An effort to bring greater openness and transparency to collective bargaining agreements experienced a significant setback on Wednesday. It may return, but it is on hold until next year.

Rep. Toni Ligi’s (R-Metaire) Public Employee Bargaining Transparency Act (HR 204) would have placed collective bargaining sessions between state public employers and labor unions under the open meetings law. Any document created or presented during the sessions would be available to the public and the details attached to the collective bargaining agreements posted on the Internet.

“This was about a very specific change,” Ligi explained. “There is an attorney general opinion that says executive sessions are not subjected to public records requests. So it is possible to go in undercover and hide important details from the public. This bill would change that.”

However, the House and Government Affairs Committee voted 8-7 to involuntarily defer the legislation. Ligi lost two of his own Republicans, Reps. George Cromer of Slidell and Jane Smith of Bossier City. Cromer and Smith joined with the Democrats on the committee to vote in favor of a motion from Rep. Richard Gallot (D-Ruston) to kill the bill.
Ligi said he is determined to bring the bill back.

“Right now the public has no say in these negotiations and what they will end up costing… [Often] it happens without the public even having seen the documents or having any input. That’s not the way we should operate. Public employee contracts involve a lot of money and we need transparency.”

Renee Baker, the Louisiana director for the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), ardently supported Ligi’s bill.

“Yes, Louisiana is a right to work state and that helps,” she said. “But remember we do have RINOs [Republicans in Name Only] in the House and Senate who take money from organized labor. This means they may not always vote for the right policies.”

The Louisiana Federation of Teachers has expressed opposition to the legislation. Meladie Munch, president of the Jefferson Federation of Teachers, has argued that Ligi’s bill would actually harm the negotiation process. Participating parties would not be able to speak in an open and unrestrained manner, Munch has said.

Between 2003 and 2009, the Louisiana Federation of Teachers has donated $191,857 to both major political parties with $175,755 of this amount going to the Democrats.

Despite union opposition, Baker suspects that Ligi’s bill would have passed if the full committee had been present. Prolonged testimony can sometimes work to the disadvantage of contested legislation, she explained, as members have to fulfill other obligations.

“This is a good public policy,” Baker said. “It would be interesting for the public to be able to see and comment on what’s being done with their money. I’m sure the small businesses I represent would be interested in the contracts between unions and public employers. The unions in these hearings also say they are taxpayers, and they are, but we are also taxpayers and we don’t get the public benefit they get.”

Kevin Mooney is an investigative reporter with the Pelican Institute for Public Policy. He can be reached at kmooney@pelicaninstitute.org. Follow him on Twitter.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s proposed actions towards public sector unions have evoked national outrage among unions and Democratic leaders. Regrettably, they have also elicited a firestorm of misinformation.

Riding this ill-informed rhetoric, this Tuesday a collection of Louisiana unions plan to show support for Wisconsin unions with a protest at Baton Rouge City Hall. With members of Service Employees International Union (SEIU), American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), the Building and Construction Trade Unions, and others, this coalition will protest what they view as the ‘scapegoating’ and vilifying of middle-class, working families to appease corporate and political interests.

Louis Reine, president of the Louisiana State Federation of Labor, says “[Governor] Walker must stop using the working families of this country as a scapegoat for the nation’s economic woes caused by the Wall Street greed that crashed our economy.” Meanwhile, Charles Selders, leader of the Local 21LA SEIU chapter, says “We need our elected leaders to create jobs, not wage attacks on middle-class and working families to score political points with big donors.”

Whether sincere or not, these statements convey an unfortunate confusion over the the situation in Wisconsin. As explained in the Heritage Foundation’s Morning Bell, spiraling public pension and benefit plans are severely compromising the stability of state and local governments across the country. Unfunded liabilities, estimated to be $574 billion in major American cities and $3.4 trillion among states, stand testament to overly generous benefits and pensions.

Contrary to what Governor Walker’s opponents have propagated, Wisconsin’s deficit was not created by recent tax breaks to businesses, but by these liabilities. And because of these growing liabilities, money which would otherwise go to core government services is being swallowed up by special interests.

In fact, Wisconsin’s public benefits are considerably higher than the national average. If Governor Walker’s plan succeeds, Wisconsin state workers will have to contribute 5.8 percent of their pension contributions and 12.6 percent of their health care premiums, double the current rates. Even after these adjustments, Wisconsin state employees would still pay less than the national average for public employees and far less than private sector workers.

Furthermore, Daniel Disalvo of City Journal rightly notes that Governor Walker is pursuing the will of the people and reducing the influence of unelected special interests. Not only do public-sector unions hamper the effectiveness of government and the efficiency of business, they impede the ability of elected leaders to enact sound reforms.

The locus of union delegates and representatives descending in both Wisconsin and Baton Rouge are not just wrong factually, but on principle as well. By implementing his plans, Governor Walker would greatly assist in alleviating the economic strain of pensions and benefits on Wisconsin. Additionally, he would preserve his elected government’s constitutional right to administering policy consistent with the wishes of the electorate.