Federal Employees Play “DOGE” ball with Elon Musk's Cuts as President Trump Fulfils His Campaign Promises

As we close in on Trump’s first 100 days, he’s has cut through the Washington quagmire like General Sherman's march through Georgia. With Elon Musk leading the charge through “DOGE” (Department of Government Efficiency), over 200,000 federal employees in 18 agencies have had their employment come to an end, not to mention 75,000 who have accepted buyouts.

 That number includes 2,400 Veterans Administration employees, 1,700 workers from the consumer watchdog agency, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,  2,000 from the Department of Energy, and 2000 from the Department of the Interior, including 800 from the Bureau of Land management.

The IRS has seen 6,000 employees terminated and 5,400 probationary workers from the Department of Defense with an estimated 70,000 who may be let go by the time it’s over. 700 workers at the Centers for Disease Control have fired along 388 employees from the Environmental Protection Agency.  

The Department of Homeland Security has seen a reduction of 400 individuals, of which half were from FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The Small Business Administration has seen a reduction of 20% of its workforce.

 Lastly, 10,000 individuals from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) have been placed on indefinite leave. The move is estimated to reduce government “bloat” and save billions in taxpayers dollars.

Meanwhile, some 530,000 immigrants have seen their temporary legal status revoked while some 27,000 illegal immigrants have been deported back to their country of origin as the Pentagon has announced the deployment of some 10,000 active duty and National Guard personnel to our southern border while so-called “sanctuary cities” are facing the possible loss of the  federal funding which keeps them afloat.

So, what do Americans think of the Trump-Musk blitz on the Status Quo? Are all the cuts and reductions justified or is this another example of government going too far? 48% of Americans surveyed by a Pew poll see illegal immigration as problem, so there’s presumably happy with President Trump’s handling of the problem.

As for the mass layoffs, 57% of those polled though the budget deficit was a serious issue, so the reduction in the federal work force would presumably be a good thing. While the layoffs have little or nothing to do with the corruption, 72% believe money in politics is problem. Perhaps Trump can take steps to reduce the control Wall Street has on Washington, such as overturing Citizens United, term limits, and honest to goodness campaign finance reform.

But for that to happen, we’d have to have a level of bipartisan cooperation that we haven’t seen in decades. The divisiveness in today’s politics borders on political turmoil or even a possible civil war. Maybe that’s why 56% of respondents are concerned about the failure of the two corporate owned parties to work together. 48% are worried about the failure of our political system itself and why not?

Afterall, given our “winner-take-all” system, the majority of voters have no representation. Only those whose side wins have any form of representation, while the losing side is out of luck, and when you consider that the largest percentage of voters are Independents, that means that no more than 28% or 29%  of voters (the respective size of the two parties by registration) can claim to have a voice in politics. Of course, when we consider that Washington serves Wall Street and gives Main Street lip service at best, a pretty good argument can be made that voters have little real representation at all.

One issue which has come to the forefront lately is the Trump-Musk duumvirate cutting social services like Welfare, food stamps, Social Security, and  Veteran’s benefits. Supposedly, these cuts will affect just the administrative staff of these agencies and have little impact on benefits. 47% of those polled said they were concerned about the financial solvency of the Social Security and Medicare while 67% are worried about the cost of healthcare.

Of course, cutting back the staff will certainly impact wait times. As anyone who’s applied for Social Security or Veteran benefits already knows, it can sometimes take weeks or months before they receive benefits, which can seem like an eternity when you’re needing the money.

Nevertheless, the reductions are designed to improved the financial stability of safety net programs like Medicare and Medicaid, so that they’ll be available for future generations. One change which will likely occur is changing the minimum age requirement to receive benefits to 70, which makes sense.  For instance, when Social Security was introduced by President Roosevelt in 1933, an applicant had to be at least 65 years of age. That was ten years beyond the average male life expectancy. Today the average life expectancy is 78 years old.

Another possible change is allowing individuals the option of allowing future recipients to invest a portion of their SSN payments themselves into something like an IRA account. Currently the federal government handles all that. Some people may prefer a more aggressive strategy. Of course, should their investments not live up to their expectations,  they could end up receiving a smaller social security check at an age when they need the money most and then what?

In a related area,  63% of those surveyed are concerned about the impact of inflation. It seems that every time we go out to eat or go to the grocery store, food prices have skyrocketed. From 2020 through 2024, food prices have jumped 24%. Egg prices are up 37.5%. thanks in large part to another round of Bird Flu. The average price for a dozen regular size eggs is $5.90. Drought and feed prices has resulted in a reduction of cattle for consumption to the lowest level in 70 years, resulting in 5% increase in the price of beef. Chicken has seen comparable increases in price.  

The price of coffee has increased 1.9%. Orange juice and other frozen juices have spiked 17.2%. The reason is primarily because of weather conditions. Brazil, which is responsible for 30% of our orange juice, has just face one of the worse harvest its had in decades thanks to flooding (due to hurricanes) in some regions and drought in others, as well as a citrus greening disease.  Analysts, reflecting the opinions of 41% of those polled, said climate change may be the culprit.  As a result, don’t expect to see prices go down anytime soon.

Rising prices and taxes coupled with stagnant or declining wages are fostering concerns about the poverty rate. 53% of those polled were worried about the declining middle class and the growing number of individuals slipping into poverty.  As of 2023, 11.5% or 37.9 million Americans were living at or below the national poverty level.

