In today’s Boston Globe. Tim Cahill gained the endorsement of a number of “Police Organizations.” This will do doubt help the Treasurer’s campaign as he gains both earned media coverage and organizational support. It should also serve to remind us of why Tim Cahill has been a Democrat for so long.
When we hear names like “Massachusetts Municipal Police Coalition” and “Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association” we are reminded of the many decent law enforcement professionals that work hard to protect us every day. However, we must remember that these are not public safety organizations, but rather public sector unions. Their purpose is not to fight crime, but rather increase the salaries and benefits for their members that are financed with our tax dollars.
This same idea is easy for us to remember with the Massachusetts Teacher’s Association. The are obviously not an organization dedicated to the improvement of education, but rather a public sector union that often stands in the way of both fiscal sanity and reforms intended to improve the quality of education. Both police officers and teachers are both noble professions with many decent hard working people. We should not forget what the purposes of the unions they belong to are.
Charlie Baker has campaigned on ending union control of government contracts and substantive pension reform. He is the only candidate for government committed to these reforms. These measures are designed to cut the cost of government without cutting the service of government. With both rising taxes and rising debt they are absolutely necessary reforms for both state government and our economy as a whole. Public sector unions are the single greatest obstacle standing in the way.
Charlie Baker will continue to take a political hit for choosing to fight this important fight. It is a hit worth taking, and it goes to the core of why Charlie Baker is running for Governor in the first place.
MORE BELOW THE FOLD….
When Democrats challenge us, and Charlie Baker, to specifically name the government cuts we would make it’s a trick. They want us to answer “education” or “public safety.” The negative implication is that we would cut education or public safety service when that is not the case. By changing the way state government does business, by taking on the public sector unions, by reforming pensions, we only cut the cost of government. We do not cut the service of government. Charlie Baker has made several gaffs during this campaign, but he has not yet fallen for this trap.