Chris Christie was asked on national television by CNN host Jake Tapper who at the national level deserves a punch in the face. Christie replied, according to the Wall Street Journal‘s account,
“Oh, the national teachers union, who has already endorsed Hillary Clinton 16, 17 months before the election.”
Mr. Tapper: “Why?”
Mr. Christie: “Because they’re not for education for our children. They’re for greater membership, greater benefits, greater pay for their members. And they are the single most destructive force in public education in America. I have been saying that since 2009. I’ve got the scars to show it. But I’m never going to stop saying it, because they never change their stripes.”
Since most teachers are women, and the leaders of both unions are women, Governor Christie relishes the idea of punching a woman in the face. Nice. What a bully.
So here is a thought experiment for Chris Christie:
Which states are the highest performing in the United States?
Answer: Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Connecticut.
Question: Do these states have teachers’ unions and collective bargaining?
Answer: Yes.
Question: Governor Christie, can you name a non-union state that is high-performing?
Answer: (silence)
Bottom line:
Teachers’ unions advocate for higher teacher salaries, which is good for teachers and ultimately for students because their schools have happy, experienced teachers; teachers’ unions advocate for reduced class sizes, which is good for teachers and immediately for students; teachers’ unions advocate for better working conditions, because working conditions are also learning conditions; teachers’ unions advocate for greater public investment in public schools, which is good for students, schools, and communities.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Actually, I don’t entirely disagree with his first statement, except that I don’t like violence. But the AFT endorsement of Hillary this far in advance of the election is truly disgusting and deserves at least a figurative punch in the face. Of course, I’m sure Christie and I disagree vehemently on the exact reasons why it’s so disgusting.
Unions exist at two levels. The political, useless national unions. And the grassroots, day to day unions staffed by volunteers from the classroom. Republicans hate them both.
If it waddles like a duck it is a duck. If it is a union, it is a union. Period. If one is good and the other useless, why support the useless one? Why cover over it with a lame description of something else?
There’s ducks, and there are geese. They both waddle.
I do not understand you. At the national level, the unions are ineffective and appeasing. They have lost focus on their mission.
At the local level, unions are staffed by mostly volunteer classroom teachers. They deal with the nuts and bolts of pay, class sizes, education policy, training. The local unions are effective and critical and should be kept.
When Christie wants to assault teachers, which one is he targeting?
What’s the relative worth of a policeman compared to a firefighter, compared to a teacher, compared to other public servants? None of them need unions if they are fairly compensated by society.
Compensation is only a part of what unions do. Job protection is far more important.
If we didn’t have people who say we do not need teachers’ unions, then we would not need teachers ‘ unions. We could have true professional organizations. The irony is, people like Christie are the REASON teachers’ unions exist as they do today.
EXACTLY! I couldn’t agree more. If there were no lowlife demagogues like Chris Christie and if all people respected educators no union would be necessary.
Unfortunately, we still live in the current reality, so we’ll continue to do what we can—even people like me who are neither teachers nor union members—to back up and support the people who teach our children and make a difference in their lives.
He reminds me of a fat playground bully.
I’m sure Rachel Maddow will have a lot to say about this…
Don’t hold your breath.
I sure wont. Silence in the face of this assault on a cornerstone of our society is tantamount to collaboration. A high profile “progressive” like her–and others–are really traitors. She is well paid, though, so maybe that her consolation.
Maybe Steve Kornacki?
“greater benefits, greater pay”
Hang on, I thought that was the self serving doctrine of the free market that was the miracle of the U.S., the ideology that they wanted to promote the most in AP US history? What gives, is Christie some kind of socialist or what?
Greater benefits and greater pay. What a joke! I’m still waiting for that even after 13 years of teaching and one year out from quitting to pursue a new career. The Union’s are in on everything and this is nothing more than a dog and pony show to make it seem otherwise. Just look at who these bums endorsed. That says it all.