44% of those polled admitted being concerned about natural disasters, which are usually handled by FEMA.   Last year, in 2024, there were 27 weather or climate related disasters in the United States according to the National Centers for Environmental Information, with each exceeding $1 billion dollars in damage and a total of 588 deaths.

In 2024, there were 90 declared “major disasters” according to FEMA. That’s roughly a declared disaster every four days. 41% or 137 million individuals lived in an area affected by a natural disaster. Also in 2024, there was 64,897 wildfires reported. That’s up from 56,580 in 2023. 8,924,884 acres were destroyed compared to 2,693,910 acres in 2023.

California by far experienced the most damage, followed by Alaska, Mew Mexico, Texas, and Oregon (together, they accounted for 46% of all fires).  The cost in terms of private property and economic impact to the affected areas was between $ 250 and $275 billion dollars.

Aside from natural disasters, crime and violence is another area where America’s are concerned. 48% said they were worried about gun violence while 47% were the rise in violent crime. The District of Columbia, New Mexico, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama had the highest number of gun related deaths.

The Department of Homeland Security reports that gang related violence is on the rise thanks to the expansion of ultra-violent gangs from South and Central America and the growth of the fentanyl market.

 Most of the violence is occurring in inner cities, which is sparking fear among city leaders that their city will turn into gang controlled “narco-cities”.  51% of respondents said the drug problem is our biggest concern. 50% said declining morals and values are a contributing factor.

Will Trump’s crusade help ease the concerns of Americans or will it backfire? According to an NBC News Poll conducted in March by the Hart Research Associates/Public Opinion Strategies, 46% of those surveyed thought DOGE was a good idea. 40% didn’t while 14% had no opinion. However, the numbers flipped when asked about Trump appointee, Elon Musk, who is leading DOGE. 51% disapproved the billionaire tech president. While just 39% actually approved.

However, in another poll conducted by Quinnipiac, 54% of their respondents said the DOGE was actually hurting the country. 60% disapproved of how DOGE dealt with federal employees while just 36% approved. The poll also indicated that 50% of those polled did not approved of how Trump handled the termination of the federal employees. 82% of Republicans thought Trump was doing a good job when it came to DOGE. 94% of Democrats disagreed.  

The polling results shouldn’t come as a great surprise. They go to show the extent of our divide. It’s also another case of “NIBY” or “Not in my back yard”. Many Americans appear to want to cut the size and scope of the federal government, but not if it adversely affects them.  

We’ve become too dependent on the government. It’s a sense of entitlement. We’ve come to expect it as normal. We want everything but we don’t want to pay for it. Unfortunately, life doesn’t work that way. There’s a cost to everything. President Trump campaigned on what large numbers of Americans said they wanted, and in keeping with his promises, he is acting on them. But, as the American People are coming to realize, the consequences of having often doesn't match the anticipation wanting.

 

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 

Americans Continue to View Several Economic Issues as TopNational Problems

Here are all the federal agencies where workers are beingfired

NCEI: Billion Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters  

As Trump Works to cut FEMA, data shows there was a major disaster every four days in 2024

National Poverty In America Awareness Month: January 2025

Food Prices are on the rise again. What’s behind theincrease

Trump’s early immigration enforcement record, by the numbers

Poll: Voters like the idea of DOGE, but Elon Musk and hisearly results raise red flags

 

Voters frustrated with Elon Musk ‘s DOGE cuts, new pollfinds

How the Trump Administration Could Leave Families Hungary: Potential Cuts to SNAP in 2025 and Beyond

A Case of Misplaced Priorities and False Promises

I've been a political activist, candidate (won three lost two), a congressional aide, and a community organizer for over 40 years. There's not much I haven't experienced or seen. But if there's one thing I've learned, and it's been exemplified more this election go around than ever before, is that today's politics, in its final analysis, is really nothing more than a popularity contest. Not much different from when you were in junior high school.

Like those junior high school popularity contests for class president and the student council or homecoming king and queen, it's all about working the crowds and making promises you either can't or have no intention of fulfilling like less homework, open book tests, more pep rallies, and so forth.

In truth, I guess no one really expects you to actually follow through on your promises, it's just that they get so caught up in the campaign speeches (usually accompanied by free pizza), balloons, flyers, confetti, and all the rest, we just overlook the fact of the matter. That is, there's not much of what they're promising they can make happen.

 After all, most everything has to be approved by the teacher, the principal (who may have to deal with multiple teachers and staff members ranging from the janitor on up), the coaches, and perhaps even involve the School Board. There's not much in life, and particularly in the world of politics, which is as it appears to be.

How often have you heard candidates say something like "when I'm (re)elected I'm going to lower taxes" or "I'll stand up to the powerbrokers (or substitute "corporate lobbyists" "special interest groups", etc) and make them pay", "I'll fight higher gas (utility, grocery, or whatever) prices" and best of all, "I'll be your voice" and "I'll be answerable only to you". 

They talk about encouraging or restricting development (depending on what the pollsters say), illegal immigration, foreign aid, or simply trying to pigeonhole some scapegoat (which is always someone or something already unpopular). But, in truth, can they really do anything about it? The short answer is no, but let's take a moment and look at why.

No one in politics or business (or indeed life) exists in a vacuum. They don't take actions arbitrarily. Everyone has a boss, especially politicians. Everyone elected is assigned to committees and have to follow the committee structure, and that means getting the approval of the committee chairperson, and up the food chain. There's a party whip to ensure bills are voted on in a certain way. Of course, there a large chunk of their time dialing for dollars, not for themselves, but for party bosses and the party itself.

