As I observe the contrived struggle between the Democrat Congress and the CEOs of the Big 3 and the UAW, I shake my head in puzzlement as to why forced unionization still seems to make sense to so many people. Few in the mainstream media are discussing the incestuous relationship between the UAW and the Democrat Party, who are falling all over themselves to find a way to give this $25 billion to save the unions, all the while trying to appear to NOT be in the back pocket of this group who funneled over $1.3 million to Democrats in the 2008 election cycle. I watched part of the hearings the other day and was cheering “Bob Corker for President in 2012!!” when the Republican Senator from Tennessee asked the following piercing and forthright questions to the 3 CEOs and Ron Gettelfinger.

CORKER:
Yes, Mr. Nardelli had a representative in our office earlier today that was sharing that, even when they’re operating, even when they’re not making cars, when there’s not a demand for cars, in their plants, they have to operate at 80 percent regardless. And I’d like for you to acknowledge whether that’s true or not. And then I’d like to ask you, Mr. Gettelfinger, why that would be the case.
NARDELLI:
Senator, I’m not sure when you say operate at 80 percent, if you’re suggesting that we have to…
CORKER:
I understand you have agreements in place. Mr. Jim Press was in my office earlier today and explaining that — that, in fact, even when your plants are not needed, they have to operate. And there — there have to be some issues that still cause you to lose money unnecessarily.
NARDELLI:
Maybe what he was referring to, Senator, is that there is a contractual obligation that, when we have to idle a facility, that we do have to continue to pay wages at about 95 percent. I think Ron could be more specific than that.
CORKER:
That seems kind of problematic to me — I mean just on the surface. And it seems to me that you’re asking us for $25 billion to support a clause that in no other business in this country would be tolerated.
And I understand the good job Mr. Gettelfinger is doing on behalf of the employees that are not working but still being paid, but I find it very difficult that you’d be in here asking us for $25 billion, which we know is just the beginning, when you have an agreement in place like that that causes you to have to pay 95 percent of the workers that are not working.:
Yes, Mr. Nardelli had a representative in our office earlier today that was sharing that, even when they’re operating, even when they’re not making cars, when there’s not a demand for cars, in their plants, they have to operate at 80 percent regardless. And I’d like for you to acknowledge whether that’s true or not. And then I’d like to ask you, Mr. Gettelfinger, why that would be the case.
NARDELLI:
Senator, I’m not sure when you say operate at 80 percent, if you’re suggesting that we have to…
CORKER:
I understand you have agreements in place. Mr. Jim Press was in my office earlier today and explaining that — that, in fact, even when your plants are not needed, they have to operate. And there — there have to be some issues that still cause you to lose money unnecessarily.
NARDELLI:
Maybe what he was referring to, Senator, is that there is a contractual obligation that, when we have to idle a facility, that we do have to continue to pay wages at about 95 percent. I think Ron could be more specific than that.
CORKER:
That seems kind of problematic to me — I mean just on the surface. And it seems to me that you’re asking us for $25 billion to support a clause that in no other business in this country would be tolerated.
And I understand the good job Mr. Gettelfinger is doing on behalf of the employees that are not working but still being paid, but I find it very difficult that you’d be in here asking us for $25 billion, which we know is just the beginning, when you have an agreement in place like that that causes you to have to pay 95 percent of the workers that are not working.

Are you yelling “Bob Corker in 2012!” now, too?

Another general point about Michigan. Michigan is not a right-to-work state; in other words, it is a forced-unionization state. Companies opening new plants or factories are NOT opening them in the 28 forced unionization states. They are making a beeline to states like South Carolina, Alabama, Texas, and the 19 other states that are productive and successful. Have you noticed that the increasing number of governors that are crawling to Washington on hands and knees begging for bailouts of their own states are heads of forced unionization states? California, Michigan, Pennsylvania. You certainly don’t see Texas, Florida, Kansas, Tennessee, or Georgia governors with their hands out. There is a simple reason and it is completely wrapped in the issue of unionization.

I am not naïve enough to think that it will ever happen, but I dream about the day that the electorate in the forced unionization states would have the ability to change via the voting booth their states’ status in this regard and have the chance to make their states, companies, and citizens magnets for job creation, prosperity, freedom, and economic growth. Until then, people will have to vote with their feet, uprooting their families and moving to states where they are free to work where they please, associate with whom they please, and donate to the politicians and causes in which they believe. The impending demise of the secret union ballot will only increase economic bleeding – nay, hemorraghing – until loud voices of reason bring this danger to the forefront of the political discussion.

To paraphrase a Rush Limbaugh axiom, when one tries to give the other side everything it wants in the hope that they will one day reciprocate, it backfires EVERY TIME. This has proven true as long as time immemorial when Republicans have tried to “play nice” with Democrats, only to end up eating dirt with knives in our backs while the Democrats huddle together and laugh themselves silly that Republicans were such suckers. McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Lieberman…and I sure didn't see Democrats flocking to Sen. McCain in this election.

I believe the same Limbaugh principle holds true when examining the relationship between the Big Three automakers and the UAW. For decades, Ford, Chrysler, and GM have bent over backwards while simultaneously succumbing to a stranglehold by the unions. Talk about a painful position! The pickle the American automakers find themselves in presently is not a sudden, unforeseen emergency…this has been a long time coming and no objective, thinking person should be surprised. Precisely the reason why a taxpayer bailout is unwarranted.

Well-known, long-standing bad business models and weak negotiating are not sufficient reasons to demand a quick fix from John and Jane Public. Even though I initially oscillated back and forth on the merits of the TARP program, I ended up calling my Senators and Congressman in support of it. I have since changed my mind, seeing that credit markets have barely thawed and that Hank Paulson was flying by the seat of his pants on the economic CPR plan. I do believe that our entire financial market system IS too big to fail, but that market forces are the only solution that will heal the deep wounds long-term. The feds can inject as much money as they like, but I do not believe it will save the patient. I believe precisely the same thing when it comes to “fixing” the auto industry.

Bankruptcy filings, re-organization, de-unionization, moving the businesses to “right-to-work” states or changing the labor laws in the state of Michigan, and job training programs are the only steps that will make the Big Three competitive with foreign car companies like Toyota, BMW, Hyundai, and others. These profitable car companies have large factories in right-to-work states, are thereby not unionized, and pay their workers an average of $48/hour compared with $73.20/hour with unionized workers at the Big Three. How on earth can the union leadership claim, as Ron Gettelfinger did on November 15, that essentially the unions have sacrificed enough already? Clearly they would rather lose their jobs than take a paycut. I would rather get a smaller paycheck than get no paycheck at all, especially if the organization to which I belong has brought this upon itself.

Finally, the claim that filing for bankruptcy would put millions out of work is bunk. How many airlines have declared bankruptcy but are still flying people all over the world at this very moment? Bankruptcy would simply force these failed companies with rotten business models and policies to come to grips with reality and re-tool. This creates a frightening precedent for every other industry that has its hands in the Democrats’ back pocket and is preparing to put their left hand out while stabbing the country in the back with the other. The unions’ staunch support of Democrats may finally pay off, but at a grave cost to the entire nation.