Union Approval Rating Plunges to 25-Year Low

You can dot the i's and cross the t's when viewing this graph showing poll results of public approval of unions, which has now hit a 25-year low, but think EFCA, Big Three, Congress and Barack Obama when doing so:

Dems Hope to 'Unionize' All Federal Contracts

If they can't get enough votes to pass the egregious Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), left-ish Democrats can get the White House and Department of Labor (DOL) to rig the rules so only union contractors get fed jobs.

The vehicle for this would replace the current institution of the prevailing wage, whereby the DOL dictates what wages must be paid for each contract, adjusted for the cost of living in the location of the work. However, this is evidently not enough for the left and its cronies in the unions. Now they want a "living" wage (presumably much higher than a prevailing wage), along with health and other benefits, sick days, and ad nauseum.

Here's a good explanation from what's called the EFCA Blog:

Labor and the White House are reportedly contemplating new rules – which have not yet been made public – to give unionized employers an advantage. Called the 'High Road Contracting Policy,' it would require the DOL (and all federal agencies) to create new bureaucracies to assess the labor-friendliness of bidding contractors. 'Prevailing wage' would be supplemented with standards of a 'living' wage, health insurance, employer-paid retirement benefits, paid sick days, and possibly more. Agency officials would give a subjective preference to contractors providing these higher levels of compensation. Applying these standards to those of area union contracts would instantly benefit union contractors.

Democracy in action.

Illinois Worst When It Comes to Raiding Pensions

Illinois (and I'm sure California is neck and neck) has been rated the worst state in managing (read: looting) its public employee pension trust funds--to the tune of $54 billion (which pales in comparison to the Feds' $1 trillion, reported here yesterday).

At least Ahnold in California attempted to convert public employees to 401(k)s like the rest of us, but for that he was lynched politically by the unions. Since that time in 2005, the trust funds must've rung up another $10 billion or so in unfunded liabilities, but do you think the unions care that the voters are going to have to pay for this with higher taxes? Nah....

Dems Continue to Loot Trust, Retirement Funds

In a startling post yesterday, it was revealed that Congress since 1983 has raided every penny--$2.5 trillion's worth--earmarked for the Social Security Trust Fund. Meaning that, starting in 2016 when Social Security taxes won't be enough to pay for those already drawing on their retirement, Congress will have to raise taxes, borrow more money, lower benefits, or end the program.

Worse, the Social Security Act grants Congress sole discretion to revise or cancel the program at any time, while the Supreme Court has ruled that no one is entitled to Social Security benefits.

Now catch this juicy bit of news.

Congress has likewise screwed federal government workers and military personnel out of their pension funds to the tune of $1 trillion. In the first three months of fiscal 2010, Congress looted $65 billion from these retirement trust funds while taking every penny of Social Security receipts as well. In all, in that one quarter the U.S. government looted or borrowed $400 billion.

All this, of course, is in the name of buying votes to stay in office.

Think you can retire? Think again. Uncle Sam wants you to die on the job.

Really.

EFCA by Stealth or Fiat?

In one of the few votes being taken this week in the U.S. Senate (due to inclement weather), Craig Becker was filibustered out of a chance to be voted into office with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), though I'm sure the cloture vote will be taken again, maybe many times.

Once ensconced at the NLRB, Becker hopes to issue diktats to implement the provisions of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), bypassing both Congress (where there aren't enough votes) and the Constitution (where it says you need Congress to vote).

Anyway, it all may be moot since rumor has it that the Dems have slipped EFCA language into the looming "jobs bill," which is probably not even a jobs bill but a bunch of pork for the cronies back home.

Anyway, I thought this cartoon pretty well summed up the consequences of EFCA and "card check."

Reward for Getting It Wrong: More $$$ for AHRQ

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), America's equivalent of the draconian National Institute for Clinical Health (NICE) in Great Britain, saw its budget increased multifold by the Obama stimulus plan--with a cool $1 billion in funding. Now, after getting the data wrong on women under 50 not needing mammograms, the agency is being rewarded with another increase of $640 million.

AHRQ is tasked with comparing medical treatments and coming up with the best (i.e., cheapest) method that works (sometimes and maybe even just partially, but it looks good on paper) for each disease and condition. This is called comparative effectiveness research (CER). CER lay behind the data given the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), which then issued a fiat that no woman under 50 be given a mammogram.

Of course, this was immediately denounced by every field-operative medical professional on the face of the earth, and the Obama administration just shrugged off the ban as being based on the "best available science."

One wonders which dictionary they used for the definition of "best."

Meanwhile, over at the National Institutes of Health (another government agency), Director Francis Collins, who helped mapped the human genome, worries that AHRQ has it all backwards, saying that the AHRQ and its CER approach wrongfully consider "everybody equivalent, which we know they are not."

In other words, "one size fits all" doesn't work in medicine, but it's a NICE solution for an agency charged with bending the health care curve through "scientific"-based evidence for rationing and denial of service.

A death panel, are ye, AHRQ?

London's Heathrow Implements Body Scanners

Anybody traveling out of Heathrow Airport in London will now be subject to screening by a body scanner (see image of results).

The new screening equipment was installed after the Amsterdam-to-Detroit bombing attempt by a Nigerian national, who slipped through security with body bombs.

"Given the current security threat level, the government believes it essential to start introducing scanners immediately," said Transport Secretary Andrew Adonis.

Britain raised its terrorism threat level to "severe," the second-highest level, on January 22, days before London was due to host two international conferences on Yemen and Afghanistan. The conferences took place last week without any security incident.

What are the odds the sexiest women are routinely--but invariably--body scanned?