If there is any candidate who thinks they're going into Congress, the State House, or local council and play the part of a rebel, they are sadly mistaken. First off, the committee system virtually guarantees they won't have the time. Most members are assigned three or more committees which occupies most of their day, and sometimes even into the evening.

Secondly, the party system is partly designed to weed out anyone who isn't a "team player". Party leaders are more than willing to work against an individual, including getting someone to run against them in the primary (called "primaring"). Troublemakers can be excluded from media events.They can even be reassigned to some obscure and worthless committee, virtually guaranteeing  they'll never be heard from again.  

They can be cut off from the financial spicket of corporate donations and endorsements (bear in mind, to get reelected the average U.S. Senators needs to raise a minimum of $14,000 per day for the six years they're in office)  So the next time you hear some candidate saying they'll stand up to whomever, tell them to set down and shut up. They aren't "standing up" to anybody.   

As an aside, in Congress, corporations are responsible for underwriting political campaigns, filling the coffers of the both parties and the so-called "leadership PACS" (ie: political slush funds). All thanks to the 2010 Citizens United ruling. In 2022, both parties received $8.9 billion dollars, with the GOP receiving just slightly more than the Democrats.

Another $344 million came from company PAC's and trade associations. In 2023, corporate donors gave a record $4.2 billion dollars to Congress (most of the money came pharmaceutical and healthcare companies). Now, tell me who Congress represents.  

Spending $4.2 billion dollars should buy a lot of Congressional members, so you'd think we would have a pretty good healthcare system wouldn't you? Well, if so, you'd be wrong. Dead wrong. The U.S. healthcare systems ranks last compared to other top tier nations in 70 performance measures.

Our hospitals have fewer available beds per patient than other countries. We also have fewer doctors and nurses per patient too. We fail in preventative care (focusing more of treatment after the fact) and in access to care. We face higher costs for care than in other nations and poorer administrative efficiency. One reason is that most other countries have some form of nationalized healthcare while we have "pay-as-you-go" system. The closest we come to nationalized healthcare  is so-called "Obamacare" which is considered mediocre.

Corporate lobbyists also "help" draft legislation for legislators. They also review various bills and provide summaries of their content and even recommendations on how to vote.  Now isn't that nice of them? It bears mentioning that roughly 90% of Congress members go on to become lobbyists when they leave office. Why? Well, besides all the usual perks, the average member of Congress can expect a 1,452% pay raise over the $150,000 they made while in office.   

Politicians like to make all sorts of claims and promises when they're running for office. They always try to make it appear they're "one of the people". Some "dress down", appearing in blue jeans, rolled up sleeves, eating at some local diner, or using working class phrases, etc. These people have as much in common with the working or middle class as Martha Stewart would at a White Castle or McDonald's.

Donald Trump, for instance, has a net worth of about $4.6 billion dollars while Kamala Harris is worth about $3.5 million (and her net worth is only 38th in the Senate). "The Donald" as he is called, doesn't play down his wealth. If anything, he waves it like a flag. He's proud of his accomplishments. Harris, on the other hand, wants to sounds like she's one of the "working class stiffs".

Congress is called "the Millionaire's Club" for good reason. Almost everyone in Congress is a millionaire. In fact, the median net worth of Congressional members is one million dollars. Some are worth far more than a million dollars, and those who aren't, are pretty close going in and are certainly worth a million or more coming out. Not bad for a job that pays $150,000 annually.

Kamala Harris speaks about "a new way forward" on her campaign website as if the country is heading down the wrong path. Well, I think we're owed an explanation since Harris and her boss, Joe Biden, have been the ones driving the proverbial "bus" for the last four years. Exactly what kind of "new path" does she mean? A new path different from what Biden and Harris has been skipping down over the last four years?

Trump's campaign slogan in 2014 was "Make America Great Again"; the same as it is now. That's pretty straight forward. He sees an America which once was the envy of the world. We were number one in production, top tier in education, had the highest quality of life of any country, the lowest child mortality, one of the longest life expediencies, and the world's best military bar none. None so much anymore.  

The majority of our manufacturing jobs were shipped overseas ("offshoring") as early the late 1960's and 70's, but it was in the 1990's that it went into high gear, especially during the Clinton Administration and the package of NAFTA, and with it a lot of solid middle class incomes. The worst segment hit were women and minorities. America transformed from a major manufacturer nation into a service economy. From 1998 to 2021, the U.S. lost 5 million manufacturing job (2.8 million between 2001 and 2018), with the majority going to India, Malaysia, and China.

We're second tier (13th) in education and near or at the bottom when it comes to mathematics and science among other industrialized nations. We're 75th overall in mortality and 57th out of 195 countries in infant mortality. That's the highest among the world's industrialized nations. In terms of quality of life, we rank 12th, just behind Australia and the Scandinavian countries.

Even our seniors, who used to be considered politically "untouchable" have faced low cost of living increases ("COLAs"), fewer exemptions, and even Social Security, once regarded as "sacred" is under attack. Starting with President George W. Bush, there's been regular raids on Social Security, starting with a "borrowed" $1.37 billion to pay for the war in Iraq and cover the costs of tax cuts for the well-to-do.   To date Congress will owe Social Security over $804 billion dollars in interest alone by 2027. Instead, Social Security and Medicare are facing a deficit.