Certainly the single most destructive force in education in New Jersey is Chris Christie. http://russonreading.blogspot.com/2015/08/hey-governor-christie-punch-my-face.html
Please, folks! I never voted for CC & never would! For out-of-staters: NJ Dems have a long & colorful, corrupt, Tammany-Hall-style history, & voters have a long memory. So they are willing to experiment with Republicans. Christie rode in on the anti-Corzine tide thanks to the financial collapse. The sleazy move I hate him for: when Dem Sen Lauterberg died, Christie pushed thro an unpopular [because expensive] special election for Lauterberg’s replacement just THREE WEEKS before the general election. Christie [correctly] calculated that blacks–unlikely to vote to re-elect Christie– would turn out in record numbers to put DINO Corey Booker in the Senate. Sure enough Cristie won re-election 3wks later on the lowest-ever turnout for a gubernatorial election.
I’d say the voters of NJ deserved a punch in the face for reelecting this clown, but Rick Scott is my governor, so…
I agree, but Mike Pence is my governor, so…
and I agree, but Andrew Cuomo is my governor, so…
The voters who really deserve a punch in the face are the thousands who did not vote at all. Christie’s base is motivated and highly organized to get out the vote. His opponent had very little support, even from her own party.
However, the legislature that was voted in at the last election is much more union-friendly than the previous cowardly one. At least these folks are standing up to Christie.
At this November’s election, all seats are up for grabs. It’s our job to organize our base to keep the legislature on our side. Somehow, I doubt we will. Union members get complacent, despite the whole pension to-do here. Once the school year gets under way, they’ll be soooooo busy, they won’t get involved. And round and round we go. Let’s hope things will be different this time around, but somehow, I doubt it.
After reading this, I went onto his office’s website and emailed him. Here’s the message I left:
I am writing today to volunteer towards the presidential campaign of Governor Christie.
Recently, the governor proclaimed the teachers unions as the problem with public education, so much so that he would punch them in the face.
As a public educator, everyday I see the powerful impact that words can have. But I also know actions can speak louder than words. If you believe this as well than please accept my invitation to come to Wisconsin and literally punch me in the face.
Show all of your constituents that you mean business by inflicting violence towards the enemy. This will give you signficant street cred with the anti-education, pro-voucher reformists, and given your most recent numbers you could use the bump (no pun intended).
As you campaign across this country, voters need to see more than just rhetoric. They need to see action. Voters don’t want to see what you will do; they want to see what you’re willing to do.
Put-up or shut-up and visit Wisconsin and punch me, an educator, in the face.
He won’t care and will just laugh. But I do think my kid’s 90lb kindergarten teacher could take ’em with one well placed uppercut..
Punching teachers and breaking out the bat on a senior NJ legislator. Well Chris, what do we do to you?
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/04/14/158560/chris-christie-take-bat/
I was reading in the Vidal/Buckley debates, the conservative Buckley, when over-powered intellectually, resorted to calling Vidal a “queer” and how Buckley would “sock” Vidal in the “g$#)-_mn face and you’ll stay plastered.”. I find that Conservative Republicans, from Buckley to O’Reilly to Kasich to Christie, are quick to resort to violence when challenged and proved for what they are – angry, mean, misanthropes who care only for themselves. Scratch the surface and rot like Christie bubbles up.
Happens shortly after this point.
Please let’s not throw Buckley in with the likes of O’Reilly, Kasich, Christie. Buckley was a complex character of high intelligence, whose political positions evolved with time and evidence. I miss his absence: today, when seeking to understand the conservative viewpoint to balance that of great progressive thinkers, I find only dreck promulgated by such as you mention here.
Buckley was a rational cream puff compared to today’s conservatives. But my point is what happens when you take a hard look at conservatism. At its roots today are anger, hatred, fear, and violence. What’s the difference between Buckley threatening to punch Vidal v. Christie suggestion of punching teachers? Why is it saying crypto Nazi means violence is an equivalent and justified? Perhaps Buckley was just better at hiding his true nature.
