union bosses – http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?type=A