Comment on this post

Taking on the narrow view of business and labor — My Sunday Column in News-Press & Leader

Business and labor, so often posturing as antagonists in a life and death struggle for power, have come solidly together in their nostalgia for the good old days when politicians were bought once and stayed bought.

Ah, the good old days before term limits, how sweet it was — and cheap for special interests.


Back then, political hacks held their Assembly, Senate or other public offices more or less for life unless they got caught up in a bribery or sex scandal. Even then, it was 50-50 whether they would get re-elected as long as they stayed out of prison.

Term limits grew out of the failure of our political leaders to do their jobs as public servants for the best interests of their constituents, an effort to try to break the political gridlock that was running California downhill. Sadly, the slide of the state has continued unabated to the point that we are in endless crisis.

So business and labor have found common ground: Let’s get rid of term limits and go back to the way things were.

“They’re running all the time, for one office or another,” Maria Elena Durazo, executive secretary-treasurer of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, complained last week to L.A. Times political columnist George Skelton. “We raise money over and over again, one after another after another…. “


You can sympathize with her lament that this game of political musical chairs is so costly when all she wants is for them to do the bidding of organized labor.

Enhanced by Zemanta
This entry was posted in Glendale-Burbank and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Taking on the narrow view of business and labor — My Sunday Column in News-Press & Leader

  1. Anonymous says:

    It looks like it is whose oxen is getting gored.
    Hmmmm… Do we get along best when there is something for everyone???

  2. Anonymous says:

    “It looks like it is whose oxen is getting gored.
    Hmmmm… Do we get along best when there is something for everyone???”
    Of course that leaves out the taxpayer who
    pays the bills that business and labor send in to the pols.
    Some bills are legitimate and should be paid.
    But schemes like the CRA and the AEG are despicable.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Beware of Durazo, Carol Schatz, AEG, CIM, VICA, the Mayor, Jan Perry and Garcetti to name a few. They are poison for the city.

  4. Anonymous says:

    You all know that there was a time when people protected their good names by staying honest.
    We must use the internet and all the message services like facebook and twitter to share Ron’s messages as well as others to get the
    political offices and administrative personnel
    a lot of publicity about what we have learned.
    The LA Times seems to ignore that kind of story but do publish unnessary stories as public
    interest. ( remember freebasing cocaine in the 1970′s?)
    Embarassment is a tool that used to work. We should do more of it. Honest stories not lies.
    And we should talk with our friends,neighbors and families so that the word of bad monkey business becomes an embarassment, No time to be polite.

  5. anonymous says:

    I think this is why campaign financing should be eliminated.
    My tax and rate dollars goes to a tax exempt body that gets to take from their members (the workers) a portion of that tax and rate dollars to purchase the politicians of their choice. For that reason, I believe they profit under the guise of being non-profit.
    Second, you have private businesses that are in a quandary. They are taxed and have to take from whatever money is left over to try and purchase some semblance of political consideration for their plight.
    Then you have the large corporations that are also taxed. However, they know that if you can’t beat the corporate unions, you should join them. How? Promise to hire union workers in exchange for the government contract. That, in turn, ensures the union workers to have to give their leaders more money to pay for the politician of their choice.
    I can understand that our representatives need time for a learning curve in order to follow through with their promises (assuming they actually keep their promise–and that’s a big assumption). It seems like two, maybe three, terms should do the trick. Any more than that enables processes and votes by individuals who forgot what they were put in office for in the first place.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>