On the issues section of her website, Mary Burke uses the phrase collective bargaining, or some version of it, twice, and both of those fall inside the same paragraph. Does this seem weird to anybody? Shouldn’t the Democratic candidate who is running against, arguably, one of the country’s least union-friendly governors be making this a bigger deal. Since her victory in the primary, I’ve been waiting for Burke to become more salient on this topic, but so far that hasn’t happened. It’s like I’m pretty sure that I’m at my surprise birthday party, but I’ve been here for 45 minutes and no one has said surprise yet, or even happy birthday. So, either this is an incredibly long pause for effect, or all of my friends forgot about my birthday. In other words, I think Mary Burke forgot about my birthday.
Hello. Did you forget that time three years ago when there were nearly 100,000 people on the capitol square screaming? Obviously she hasn’t, but when confronted with questions about it she has responded with phrases like, “I think that Act 10 was done in a way that left our state divided and weakened.” Yeah, no duh. Beyond this, Burke has been consistently vague in her support of collective bargaining rights for public employees. Now, I’m sure she does in fact support them, but why not provide a little bit more detail to calm the nerves of union leaders in this state?
But why is this such a big deal? Short answer: because unions matter, and they’re dying. Since the late 1970s, both union density and coverage have tanked in the United States. This is especially true in the private sector, where unions now border the edge of non-existence. The public sector remains the last great hope for organized labor, not only in Wisconsin, but across the country. That still doesn’t explain why so many people in, and more importantly outside, of this state rose up to challenge Act 10 and Gov. Walker, however. To find that, one must look at what unions do in real terms.
To start, a larger union coverage rate would lead to lower income inequality and higher overall wages across the economy. This shrinking of the earnings dispersion would then overturn the current disastrous consequences of falling down a rung on the income ladder and make upward mobility more possible, renewing the fabled American Dream.
These are the hues that Burke needs to be painting the concept of collective bargaining rights in. Because, while she will not lose the support of union leaders, who scoff at Walker’s incompetence with the same fury as would myself and other Packers fans when discussing Jay Cutler, she may start losing some of the rank-and-file union members of this state. Many of these Wisconsinites, especially those in more rural areas, are social conservatives in addition to being strong supporters of workers’ rights. So, if they start to view Burke as shaky at best when it comes to unions, what will stop them from voting for Walker, who no doubt matches the values of many in that group more so than his opponent.
In the end, I’m just confused. Confused why Burke, who claims to be a strong supporter of public employees’ collective bargaining rights hasn’t really elaborated further on that. Confused why an issue that should not only be playing a large part in this race, but defining it, has been allowed to be swept under the rug. Ultimately, I’m sure Mary Burke will be more friendly to unions in this state than Walker has been. How much more, though, cannot yet be determined.
Max is a junior majoring in Political Science. Send all feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