According to a Pentagon assessment following the disastrous end to our 20 year involvement in Afghanistan and embarrassing withdrawal under President Biden, our military is exhausted and in serious need of a total overhaul and refit. The only branch rated "battle ready" was the U.S. Marine Corps.  Nevertheless, we are presently not capable of successful dealing with multi-front conflicts.

We are currently struggling with the aftermath of two severe weather events, and yet we can send billions overseas to prop up juntas and wannabe dictators. We sent Ukraine and Zelenskyy $12.1 billion alone in 2023. We face rising poverty rates--12.9% or 37.2 million individuals living at or below the poverty line. In 2023, there was 653,104 homeless individuals in the U.S, especially among our veterans. Between October 2023 and August 2024, there were 43,116 U.S. veterans living on the streets, and yet those entering the U.S. illegally are given preference.

 We can no longer tolerate substituting popularity contests for serious leadership in Washington. We can no longer afford the corruption of a neo-fascist kleptocracy in lieu of a republic. We need real solutions to address real problems here at home. No one appointed us the world's policeman, banker, or arbiter of morals. We need to accept the choices other nations make whether we agree with them or not. Until then, is it any wonder that we are rated as a "flawed democracy" teetering on a "failed democracy"?

 

Thank you for reading Another Opinion! We hope you enjoyed this article and will pass it along. Please don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly, please "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Please find below the links we consulted in researching this article. 

 

Offshoring

 

Botched Policy Responses to Globalization...

 

Not Prepared for Major War: Commission Slams U.S. DefenseStrategy

Measuring U.S. Military Readiness

Group spent record $4.2 billion in 2023lobbying federallawmakers, report says

US Healthcare System Ranks Last Overall Among Other HighIncome Countries

Labor Day: A Day for the American Worker

Labor Day was established in 1894 and signed into law by president Grover Cleveland  to make the first Monday of each September a federal day set aside to celebrate the efforts of organized labor and the gains---financial and social--- it has made on behalf of all workers, union and non-union.

I guess I've always tended to support unions, employee owned workplaces. and employee initiatives. From the time I got out of the Navy in 1979 to when I retired at the ripe old age of 55 in 2013, I've worked for several non-union companies. Most were decent, but some seriously "used and abused" their employees and left much to be desired. This resulted in a lot of employee turnovers, sloppy work, very low morale, hostile outbursts, and some unnecessary tense work conditions.

In every place I worked, I was asked by fellow employees to be the employee representative. I'm not sure why I was repeatedly chosen. Maybe they thought I'd be fair and balanced or perhaps it was because I wasn't bashful about challenging authority figures! Regardless, I was always honored by the trust and confidence my fellow employees had in me to take on the role of employee/management liaison.

My last position before retiring was that of "Special Coordinator to the President for Special Projects". Basically this was a assistant vice president position which functioned similar to my previous roles as a employee/management liaison. I was to provide a comprehensive report to the company president and the Regional Vice President along with recommendations for the improvement of company morale and productivity (in addition to my role as Senior Legal Manager, where I oversaw around 30 contract attorneys and managed a receivables portfolio of some $15 million dollars).

In addition to serving on several non-profit boards, I was appointed state chairperson of a national writers union (NWU 1918) where I served for 11 years. I handled state based issues and served on the local labor council. I was elected as the National Vice Chairperson of the At Large Chapter and served on several national committees. I also liaised with several worker oriented organizations.

Did you know organized labor has been chiefly responsible for establishing the 40 hour work week, health and other benefits, paid vacations and personal time, job safety (resulting in the creation of OSHA), an end to child labor (children as young as 8 years old were often working in mines),  fiscal accountability of hours worked and wages earned? They promoted Social Security, unemployment insurance and worker's compensation for work related injuries.

Equality and fairness in the workplace has always been a historically important union issue. Unions backed social causes like the Women's Suffrage Movement, Civil Rights, and the Chicano Movement of migrant farm workers and sharecroppers for fair wages, not to mention the Family Medical Leave Act,  and the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) which guaranteed returning military personal their old job back or paid training for a similar job in the event their earlier job or place of employment was gone. But these gains didn't come easy. They opposed President Clinton's "NAFTA", which was a disaster for American industries and blue collar workers.

It's estimated that at least 1100 individuals died fighting for worker rights (many murdered by "enforcers" hired by company bosses). Thousands more were injured. Some badly. Others permanently. Companies used every form of intimidation imaginable, from reducing hours for hourly employees (or overloading them with hours and no breaks or rest time), ostracizing employees (and anyone who associated with them) to outright firing them. A lot of blood was spilled for these "concessions".

Since the advent of the modern Industrial Age, countless workers, mostly women, worked for low wages in the textile industry, often in hot and unsafe conditions. Many were maimed or killed. With no daycare, the women often brought their children with them, tucking infants and small children under chairs or beside their machines. Not surprisingly injuries or some other mishap wasn't uncommon among the children, such as lung disease, hearing loss, or the loss of a finger.

In 1911, some 600,individuals, mostly women, were working at the Triangle Garment Company, owned by Max Blanck and Isaac Harris, and located in the Greenwich Village district of Manhattan. The company occupied the top three floors of the ten storied Asch Building (now the "Brown Building"). For the time, the building was often billed as being "fireproof" (like the unsinkable Titanic in 1912 I guess).

