This week Governor Scott Walker gave himself kudos for closing the gap between state employees and his brother who works in private industry. The governor recognized an inequality: state employees receive better benefits than most employees in private industry. He could have done one of two things to help solve this problem. He could have worked to make the situation better for his brother and others like him, or he could have worked to make the situation for state employees worse. He chose to make the situation for state employees worse.
The governor's comments undermine his apparent zeal for private industry, confess problems with the health care system, portend future troubles for his brother, and raise moral questions.
The governor plays the part of champion of private industry and claims his state is open for business. He is handing out goodies to companies that suggest they will create jobs for the state. But he's unhappy with the jobs they are creating in exchange for state resources. The governor laments that his brother (a banquet manager and bartender) pays nearly $800 a month for health insurance and has difficulty saving for retirement. That is the plight of most of the middle class. It won't change with more of the same sort of jobs.
Heralding job creation in one breath and observing their inadequacies in another call the governor's judgment into question. He is paying a lot for the jobs he doesn't particularly value. Other states have made similar mistakes, paying as much as $3.1 million for one $85,000 job. Blind commitment to job creation won't solve problems.
With all of his job-creation rhetoric, the governor is perfectly willing to layoff state employees, the opposite of what he claims is his top priority. Because he is using funds to pay for jobs in private industry, he cannot rely upon cost savings to justify eliminating state jobs.
By referring to the cost of his brother's health insurance, the governor implicitly acknowledges a deficiency in our country's health care system. Instead of expending efforts to fix that problem, he is ensuring that everyone feels the pain. He is taking steps to further expose his state's employees to the growing burden of health care.
Budget cuts couched in the name of equality may appeal to some people, but if anything, the trickle-down effect of cutting public services will worsen the situation of the governor's brother. For example, cutting teaching jobs and funding for education will create another item to add to the list of the brother's woes -- poor public education for his children.
Most troubling is the governor's attitude about inequality. He did well to recognize disparity and highlight his brother's troubling situation. But he responded by bringing others down to his brother's level. This action does nothing to improve his brother's situation. His brother's medical expenses will remain the same. His brother still will have difficulty making 401(k) contributions. The governor appears intent upon making life worse for everyone -- except big business.
I am a champion of equality. It is a significant part of what I think about in my work in tax law and policy. I am also a champion of the good life. I challenge our government leaders to look to create equality by lifting those that are low. I am troubled when a public figure brags about successfully making one group of people worse off and is unable to claim victory for improving the lot of anyone.
Our elected officials should find ways to make life better for everyone. Ceding all decision-making to market forces (i.e., big business) is not problem-solving, nor is bragging about how you just made someone's life worse. Let's rise to the challenge and work to provide world-class education, quality health care, and a decent retirement for every human. That would be something worth bragging about.