SKARBECK: Deficits turn up pressure on unions, politicians

Ken Skarbeck
January 8, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Ken Skarbeck InvestingOne sure bet this year is that Americans can expect to see a number of high-profile battles across the country between municipal or state governments and public-employee unions.

A combination of financial distress and political change has stoked this approaching firestorm. Recent election gains by Republicans and rising taxpayer ire have put public unions on the defensive.

Indiana has already in 2011 introduced “right to work” legislation that would bar unions from forcing workers to become members and pay union dues as a condition of employment. As many as nine other states plan similar legislation, while 22 states already have such laws in place.

Advocates (generally Republicans) of right-to-work laws argue that unions drive up wage costs for businesses and hinder economic development. Opponents (generally Democrats) say right-to-work laws will lead to lower wages and benefits and reduced worker rights. Successful passage of these laws would likely weaken the power of unions in the long run, reduce money flowing into their coffers, and weaken their political influence.

The political media delights in endless debate over “hardball tactics” pursued as mandates by the party who wins an election. But the reality today is that financial considerations are swirling to the point where budgetary realities will overwhelm politics. The can has been kicked as far as possible down the road and it will take brave leaders, both Republican and Democratic, to make the difficult decisions to rein in budgets and increase taxes.

Last October in France, union workers rioted over the government’s proposal to raise the retirement age from 60 to 62. French President Nicolas Sarkozy stood firm, arguing the increase was necessary to save the country’s pension system. The law passed.

It is unlikely we will see the kind of labor unrest experienced in Europe. Yet, there have been reports that, during the recent blizzard, some New York City union snowplow operators skipped routes to protest cuts to the city’s budget. In addition, a confrontation between a New Jersey teacher and Gov. Chris Christie has become a YouTube classic.

As states and municipalities wrestle with budget deficits, we can expect to see more public assets being shopped for cash. Locally, Indianapolis is nearing the decision to sell its water and sewer utilities, raising $435 million for infrastructure investments. The city also entered a 50-year lease on its metered parking spaces that will generate $20 million upfront. In 2006, the state received a whopping $3.8 billion on a 75-year lease of the Indiana Toll Road when infrastructure values were at their peak. Prices for public assets today are not nearly as juicy (or irrational).

Elsewhere, the clock keeps ticking. Illinois is down to days to decide how to plug a $13 billion deficit and Pittsburgh cut a deal to direct parking tax revenue into its pensions just eight hours before the underfunded plan was to be taken over by the state of Pennsylvania.

On the plus side, the economy seems to be gathering some strength. If it can keep its momentum, stronger growth will eventually boost state revenue, particularly as employment rates increase. In the meantime, a combination of painful spending cuts and tax increases will and should be considered by legislative bodies across the country.•


Skarbeck is managing partner of Indianapolis-based Aldebaran Capital LLC, a money management firm. His column appears every other week. Views expressed are his own. He can be reached at 818-7827 or ken@aldebarancapital.com.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.