The women, mostly young and recent Jewish and Italian immigrants, were engaged in manufacturing of women's blouses, an industry declining in popularity. The women worked 9 hours a day and earned between $7 and $12 a week conditions were stifling.  Windows were often kept shut and typically management required all doors to be closed and locked from the outside (a supervisor had the key).

On the late afternoon of March 25th, a fire mysteriously broke out in a rag bin and quickly spread. As all the doors were locked from the outside, the only options were burning alive, smoke inhalation, or jumping out the windows to certain death. Many chose the latter. 146 individuals---123 women and 23 men---perished in what was one of the worst disaster in the history of the garment industry.

Although sued by family members, with no safety regulations, the two owners were found innocent. Meanwhile, their insurance company paid Harris and Blanck $60,000 for the loss of their business. That equates to $75 per life lost, of which the families never saw a dime (it was never determined if the fire was accidental or not, but it's worth noting that the two owners had been found guilty on four occasions previously of insurance fraud by arson). OSHA would not be founded for another 60 years when, after intense union pressure, it was signed into law by then President Richard Nixon.

In company owned towns (which were common in and around mines and lumber mills) reprisals for union organizing may include refusal of service at company owned grocery stores (workers weren't paid in U.S. currency, but in company script which was worthless anywhere else), evictions from company owned housing, the rape of wives and daughters, expelling their children from company run schools, and verbal condemnation at company approved churches (attendance was often mandatory). If the "problem" couldn't be resolved "in-house", the company would often employ "other measures".

"Other measures" often took the form of militias or recruited vigilantes, private security companies (like the Pinkertons), hiring  (aka bribing) local cops to break up protests as brutally as possible. If that failed, company presidents would use their influence to get the governor (who was usually in their back pocket anyway) to call out the National Guard and "restore order" and detain ring leaders.

Since many of the workers were Black, German, Irish, Scots, Welsh, Jewish, Asian (predominantly Chinese) or Italian, there was no shortage of hate groups willing to inflict as much violence as possible and get paid for it! Arson or the use of dynamite were often employed as "tools of anti-union trade" and when those tactics didn't work, it sometimes came down to cold blooded murder.

The result was decades of bloody "wars" between companies and their employees from the steel mills of Pittsburgh, the docks of New York, the  coal mines and hollows of Appalachia, and the automobile factories of the Northeast. Ultimately, the workers won, at least in the short term.

Unions were finally officially recognized thanks to the passage of "National Labor Relations Act of 1935"  (aka "The Wagner Act") on the heels of the Great Depression and signed into by President Franklin D. Roosevelt.  FDR was perhaps the most labor friendly president in our country's history.      

His long time friends and opponents, mainly on Wall Street, often called him a "traitor to his class", and perhaps he was. The aim of the "Wagner Act" was to mediate differences between labor and management in order to prevent strikes and work stoppages which weaken an already struggling economy. But the fighting between workers and owners needed to stop for the sake of the nation's economic health (ultimately is wasn't the recognition of unions which saved the economy, but World War II).  

Eventually Big Business was able to claw back many of their concessions. There was no way they were going to allow the political clout of organized labor to stand. In 1949, with bipartisan support, the 80th Congress went over President Harry Truman's head and enacted the "Taft-Hartley Act".  

The act restricted many of Labor's actions against employers, specifically  wildcat strikes, political strikes, solidarity strikes and secondary boycotts. It prohibited discrimination against  non-union members, and additional rights such the right to vote out a union and the right of companies to vote on a union's demands, but it didn't stop there.

In 1959, Congress enacted the Landrum-Griffith Act which was made law with President Dwight Eisenhower's signature.  Also known as the "Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act", the law was primarily geared to protect union members from any corrupt activities of union officials may be engaged in. This was the era of organized crime's takeover of a number of unions, notably the "big four",  the International Longshoremen, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Laborers International of North America, and Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International. 

It made union participation or involvement in racketeering, bribery, extortion, misuse of union funds, intimidation of workers illegal. Anyone found guilty could be removed from their union position and race fines or even jail time. It also created a "Bill of Rights" for union members (which was later extended to include non-union employees as well). 

It should bear mentioning that the Landrum-Griffith Act was passed during the era of "McCarthyism",  "the red Scare", and the "Cold War". The importance of this and how it relates to unions is that many of the early union leaders admitted to being socialist or Communist. Perhaps the best known of these was Robert Le Follett, A. Phillip Randolph, Mary Harris "Mother" Jones,  Eugene Debbs and Samuel Gompers.

Some of the unions which had a large socialist or Communist membership included the CIO and AFL, the UAW, International Union of Electrical Workers,  International Workers of the World ("Wobbles"), the Transport Workers Union, the Longshoremen, and the United Steelworkers.

In addition, many of the laws passed in the 1930's like Social Security, unemployment, the right to unionize and strike were all labeled as "anti-American", "socialist" and "Communist". Nevertheless, most of these laws are not just still with us, but have become institutionalized as a "national right".

Unions are said to have created the middle class, which may very well be true, but it's not been all wine and roses. I voluntarily joined the NWU. I wasn't coerced into joining. It offered me an advantage and I felt I had something I could offer the union. I was honored to have been the liaison on behalf of my fellow employees for 34 years. We accomplished a great deal for ourselves and the company's bottom line. Lastly, while I support unions and the right to organize and bargain for better pay and work conditions, I also believe in free choice and not being compelled into joining any organization.