No difference. Yes he was an ass of the first degree in his middle age. But he seemed to learn from life unlike some. I found him quite human in his final interview by Charlie Rose.
Arne Duncan discrediting teachers, Obama publicly agreeing with decision to fire teachers in a Rhode Island town, a few years ago, Obama gets RTTP and Christie is your target? I understand this is a political season but I also sense a knee-jerk response to one of 17 Republican presidential candidates who doesn’t command much attention on the national stage.
There aren’t any politicians from either major party that are on the side of public education. There aren’t any “progressive” media outlets that are, either.
“There aren’t any politicians from either major party that are on the side of public education.”
Does this say anything about public education?
Raj,
It says that billionaires and their lackeys have successfully turned public education into a scapegoat, to divert public attention from their outsourcing of jobs and their compulsive greed
How dare you, Raj! What a cheap shot. And then you complain about our comments towards you.
That’s the dumbest question that came out from your mouth, Raj. It’s just so silly that even a 5-year-old Asian kid mocks at you for obtuseness.
It only says you haven’t been listening.
Diane,
You cannot blame every thing on billionaires. The public school system is a $600 billion a year business. If democrats and republicans are against you who is with you? I see no one is left.
Raj,
90% of parents in America send their children to public schools. How do you think America became the greatest nation in the world? It wasn’t because of charters; they didn’t exist. It was on the backs and creativity and ingenuity and persistence of the 90% who went to public schools. They have millions of parents. They support public education.
That’s easy enough, Raj.
The 70% + of parents with children in school who have, pretty consistently for 30+ years, rated the schools their children attend as being “A” or “B” for quality.
Interestingly enough, by similar margins, the public gives the education system as a WHOLE much lower marks which, given the steady drumbeat of “failure!” since the Reagan administration, is not surprising.
When it comes to perception of public education, the grass is usually GREENER on your side of the fence and familiarity typically breeds regard and appreciation.
The politicians are, as is more and more the case today, responding to their donors rather than to the actual stakeholders.
Christie has a history. Check out his self made YouTube videos. Christie deserves to be called out, just like the others.
When education became a political agenda, and when the general public became “convinced” that schools were bad and it was all the fault of the teachers — the deep damage was done, and it will be very difficult to entice recent high school graduates into the profession. I wonder if Christie is expected to buy his own supplies and the supplies of his staff?
I personally have to agree with him on this one. Unions are out for unions and that is that. I too have first hand experience and I know many teachers that will tell you the union does nothing for them except collect their dues. Unions are one of the major causes of companies moving out of this country because they cannot afford to be competitive. Unions sold the teachers down the river when they supported RTTT. And now we are expected to believe they are out for teachers. But what will be next for this guy. I am waiting for him to attack elected school boards to buddy up to his Charter friends. Bottom line: Christy is not good for NJ and he surely won’t be good for the nation. His candle will burn out after the first debate. He will be yesterdays news.
Unions were not the cause companies moved overseas. Low wages and benefits were the cause. Companies want the protections of the U.S. military and influence globally, but do not want U.S. workers to enjoy those protections. But there is a strong correlation between the decline of American compensation and union membership.
I believe in unions, just not necessarily the people who run them. Same for our government. Both have the potential to do great good for many, but once individuals get in to positions of power, they begin to take care of themselves and those who help keep them in power and they lose sight of their original purpose.
If you belong to a union then YOU are the union. YOU can get involved and change the leadership if you want. Too many times teachers, and probably other union members, act like their only duty to the union is to pay dues. It is not. It requires active participation or the union loses strength.
Personally I believe the union is there to protect due process rights of teachers, to gain wages//benefits for teachers when possible, and to negotiate contracts between boards and teachers. If somehow this helps the classroom, o.k.
When Reagan was elected, it was a no brainer to predict the decline of a middle class. Fair trade only enhanced this.
