The Inside-out Logic of Republican Job Creation

Last week, the Volkswagen plant in  Chattanooga, Tennessee voted on whether to become a union shop.  The U.A.W. was ready to take them in, plant employees appeared to favor unionization and management said they had no problem with the idea, stating that they were accustomed to working with union labor at other VW plants.  There appeared to be no question about the outcome--a peaceful switch to unionization.

Then Republican politicians inserted themselves in the mix, everything changed and the vote failed by a count of 712-626, 53% to 47%.

what eye thynk:   The Chattanooga plant assembles the VW Passat.  They have put out feelers about expanding the plant by adding facilities to assemble a new S.U.V. in the same factory.  As any business planning an expansion or a move, they approached officials in the area asking for incentives to help offset the cost of the expansion.

First, let me say that I am solidly against this practice.  I have never heard an argument that has been able to change my mind on the justification of using my tax dollars to assist a profitable business in their attempt to become even more profitable.  Yes, I know there are all sorts of arguments that expansion means more jobs, which means a bigger tax base; but the results always seem to fade to something less than the company promises at the outset. And, yes, I know that without incentives, businesses can be tempted to move to another area that WILL offer an incentive and the existing jobs can be lost. My point is, that if everyone stopped this practice, there would be fewer reasons to relocate, companies would choose to expand where they already have facilities since the cost of an expansion would undoubtedly be less than starting from scratch somewhere else and my tax dollars would end up paying for the services they were originally supposed to cover.

Back to the situation in Tennessee:  For reasons that elude me completely--I don't see traditional Southern resistance to unions as a "reason", only a baseless prejudice--Republicans were vehemently against the unionization.  

Tennessee Senator Bo Watson (R) who represents a Chattanooga suburb, warned the VW workers that, if they voted to join the U.A.W., the Republican led legislature would vote against approving any future incentives for the plant's expansion.  He warned that they would lose their jobs because Volkswagen would then decide to move the entire plant to Mexico and they would all join the ranks of the unemployed. 

• And this is what I mean by Republican inside-out logic:  Mr. Watson seemed to say that when business incentives are proposed that may create more jobs, you have no choice but to threaten to derail those incentives in order to say you support the creation of more jobs. 

U.S. Senator Bob Corker (R), former mayor of Chattanooga, joined the Republican anti-union crusade calling the U.A.W. "a Detroit-based organization" that would bring the kind of bankruptcy to Chattanooga that Detroit is now facing.  Mr. Corker claimed he had "secret knowledge" that VW would move production of their new S.U.V. to Mexico if the plant unionized.  VW refuted his claim of "secret knowledge", and again stated that they worked with union plants in other cities and saw no problems ahead if the Chattanooga plant unionized.

• I fail to see how increasing wages and benefits for existing workers who would, as a result, pay higher local taxes might force Chattanooga into bankruptcy. Mr. Corker, for his part, offered no explanation.  As for that "secret knowledge" claim, VW nipped that one in the bud.

Grover Norquist and his latest organization "Center for Worker Freedom", (there are so many things wrong with that name), put up 13 billboards around Chattanooga condemning the U.A.W. for its connection to President Obama and the 2009 auto industry bailout.  

• When you have no logical argument, tapping into anti-Obama sentiment is always a useful tool, I guess.

The all-out fight in Tennessee seemed a bit over the top until I considered that VW was the first foreign-owned, southern automobile plant to attempt unionization.  Republicans reasoned that other foreign-owned factories in the South, among them Mercedes-Benz in Alabama and a BMW plant in South Carolina, were sure to follow if the vote in Chattanooga was successful.   Southern Republicans saw their anti-union tradition being threatened and pulled out all the stops.

When the vote in Chattanooga failed, Republicans thanked the workers for helping them in their fight to create jobs.  I'll admit that I'm having a little trouble finding the connection between their job creation claim and Mr. Watson's promise to derail any proposed plant expansion.  The way I see it, their campaign simply kept the jobs that were already there, (and which were never threatened in the first place).  

Taken along with the Republican fight against raising the minimum wage, this anti-union drive leaves me to conclude that, while Republicans may be FOR jobs, they are AGAINST good paying ones.