However, those individuals who decline to join should not expect to receive all of the benefits that their fellow union employees do. That's the trade off. It's called personal responsibility. For me, it's just that "something" about being told I "must" do or participate in something without being given a choice that irks me to the core. I bet no one is surprised to read that! We also have to remember the years of corruption and crime which has smeared the reputation of organized labor, perhaps forever. 

Finally, unions refuse to think outside of the box, or to be more accurate, outside of the hip pocket of  the Democratic Party which, like the Republicans, greedily serves Wall Street. Union leadership has consistently failed to protect the best interests of its members by not making the major parties or candidates compete for its support. Labor must look elsewhere, even if it means forming it's own political party (we're the only industrial nation without a Labor party) or face eventual extinction.  

So, that's a brief history of Labor Day and why you get a three day weekend marking the last "official" holiday of the Summer, but remember the high price others paid for you to have that one extra day off.

 

 If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!

 

The Haymarket Affair

Lists of worker deaths in United States labor disputes

No union mines left in Kentucky, where labor wars once waged

Union busting

History of union busting in the United States

Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire

USERRA: A Guide to the Uniformed Employment or ReemploymentAct

What Is The Taft-Hartley Act?

1959 Landrum-Griffin Act

Communist Party USA and the American labor movement (1919 -1937)

Communist Party USA and the American labor movement (1937 -1950)

 

 

 

Playing "Chicken" With American Lives: The 2018 Government Shutdown

Once again, Washington politicians have shown a complete disregard for the lives of ordinary Americans living out here in "Flyover Country". This time the shutdown was the result of some 44 Democrat politicians playing a game of "Chicken" over approving a budget to keep the government going without a deal on amnesty of so-called "Dreamers". "Dreamers", in case you don't know, are individuals who were brought here by their parents; parents who came here illegally and thus are generally considered to be criminals.

Now before you start tearing up about these "poor little children caught in the middle", know this. These individuals are mostly adults. They have know all along they were brought here illegally, and thus by extension, are illegal as well. Nevertheless, despite knowing this for years or even decades, very few have taken any steps to become legal residents. Now, facing the possibility of deportation, these "Dreamers" are suddenly getting their panties in a bunch and crying "poor me".

Both political parties have known darn good and well that amnesty for illegal immigrants of any sort is and has been a non-starter from the outset, and yet the Democrats are going to try and hold those who depend on the federal government as hostages. Who am I talking about? How about the millions who receive WIC or federally funded pre-school or after school care? How about people drawing unemployment? How about those on Social Security, military or VA disability? Government employees, including those who are retired? It also includes VA hospitals and low income housing. Then there are the men and women serving in the military as well as retired military. Let's not forget those going to school using a federal grant or GI Bill. Somehow, I'm not surprised that these same politician are exempt, as are all the nations worldwide that we prop up. Regardless, Congress is a millionaires clubs to begin with (especially the Senate), so they don't have to worry about paying bills or buying groceries do they?

From my perspective, every time the federal government does a shutdown, it usually means that Congress and the President are about to do something that ordinary Americans aren't going to like. However, all sides will fall back---throw their hands in the air--- and exclaim that it was the best deal they could manage and how grateful us worker bees should be. Of course, this time it was the Democrats who stepped in it. In times past, it was just as often the Republicans, so neither side gets to point the finger at the other.

Normally, I would say something like "why doesn't Congress listen to their constituents? They know that Americans overwhelmingly oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants". Well, the truth of the matter is that Congress does listen to their constituents, at least the important ones; those corporate paymasters who finance their campaigns and pull their strings. Everyone should know by now that our Constitutional Republic is nothing but an illusion, just as the notion of a republic was under Augustus or Tiberius Caesar. The truth is that we are an Oligarchy; a plutocracy with its growing police state mentality. If these "elites" didn't want this to happen, be it a shutdown or amnesty for "Dreamers", then you can bet it wouldn't happen.

So what would be the reason for amnesty? Obviously it has to be something which benefits our Corporate Overseers. The best I can figure is that it increases the numbers of those seeking jobs, which on one hand is a good thing, but on the other, the more people competing for limited jobs drives down wages and benefits (simple supply and demand economics). With ordinary Americans more concerned about getting or keeping a job, we are much less likely to be focused on what Washington is doing.

Of course, unions could benefit as there is a strong likelihood that some of these individuals will seek employment in a union shop. However, that too is a illusion. Unions have been on the decline since the 1960s. Few have any real clout---economically or politically; most are hand-in-pocket with management, willingly or not. Their marching orders are to keep workers on assembly lines and off picket lines. Therefore, all this does is help fill the coffers of cash strapped unions.

Another advantage is that is gives the Democratic Party talking points for the next election. They are hoping that by holding Americans at gunpoint, these "Dreamers" or others seeking amnesty will either register or vote Democrat in future elections (the majority of American voters are registered Independent, and that number is growing while those registered Democrat or Republican are declining).

Of course, they are counting on America's notoriously short attention span and lack of long term memory to forget missing their retirement or disability checks; their paychecks, WIC payments, unemployment , or healthcare. Who knows? They may be right on that point. After all, the Left has been on a witch-hunt (is that a politically correct term?) over alleged cases of sexual abuse or sexual assault (often happening decades ago), and yet conveniently ignore the fact that one of their modern political icons is an acknowledged sexual predator!