Meanwhile, Christie is probably expecting a group of nuns/monks to work for little or nothing, and probably mostly nuns. He will have long wait as women aren’t running to serve his needs at the moment. He is a socialist when he can save a dime, and a capitalist when he can make one, I suppose.
So you WANT Cristie to punch Lily Eskelsen or something?
@karen: “Unions are one of the major causes of companies moving out of this country because they cannot afford to be competitive.”
You need to think that one through. All unions did was extract enough from corporation profit to garner a middle-class livin for employees. Before unions, factory workers, whose numbers included children, worked 12-14-hr days, 6 to 7 days a week, without benefits, and barely eked out a living. Once unions were in place, the US had a healthy middle class who could afford to buy our mfrd products, & corporations prospered.
What changed? Third-world countries industrialized. Today our corporations can enjoy the bloated profits of the gilded age by outsourcing mfg jobs to those countries, exploiting locals who work for such low wages that it covers the extra cost of shipping products back to consumers here & in Europe.
The travesty is that not only has the US lost millions of jobs, we don’t even see benefits of bloated US corp profits paid back into our public services thanks to simultaneous tax cuts, loopholes such as banking profits abroad, etc. The sop to the US public: cheap foreign-made products (of little use to the jobless)– &– for all those US employees whose pensions ended in the early ’90’s– 401k’s pegged to the bloated Dow 500 (when it isn’t crashing thanks to the volatile global market).
So ideologists like you say, get rid of unions so we can compete w/the 3rd world! Newsflash: the only way to compete w/the 3rd world is to lower our wages/ QOL to 3rd-world status.
In response to brackenkaren:
Let’s put some numbers behind the corporate claim that unions are responsible for not being competitive. Before I go on, be aware that what workers are willing to work for in countries like China and Vietnam is much higher than what they had before the factories arrived.
“The average assembly worker in Shenzhen (China) now makes 2000 RMB ($328) per month. This is up 4 times from 500 RMB a few years ago.”
This increase in average monthly earnings in China is driving US corporations to move their manufacturing to countries where labor is cheaper—-for instance, Vietnam where “The average daily wage for a factory worker in Vietnam is about $7, compared with $8 in Indonesia and $12.50 in the Philippines, according to Oliver Tonby, a managing partner at McKinsey & Co. in Southeast Asia.”
Imagine the quality of life in the United States if workers were paid $7 a DAY for a sixteen hour work days. That’s what it was like in the U.S. before labor unions became established. And those American corporations are complaining and threatening to leave Vietnam because Vietnam’s minimum wage is increasing $14-$18 per month (not hour; not day; not week—but PER MONTH) this year.
In China the average workday is 12 hours. In the United States it is 8.6 hours. The average hourly wage in the U.S. is $23.32 but in China it’s $1.36.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/08/average-cost-factory-worker_n_1327413.html
“While Americans generally associate the idea of Chinese factory workers with terrible conditions and long hours (which are certainly issues), there is another side to the story. While earning between $1.31 and $2.76 an hour seems like a pittance to Americans, the cost of living in China is significantly lower than in the US, and often migrant workers are creating a better life for themselves and their families through factory work.”
http://knote.com/2014/12/04/chinas-factory-workers/
“The report also shows rural families (in China) had an average (annual) income of 5,919 yuan in 2010, compared with 19,109 yuan at urban level.”
To understand how much a yuan is worth compared to an American dollar, the exchange rate in December was about $6.66 yuan for $1. That means 5,919 yuan was worth $895.81 U.S, and the 19,109 yuan was worth $2,869.21.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/2011-12/02/content_14204209.htm
How will a worker in the United States pay for food and rent at $1.36 an hour?
Instead of forcing American workers into poverty, a better choice would have been to protect American workers and make sure everyone in the United States who works is earning a liveable wage based on the cost of living in America, and the products that are manufactured in the United States are protected by tariffs on imports so the imports cost about the same as what is manufactured in the U.S.
