South Carolina Gov. Relents on Unemployment Funding

The New York Times is reporting that South Carolina Governor Mark Stanford has backed off his staunch refusal to seek federal aid to shore up the state’s jobless insurance.  His change in heart comes none too soon – South Carolina’s unemployment fund was reportedly hours away from being empty.  

From the Times:

For weeks Mr. Sanford, known for a philosophy in favor of a free market and against government aid, stuck to his stand, questioning the probity of the South Carolina Employment Security Commission and demanding an audit of the agency. He has said in that past that he did not trust the agency’s calculation of the state’s unemployment rate.

The state is currently tied with California for the 3rd-highest unemployment rate in the country at 8.4%.  The article says Governor Sanford has taken a lot of heat for his refusal of help – from the newspapers and even his own party in the state legislature.  

He is still calling for an audit, but said he doesn’t want to penalize the 177,000 residents of his state for the agency’s “incompetence”.

Tim Eavenson: No Retirement? It’s not so bad…

[The following is a transcript of Tim's commentary from the radio program Marketplace]

I’m fairly convinced that retirement is a scant possibility for me, but that’s not so bad. At age 28, I am fully prepared to work until my dying day. I can’t afford to contribute to a 401(k) because I don’t have any income left over at the end of the month. I have approximately zero in savings and $200,000 in student loan debt. I do believe that Social Security will last a while, but not until I am 75, or 85, or whatever they change the retirement age to by the middle of the 21st century.

Honestly, what I’m hoping for right now — my best-case scenario — is that I can make a little more down the road, and pay off my loans before my kids turn 18 so I can get them through college, and sock enough away to become a part-time counsel somewhere when I’m older.

I’m not bitter. Honestly, the concept of retirement seems a little selfish to me. I mean, expecting to retire is a luxury just a few generations old — it’s not exactly the entitlement people like to call it; I would happily give it up in exchange for some other benefits. For example, I would love it if the government could somehow fold Social Security money, if there is any, into funding for single-payer healthcare. I’d work until my hands fell off if I knew my son could go to the doctor and we wouldn’t have to file for bankruptcy.

Plus, if I didn’t have to think about affordable health insurance, I’d have more freedom in choosing where to work, instead of my plan now, which is to get into the biggest corporate mega-firm possible so I can insure my family for under $1000 a month.

I mean, money is meant to be used to make us happy anyway, right? Why would I want to wait until I was in my 70′s to be happy? If I ever have enough money to put away, I think I’d put it to use. I’d rather feel the pride of watching my kids graduate, knowing they won’t be saddled with the debt that I had. Or take vacations with my wife in our youth. Or actually pay off a mortgage. You know, crazy stuff like that.

Big 3 Money Contingent On Union Concessions

A few weeks ago, the CEOs of Chrysler, GM and Ford were hopping back and forth to Washington to try and negotiate a deal with Congress that would keep their companies out of bankruptcy.  The biggest roadblock for the automakers were southern, congressional republicans, who thought any money should be contingent on major concessions from the United Auto Workers Union.  First and foremost on the list of concessions was bringing UAW salaries and work rules in line with the non-union autoworkers in foriegn car companies’ US plants – most of which, coincidentally, are in the south.

It was this negotiation – more between Republicans and UAW President Ron Gettlefinger than any of the Big 3 – that finally dissolved the talks.  That was why everyone was so excited when the Bush Administration – the BUSH Administration – announced that the President had authorized $17.4 Billion to be given to the automakers to stay afloat.  What many failed to notice – as they cheered the bailout’s passage, was that the restructuring schedule attached to the bailout funding looked oddly familiar:

President Bush’s plan includes targets for United Auto Workers’ wages to be brought in line with what foreign companies pay their non-unionized workers in their U.S. plants and to have similar, more flexible work rules. Foreign makers can move workers from plant to plant and give them different duties or more responsibilities. Many union plants have thick manuals regulating what a worker can be asked to do. (From USA Today)  

The deal also demands that the unions take corporate stock for ½ of the funding for its VEBA (a retirement fund established to put health and pension benefits in the hands of the union, rather than the employer – click here for earlier coverage).  But the money, of course, isn’t going to the union.  It’s going to the automakers.  So how can the President demand these concessions?

Essentially, what the President did was place the burdens of the southern Republican demands on the shoulders of the Big 3, instead of Congress.  If the automakers can’t convince the UAW to essentially overhaul its collective bargaining agreements, which means at least 3 votes by workers themselves for major concessions, then they lose out on the promised federal aid.

For his part, Gettlefinger is looking to the President-elect to alter the requirements when he takes office next month.  As the paper points out, this puts the spotlight on one of Obama’s biggest challenges: balancing the interests of a faltering economy and the organized workers that helped elect him.