The last thing amnesty does it that it cheapens the value of our borders and the meaning of American Citizenship, which, interestingly, has long been the goal of so-called "globalists" or "internationalists". These groups want to do away with borders, countries, and even the notions of nationalism or patriotism. For them, the ideal world is one global government interlocked with global corporations to create a single open and managed economic and political marketplace. People in Chattanooga will be competing for jobs with people in Bangalore and so forth. Once, being an American carried with it a sense of pride. If you came here from another country, you did everything you could to become "an American", from becoming a citizen as quickly as possible, learning and speaking English to adopting our customs and traditions. You didn't lose your heritage. You added it to the "Great American Melting Pot".

I don't expect this government shutdown to last very long. Just long enough to scare most Americans into accepting anything just in order to get on with their ordinary lives (fanned to near hysteria, of course, by the corporate media). In fact, I believe both corporate owned political parties and their puppets are counting on it. There is no real reason---no honest reason---that certain essentials remain funded and outside the scope of their political gamesmanship. I'm talking of course about social security and disability payments, healthcare and housing costs, paychecks for the military, WIC and unemployment (of course, suspending the pay and benefits of the President and Congress should be a no-brainer). It's high time that we as Americans put a stop to this. If you want to see who voted and how, I've proved two links below. I strongly encourage you to contact the appropriate representative and tell them how you feel---really feel---about this.



How Every Senator Voted on the Government Shutdown



How senators voted on the government shutdown

A World of the Left or of the Right?