“Consumer Prices in China are 36.26% lower than in United States
Consumer Prices Including Rent in China are 36.39% lower than in United States
Rent Prices in China are 36.68% lower than in United States
Restaurant Prices in China are 51.85% lower than in United States
Groceries Prices in China are 36.48% lower than in United States
Local Purchasing Power in China is 44.01% lower than in United States”
http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_countries_result.jsp?country1=United+States&country2=China
Consumer Prices in Vietnam are 47.14% lower than in United States
Consumer Prices Including Rent in Vietnam are 51.46% lower than in United States
Rent Prices in Vietnam are 61.12% lower than in United States
Restaurant Prices in Vietnam are 70.62% lower than in United States
Groceries Prices in Vietnam are 51.92% lower than in United States
Local Purchasing Power in Vietnam is 80.55% lower than in United States
http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_countries_result.jsp?country1=United+States&country2=Vietnam
Consumer Prices in United States are 197.24% higher than in India
Consumer Prices Including Rent in United States are 251.49% higher than in India
Rent Prices in United States are 493.07% higher than in India
Restaurant Prices in United States are 318.54% higher than in India
Groceries Prices in United States are 191.24% higher than in India
Local Purchasing Power in United States is 63.45% higher than in India
http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_countries_result.jsp?country1=India&country2=United+States
Sorry for the typo……….Christie not Christy
I read this account of CNN’s interview with Christie in the WSJ this morning. You missed the following addition from the editors of the WSJ who agree with Christie’s statements about punching..
“Every word of that is true and important to say. “The teachers unions have been punching poor children for decades, and someone has to punch back for these children.”
Note that the WSJ editors portray “poor children” as victims of teachers.
My reaction was not as cool as your lovely and perfectly logical thought experiment. I’d love to see your thought experiment in the WSJ.
On July 27, the WSJ praised North Carolina’s Supreme Court ruling (4-3) in favor of vouchers, saying that unions have “monopoly control over the lives of millions they fail to teach. It’s the greatest scandal in American public life.”
The greatest scandal in American public life?
Not the companies and public officials who aided and abetted the tanking of the global economy?
omg, glad I haven’t paid the WSJ subscription fee exacted since Murdoch bought them. How low the once-hi-quality journal is brought under its new mgt. Looks to be just a right-wingnut rag now.
Time to punch out of the race, Christie! My goat can beat you!
If bacon neck was able to muster the energy to throw a punch he would probably have a heart attack on the spot. Christie better stop worrying about the teachers Union and start focusing his efforts on purchasing a gym membership.
We all know that Christie is a sludge bucket. He is beyond redemption. He has spewed forth his poisonous belief system (as have the other candidates), since he assumed the governorship of New Jersey.
Let us remember that his candidacy never broke the surface and in fact is sinking like a stone. He will return to New Jersey, head unbowed and continue to destroy public school education unless he is stopped.
My heart goes out to that state’s public school kids, parents teachers and communities. The most important question regarding this sludge bucket is who will defeat him in the next election and can the gross harm, education destruction that he has perpetrated be set right.
No one will defeat him because he can’t run for a third term.
Christie’s successor, Dem or Rep, will be confronted with the same public-employee pension-funding fiasco handed to him, namely an impossible debt created by predecessors looting the fund, diverting it into general operating funds; he kicked the can to the next guy as per. [Are there any other state govs who did differently?]. He has slashed ed-funding like every other US gov in the wake of the financial collapse.
Like the great majority of other state govs, Christie bought into Common Core and its testing consortia, further strapping the budgets of local districts– and like MA & CN, kicking one of the best-performing public-ed systems in the country in the teeth. To his credit, he has put CC into a review committee & postponed high stakes for a couple-three years (small praise).
