Posted on 03/21/2008 9:35:38 AM PDT by SmithL
Legislation to grant collective bargaining rights to grandmas, aunts and other subsidized child-care providers was vetoed Thursday by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Senate Bill 867 targeted a pivotal service for low-income parents, with about 90,000 providers assisting 700,000 families at a public cost of more than $3 billion.
Schwarzenegger's veto message cited the state's massive budget deficit, which despite recent trims is pegged at $8 billion.
"Given California's significant budget challenge, I cannot consider bills that would add significant fiscal pressures to the state's structural budget deficit," he wrote.
SB 867, similar to legislation vetoed last year, was sponsored by the Service Employees International Union and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
"We believe (the veto) is a slap in the face to working Californians and hard-working child-care providers all over the state," said Joe Wilson, AFSCME's assistant director of organizing.
Sen. Gil Cedillo, a Los Angeles Democrat who proposed SB 867, was traveling Thursday and unavailable. His bill passed the Legislature weeks ago on a party-line vote, with Republicans opposed.
California's subsidized child-care system stemmed, in part, from pressures in the 1990s for the state to help welfare mothers re-enter the work force by paying relatives or others to provide care.
The cost of SB 867 was uncertain, but a legislative analysis said the state and federal tab would rise by about $60 million annually if negotiations led to a 5 percent hike in child-care rates.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
Next thing I know, there will be a union organizer here trying to get me to join “manure Movers of America” and get me union wages for feeding and watering my horses...
Unions are dying on the vine in America except for the SEIU, which is targeting illegal intruders all over the country.
Funny how ICE cannot find these illegal intruders. Lots of them are SEIU union members. Hack their files and go after the illegals. Phoney Soc Sec numbers should be easy to verify.
Hey—he got one right!
I’m almost surprised.
He vetoed this one last year, too.
As far as I can tell, his vetoes are Schwarzenegger's only saving grace. He doesn't veto nearly enough of the garbage cranked out by our give-it-all-away legislature, but the vetoes he does make provide us with a little protection from California's Politburo.
I did notice that he vetoed it for the wrong reasons, though.
If he had more money, he would have approved it.
As to his vetoes, they’ve been more scarce than his predecessors, IMO. And he has signed stuff that even Gray Davis vetoed (Sierra Nevada Conservancy being a big one) and passed controversial (liberal) legislation that Republicans ordinarily would have been revolting against. I’m thankful that he vetoes any of this stuff, but I don’t see it as a saving grace.
but let's just set one thing straight.....people that take care of very young children are VITAL and probably a lot more important than highly paid teachers when you think about it in the formative years of a child....the amount you learn from birth up to age 5 or so is your foundation.....
the other thing is people that care for the sick, disabled, and elderly are very underpaid and underappreciated....
every state including my own can spring for more money for the union teachers but the people taking care of our most vulnerable are poorly paid and poorly appreciated....
Let the market determine their value. Your judgement or mine should not be forced on others. The market will determine their wages based demand and supply.
The issue of unions is simple. Should businesses be coerced to deal with labor cartels? Should individuals be compelled to pay dues to a labor cartel as a condition of employment? The National Labor Standards Act and its many administrative rulings force businesses to deal with labor cartels. The only purpose of a cartel (labor or otherwise) is to increase the cost of its goods or services higher than a competitive market would provide. If you support labor cartels, you should also support producer cartels such as OPEC.
Second, I just wish that once, a veto message would read something like follows:
This is excessive, liberal legislation. Relatives who are caring for family members, at the expense of the state, should be ashamed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.