I receive dozens, if not more, emails daily from various groups outlining their own spin of some event (like the "war on women" or some "anti-worker" bill). It never ceases to amaze me as to how many there are to spin an issue. I've often wondered what it would be like if what they said was the literal truth. Think about it for a moment. What if Democrats really were Communist-loving Leftist after your guns? How far do you think they'd really get? Are the Democrats seriously out to destroy the Constitution and Bill of Rights and replace it with Das Kapital? Or that there is a secret cabal in some dark dingy room under the Pentagon hovering over a well worn copy of "Mein Kampf", hatching their nefarious plans to strangle workers' rights, to force "working families" into servitude. Are the Republicans really out to wage a "war against women"? I can't imagine a successful outcome to that conflict when they have to explain it to their wives and girlfriends! The absurdity is mindboggling. But, still, I confess to getting a kick at watching how one "news" network will spin one series of events, and then flip the channel to see how the other "news" network spins the same issue. Sometimes it's like they're talking about completely different issues (and occasionally, like whatever happened took place in an alternative reality). This got me to thinking (always dangerous, I know). What would our life be if the Right or Left totally won the ideological battle? Complete and utter annihilation of the other side. What would it be like? If you were a Conservative, I suspect there would be a very small federal government. States would dominate. If the majority of them agreed that a specific policy worked, it would be adopted at the national level. There would be few, if any restrictions on business. Survival of fittest would be the first (and only) rule of business. Those that outperformed their competition, would prevail. Those which didn't would be swept away into the dustbin of history (or to be more capitalistic, simply recycled). There would be no regulations for air, water, or for that matter, labor. Certainly, unions, if they even existed, would be near impotent while existing labor laws would be abolished. There would exist a almost vigilante mentality when it came to crime, so there wouldn't be much need for prison. Justice would be swift and for sure. In fact, carrying firearms openly would be common place, so robberies, carjacking, and rapes may be all but non-existent. Drugs, on the other hand, would largely be legal since government would have no right to control what you did to yourself so long as one else was affected. Conservatives would demand prayer in school. A good old fashioned fundamentalist Christian "fire and brimstone" prayer. Students would be required to stand and say the Pledge of Allegiance, "under God" and everyone else's eyes. There would be no discipline issues. Butt whoopings would be the order of the day for any outbursts or misbehavior. The school curriculums would be tightly regimented with little diversity or thought to conflict with Manifest Destiny and American Exceptionalism. The role of education would be to instill discipline, respect for authority, and pride of citizenship in the future worker bees of Cubicle America. Woe be to the student who failed to keep up since there would be no public safety net. Charity would indeed start at home, assuming you could afford one. With no government regulations, buyers of everything from cars to dishwashers to homes and service repairers be aware! Banks and financial companies would be free to charge as they please, so to the savvy buyers goes the unspoiled (especially since there would likely be no FDA to monitor food quality). Social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and workers compensation wouldn't exist since each would be responsible for their own retirement. Marriages may be as much a matter of mutual economic assistance as love, but one thing for certain, it would be hetro. Diversity would be more a matter of recipes than religion or ethnic heritage since immigration would be curtailed to critical shortages only, and then, limited to those willing to adapt culturally and linguistically. Their religious practices may be allowed, but only at the consent of the state. Orthodoxy of faith will be seen as a sure sign of God's blessing on this nation. Doubtless, the IRS would not exist and neither would the departments of Education, EPA, or Commerce. Taxes would be based on either consumption or a flat tax with states allocating a portion to the federal government based a vote by the citizens. Education and environment have been dealt with. Commerce between states would be based on mutual cooperation and consent, with an occasional "turf dispute" arising from time to time (probably decided by the outcome of a college football bowl game). So, there you have a snippet if the Conservative Cause prevails. Now, what if the Left emerges victorious? In the world of Left, things would be much different. we would have very little to worry ourselves about since the federal government would manage every aspect of our lives from cradle to grave (indeed, even before then, since would-be moms would be mandated to maintain prescribed diets and health regimens in order to insure a healthy birth for the proud parent State-to-be), and if you did find yourself worrying about your place in New World Order, then worry no more since our comprehensive healthcare system would provide you--free of charge---mental healthcare coverage (provided you are not over age 55, in which case, you no longer qualify). Yes, we would enjoy the benefits of an all caring and encompassing social system which promotes everything from the type of cooking oils you may use to how many hours of exercise per day you will undertake to the new low emission high mileage hybrid you drive (provided, of course, you have paid your monthly public road use fee), or you can stay at home in your hydro/solar powered home. If you're lucky, you may have enough energy usage coupons saved up to purchase a air quality permit for that annual May 1st cookout (the Fourth of July cookout having been outlawed due to its obvious nationalist implications). Naturally, all meals will be organic; having used the latest natural based chemically enhanced growing agents available and grown in the most modern commercial hothouses. For the after meal clean up, all utensils and most plates are biodegradable while others are cleaned using your solar heated steam faucet (which sterilizes and saves water at the same time; the water is recycled for flushing). Of course, this can be confusing, so there will be ample government monitoring stations available to help assist you in the event you should have any questions, or periodically forget to comply. Instead of a sovereign nation, America would exist as territorial designation only since nations as such no longer exists. Borders would be open. Each territory will be administered by an agency under overall control of the United Nations. Our electronic technology would allow complete and instant translations of everything, from commercials to road signs. Gone will be cash. Every transactions will be electronic. In addition to the government monitoring stations, government approved assistance is only an app away on every electronic devise. Crime too is a thing of the past. Starting from birth (pre-birth actually), everyone is monitored for an deviant behavior. What can't be corrected through early "time out" or discussing anger issues, can easily be addressed using current psycho-drug therapy. After all, since one doesn't "naturally" choose to be angry, there is no need to accept blame for its actions is there? Corporations too would cease to exist. What were once formerly businesses, would now be credit earning entities, controlled by and for the territorial governing agency which oversees the administration of, well, everything. Most individuals would continue to seeking to maximize their credits, however, everyone will be guaranteed to minimum monthly income in addition to available programs for housing, food, and of course, healthcare. With a 75% tax rate, most will choose to remain part time employees. This leaves ample time to enjoy the pristine environment, thanks to mandated pollution control. However, one may not step on grassy areas; use water found in open areas or in any other way, impact directly or indirectly the naturally existing environment. Otherwise, have a beautiful day. And while all cultures as welcomed and accepted, some restrictions will remain such as the prohibition of "honor murders" (there are some things which are inexcusable, even to the Left). Marriage will be open...really open...and no longer restricted by gender. People will be allowed to marry whomever or whatever they choose, and there will be no prohibition to the number of concurrent spouses or "significant others" one may have. Abortions will remain legal with no restrictions on age and no parental consent required given the personal and private nature of the matter. Schools will permit open curriculums, with each student being allowed to take whatever course they enjoy and excel it (though there will be no grades; only positive reinforcement) and employment upon completion of a minimum number of courses is guaranteed. There will be constructs with respect to one's religion (or lack thereof). Drugs will be decriminalized, though largely unavailable due to the consumption and recreation taxes (which may be waived with a government issued prescription). Sports will largely remain the same, but there will be no final scores kept since everyone wins by simply participating. And there you have it. What life would be like if all the emails I receive from the Left and Right played out. Kinda makes Donley Kong looks sensible doesn't it? We Can All Do Better by Bill Bradley 155 pages I've always respected Senator Bill Bradley. Throughout his career, he always seemed to be one of the few good guys in Washington. Of course, every time a current or former politician or political pundit writes a book, I try to maintain a little healthy skepticism. I'm always concerned that it's going to be another "gotcha" book. More than a few seem to be trying to impress themselves with their name dropping or playing some partisan 'blame game". I was impressed, however, with this book. First, it wasn't a "gotcha" book. There was finger pointing to be sure, but it was deliberate and deserving as a book of this type should be. Senator Bradley does an excellent job in explaining to the reader the core reasons for the failure of Washington to solve our problems. It's clear from the outset that the Senator is addressing ordinary citizens not the usual politicos attracted to similar books, nor is he writing to tout his achievements, which are impressive in themselves and well deserved. This is a book meant to explain and to inspire action, which it accomplishes and much more. At the heart of the book is the failure of our elected leader to move beyond the pettiness of partisan politics to reach a consensus that benefits the general public. Part of this failure is that the system itself has been corrupted by both parties to prevent change while practically institutionalizing the perpetual campaign. Blame is carefully crafted and spun as fine as fool's gold is deceiving. There was a time when, despite political ideology, individuals from both parties came together at the end of the day to reach a common consensus. America's interest came first. Not anymore. Today, it's lobbyists and Super PACS who are the play makers, and it's in dollars raised that the political game is scored while the American voter looks on in mesmerizing disbelief like watching a slow motion crash, except this crash is that of his world and everything he took for granted. What I enjoyed, and appreciated the most as a concerned citizen, was the Senator's explanation and history of the issues and his realistic non-partisan formula for changing the status quo. To many similar books offer "pie in the sky" solutions or blames this party or the other. Senator Bradley, while a Democrat, was equally critical of his own party as he was the Republicans. But it was his suggestions, drawn from his years of experience couple with a working class common sense, which sets this book apart. If you're concerned about America and you're looking for an explanation of how we got where we are and what we can do about it, then "We Can All Do Better" by Senator Bill Bradley is the book for you. America is in serious trouble. We have too many pundits trying to tell us who to blame. What we are sorely lacking are solutions. This book is good start.