But he may go down in history as the ass who wasted Zuckerberg’s Newark-bound $100million into consultants without spending a penny on Newark’s students. And it may be that no govr can rescue Newark, Camden & Paterson’s public-school systems from the maw of for-profit charters into which he threw them.
Thanks for correcting me on the third term issue. More importantly, you wrote persuasively on the sad, dire conditions in New Jersey. Christie has left the state deep in a dark hole .
Just waiting for a presidential candidate – any one of them, red or blue, to call this out. Not holding my breath, though.
Christie revealed to the nation. In his own words.
Christie’s sophomoric comment is unfortunate because it condones a violent action against teachers. Considering our national organizations, the AFT and NEA are both led by females make his comments even more disturbing.
As president of my local, I must say our union is involved in health and safety issues that affect our students, we have a say in which textbooks we choose as a district, and our teachers often advocate for students so that they receive appropriate services, We are also involved in building and district committees that support our students’ learning.
Our contracts and benefits are only negotiated every 3 years or so, in between we spend most of our energies advocating for students.
Christie is an ignorant political hack, who knew full well his comment would raise a firestorm. His poll numbers are pitiful, he wouldn’t even win his own state. His comment was an attempt to get a headline.
Maybe someone will punch him in the mouth so his jaw could get wired shut.
Wish it is me
Chris Christie has one truly consistent pattern: when confronted with any challenge to himself or his record, he lashes out in anger, portrays himself as a victim, and then uses that to avoid responding to any legitimate criticism. He does this over and over again and, until recently, it has helped him use his “tough guy” persona to paper over his entirely atrocious record:
That he said “the national teachers’ union” without hesitation as his first answer suggests to me that he got the questions in advance. It also suggests to me a truly disturbing individual. He had the entire world to choose from but the very first things that comes to mind for a national “punch in the face” are the NEA and AFT. Of course, the NJEA has been a main source of him actually having to work to get his agenda in place as opposed to simply ruling as king, so it is not precisely a shock.
He actually had the nerve to say he “has the scars to prove” the union is the villain. No, governor, the people with the scars are the teachers laboring in schools you defunded and subject to invalid measures of their work. The people with the scars are the kids whose educations are being distorted by high stakes testing. The people with scars are the families and community in Newark whose lives have been turned upside down by One Newark with no benefits in sight.
I made an error. Christie is not at 1% in the polls. He is at 3.2%.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html
To think he was once regarded as the great hope of the Republican field.
Well, by somebody.
Daniel, he considered himself the best candidate
Teachers are a soft target for this type of bully…a distraction from tough election issues. I guess he’s appealing to the crowd that thinks teachers are lazy and overpaid and are the reason their taxes are so high…what a moron he is. He’s the definition of the Ugly American that the rest of the world laughs at. Thankfully he has no chance at becoming our president.
Jake Tapper based the question on Christie’s earlier statement on how to deal with bullies. The question was a softball:
“During your first term as governor you were fond of saying that you can treat bullies one of two ways . . . You can either sidle up to them or you can punch them in the face. You said, ‘I like to punch them in the face.’ At the national level, who deserves a punch in the face?”
http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2015/08/02/sotu-tapper-christie-national-teachers-union-deserves-a-punch-in-the-face.cnn
Tapper, like Joe Scarborough and friends on MSNBC’s Morning Joe have done for five years or so, is openly colluding with Christie to cast a negative light on teachers.
I personally agree that the national unions are a negative force, but for completely different reasons. (They’re complicit in the test-and-punish “accountability” systems and they’re strong supporters of the untested, poorly conceived and poorly written Common Core “Standards” that should never seen the light of day. And more.)
Christie, Scott Walker, and other Republican politicians have been successful in falsely framing teachers and their unions as greedy bullies. But not without the help of expensive PR help from the Koch Brothers, the Gates Foundation and other venture philanthropy outfits. That PR has had a big influence on the mainstream media.
