Is a Government Take-Over of Pension Plans Coming?

Single-employer defined benefit company pension plans are covered in many cases by the Pension Protection Act (PPA). The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) is tasked with the responsibility to take-over the covered pension plans if they fall into default. This is a government corporation with some similarities to Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. 80% of the pension plans covered by the PPA in 2008 were considered to be reasonably well-funded. But, financial investment losses in late 2008 and early 2009, have left only 20% of these single-employee pension plans well-funded.

Meanwhile, outside of the PPA are some multi-employer pension plans. Among these is the Teamsters Central States Fund. This fund has three retirees for every active worker! There are now calls for the government to have the PBGC take over failing multi-employer pension funds, including the very troubled Teamsters Central States Fund. This will require an infusion of taxpayer bailout money.

The Teamsters claim the problem with their Central States Fund is that deregulation of the trucking industry decades ago caused a significant loss in trucking jobs when companies went out of business. Gee, have you seen a great decrease in the number of trucks on the road? No? Well neither have I. Teamsters leadership is heavily committed to the Democrat Party, so they are not well-inclined toward the truth.

Let us check up on the facts a bit here. In 1970 there were 18,000,000 trucks on the road. The Motor Carrier Act of 1980 brought about a partial deregulation of the industry. There was a dramatic increase in the number of trucking companies as a result. There were other consequences:

• Driver wages dropped.
• Consumer costs went down as trucking costs went down.
• There was a great increase in the number of truck drivers.
• There was drastic de-unionization!
• In 2006, there were 26,000,000 trucks on the road, none of which are driven by robots.
  

So, contrary to the implication that de-regulation brought about a loss of companies and truckers, it only brought about a loss of those companies who could not compete in a less regulated environment. A very disproportionate number of the companies unable to compete were unionized. Is this a surprise to anyone?

Democrats are always complaining about de-regulation. They are always unhappy with the idea of competition. They are always eager to be lazy. They are always eager to have the world owe them a living. How disgusting. How absolutely and utterly disgusting!!!!! Yet, we are all supposed to provide pensions to union workers whose unions kept their trucking companies from being able to compete. Does this sound familiar? Can anyone remember Government Motors and Chrysler? Is providing pensions for non-competing labor unions among our next bailouts?

Dems Want to Screw Up Fed Ex

The House of Representatives has passed a bill to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). A 230 word amendment directly at and only at Federal Express, would move Federal Express from working under the Railway Labor Act as all aviation-based businesses now do, to working under the requirements of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), as most other businesses do. The Teamsters Union and UPS want this change, because the Railway Labor Act provides impartial means to resolve labor disputes without strikes. Under the NLRA, however, any union local would be able to strike against Fed Ex and prevent overnight deliveries throughout the nation.

The provision's sponsor, Rep. James Oberstar, (D, Minnesota) was paid $164,000 by the Teamsters Union and UPS to insert this provision aimed at hurting Fed Ex into the FAA reauthorization bill.

Fed Ex delivers 8,000 kidney dialysis systems a day and more than 11,000 in vitro diagnostic materials a day. It delivers the critical failed component to get production lines back up and running as fast as possible in many industries, thereby saving many companies from huge losses, which also means saving many jobs. It insures that contracts can be signed and returned quickly to enable rapid starts on big contracts between companies.

It also sends the critical failure sample from a company to a laboratory such as mine, so that the cause of failure can be determined quickly. This failed part may be of very unique value, even though it is worthless, because it holds the clues to the cause of its failure and another such failure may be long in coming or come at more frightful expense. Nonetheless, it is important that it be determined if the failure was due to bad design, a failed manufacturing process, use of the part or device in an environment it could not handle, a vendor supplying different material than specified, or still some other cause. A rapid analysis to get the answer to the cause of failure might reassure a customer so he will continue buying the part, or it may allow directions to all customers that they not subject the part to some condition that will cause it to fail, or it may result in a change of vendors for a material used in the part or device. These actions may save lives in some cases and in others they may save jobs and great liability expenses. Thus, the failed part is actually much too valuable to put in the snail mail. What if the USPS lost the part?

The unique dependability and rapid delivery of Federal Express is much too valuable to lose in the interest of the Teamsters Union or to mollify UPS. This is a uniquely American institution with a rare history of success due to excellence. We cannot live without it, now that we have been shown the miracles it can deliver, but the USPS and even the pretty good UPS cannot. Perhaps a part of the reason for this attempt to single out Fed Ex for punishment is that its founder, Fred Smith, is a major supporter of the Cato Institute, which is a thorn in the foot of the pedestrian Teamsters Union and of the socialists in control of our government now generally.

Mexico Retaliates with Trade Warfare

One of the first acts of the Obama administration was to pay the Teamsters Union for its support in the election. They restricted Mexican trucking access to American roads. Mexico has now retaliated by raising tariffs on $2.4 billion of our exports. The Obama action was stupid in any case, but especially so in light of the recession. All we need to make matters worse is to incite trade wars with our important trade partners. Mexico is one of our most important trade partners.

Obama is trying to enlarge the trade wars. The administration is talking about how they will raise tariffs on the goods of countries who do not restrict the use of energy as Obama plans to and whose goods will therefore be relatively cheaper than ours. Of course, Obama can raise tariffs and protect American domestic market sales of our newly expensive goods. But .... he can do little to then make other people throughout the world buy our over-priced goods. In other words, we will lose much of our export markets. This could result in about 1 in 10 Americans becoming unemployed!

On economic issues, it is very clear that few Democrats ever think. They do not seem to do any better with foreign policy or with matters of national security.