At the same time, when Christie spouts his misinformation in a matter-of-fact tone, he sounds reasonable to the uninformed. It doesn’t matter how many of us know that he’s full of baloney. When he isn’t literally screaming at teachers, he’s very persuasive to people who’ve already been softened up by the bogus narratives spun by so-called school reformers.
And he’s persuasive to workers who don’t have the benefits that teacher unions have won over the years. Public union members still retain some of the benefits that have, by and large, been stripped out of the private sector.
Widespread resentment against people who still have union-won benefits is at play here. That’s one of the reasons the Waltons, the Kochs, the Arnolds, the Gateses and the politicians they sponsor have the upper hand in their assault on teachers and teacher unions.
The only way to correct the misinformation they spread is to replace their stories with stories that are actually true. Easier said than done. But simply vilifying Christie isn’t going to make him any less effective, especially when he is continually served up softball questions by people like Tapper.
Here’s a recent example of Christie in “reasonable” mode, stating one falsehood after another. He says teachers want 4 to 5 months off over the summer. He claims they receive a full-time salary for a part-time job. And lots of other things that could use some fact checking . . .
Randall — what you say here is very important: “And he’s persuasive to workers who don’t have the benefits that teacher unions have won over the years. Public union members still retain some of the benefits that have, by and large, been stripped out of the private sector.
Widespread resentment against people who still have union-won benefits is at play here. That’s one of the reasons the Waltons, the Kochs, the Arnolds, the Gateses and the politicians they sponsor have the upper hand in their assault on teachers and teacher unions.”
I think this point is key to understanding the widespread vilification of teachers, and in particular, to teachers’ unions.
The knee-jerk dixiecrat vilification of teachers comes from a different place: they are antii-public schools for cultural reasons, viewing the DOE as proliferating unwelcome bi-coastal incursions on provincial mores, plus looking to maintain segregated & evagelical enclaves on the public dime.
The dixiecrats are only powerful because, a minority, they pile onto to a much larger constituency of working- & middle- & upper-middle-class workers who lost regular pensions at least 20 yrs ago. Many of these folks got matched-contribution 401ks as a replacement, & watched those funds lose 40% value in the financial recession. Same folks had been watching their med benefits get slowly eaten up by rising healthcare costs since the ’80’s, first by HMO’s denying their every claim, & settling into a pattern of higher contributions wedded to lower benefits every year since.
I compare my sis’ pub-ed career (LD teacher, union rep, PT admin/teacher then FT admin) to my engr husband’s (line engr, lead engr, PT mgt/ engr then FT mgt). Both have earned masters & other credentials at night & on weekends, worked their tails off: long hours including weekends, high-stress work environments including thankless MBO bureaucracy, training hapless subordinates for free just to get a quality product in by deadline, etc.
Tho my husband earned, nominally, double her salary, he always had to live near the job, in a high-cost, high-stress urban or commuting suburban location; due to corp relocation we’ve had a ‘commuting marriage’ for 25 yrs; he stays over nearby on the company’s dime to accommodate his long hours & the long commute home.
Whereas my sis for much of her career was 5 mins from her bucolic rural home to which she returned at 4:30– more recently, as an asst principal in the next town, 25mins away, returning at 6 or 7pm. Yes, she’s on call all weekend– so is he. Meanwhile she’s never had to pay for eyeglasses or dental work. We didn’t even get partial coverage for those things (let alone pre-natal care & childbirth) until mid-career. Both families have encountered serious health challenges, but we ponied up many thousands in co-pays while she got a free ride.
Here’s the bottom line: she’s 13 yrs younger (53), yet can retire now (or when she pleases) on 2/3 (or more) of her annual salary, and will continue to qualify for excellent benefits in retirement. Her cheap bucolic home is long paid-for.
Meanwhile my husband is 66 & desperate to retire, but we’re looking down the barrel at about 1/2 income (thanks in great part to those old pensions that stopped in the ’90’s) and the switch to Medicare. Because of our costly location (required for his type of job), the RE taxes are very high so we’ll most likely have to sell [may not sound like a biggie to you, but I lost a son & am loath to leave the place where I raised him].
So a guy like my husband (& there are countless voters in the same boat) is angry, seeing that he worked just as hard as this public-sector employee– they had comparable QOL during their working years– yet she comes out well ahead of him, come retirement-time.
Spanish&French Freelancer:
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. It’s a complicated subject. I wrote a too-lengthy reply but decided not to print it. I feel lucky to have a good pension. I retired early after putting in nearly 33 years. The time was right, even though I wasn’t ready to quit teaching at 55.
Unless the economy takes a sharp turn for the better, active teachers will be feeling the financial squeeze and the scapegoating for quite some time.
Well you richly deserve it and so does my sis. I’m well aware the difference is purely a product of how fast the economic decline hit which groups. Superior benefits, working near home etc– these were common-sense correctives to low public salaries. The present situation is an anomaly– a window in time that is already closing on younger teachers, and I fear for the profession. But most voters don’t see or care about the overall picture; their own declined status rankles & they vent it on the guy who just missed the falling anvil.
Jake Tapper posing this question is yet another indication of the tragically low level of what passes for political reporting and discourse in our country. Who deserves a punch in the face? That is a question I’d expect to hear in a gym or on a playground, not addressed to anyone running for president, even the awful Chris Christie-who, sadly enough, was endorsed by my state’s governor, Larry Hogan.
The “follow up question” was asking Christie why he had stopped saying Bruce Springsteen was his favorite NJ musician for Jon Bon Jovi.
I wish I were kidding.
Stop and think. Be extension, Christie just said he wanted to punch democracy in the face. Labor unions are democratic organizations. There are literally thousands of local union chapters across the country that elect their own local presidents and representative councils who are often working teachers that do not get paid to service in an elected position in their local union chapter.
That’s democracy in action.
Labor unions limit how long their elected presidents serve. They also limit the how long reps serve. If they want to serve more than one term, they have to run for re-election just like Governor Christie who just said he wants to punch that democratic institution in the face.
Then there are state-level teachers’ unions and the members, who are teachers and maybe some administrators, vote for the president of each state chapter.
That is democracy in action. and Governor Christie just said he wants to punch that democratic institution in the face.
Then there are the national teachers’ unions that elect their presidents when dues paying members vote, and Governor Christie just said he wants to punch that democratic institution in the face.
Christie, with his mouth and his actions, had revealed his true side. He doesn’t support democracy. He supports corporations that are not democracies. He supports oligarchs who hold power the same as a monarch or dictator.
Teachers’ unions sometimes elect presidents who do not serve them well, but that can be dealt with in the next election if the membership votes that president out.
Christie can also be voted out of public office, but then he might l go to work for his heroes—-undemocratic corporate America—-as a highly paid lobbyist where he can continue to work at punching democracy in the face.
Dictators are bullies.
Christie is a bully.
Does that mean Christie wants to be a dictator who loves to punch democracies in the face? I wonder if he wants to punch a dictator in the face or hug one and shake the monster’s hand.
What an idiotic interview question.
Check this question for idiocy:
“Which do you regard as a bigger threat to the nation? Isis or our K-12 education system?”
Christie answered, “Hahaha haha haha haha.” Pause. “Both.” Followed by seven minutes of nonsense. (See video above.)
Interviewers will be throwing him bait like this as long as he’s a public figure. There must be some way of defanging him without raising his stature even further.
And it was followed up by asking him why he was now saying Job Bon Jovi was his favorite New Jersey musician over Bruce Springsteen.
Seriously. It was.
In defense of Christie I have to say that it was Jake Tapper who used the phrase , ” punch in the face.” Christie was just stupid enough to answer. The phrase was a poor choice of words for Mr. Tapper and perhaps and intentional set up for Chris Christie. He should not said what he said but let it be known Jake asked him an inappropriate question.