The Roman Catholic Bishop of Madison Weighs in on the Wisconsin Budget Battle debate

Should one support or oppose the legislation which regulates union procedures? The Wisconsin Catholic Conference (WCC) has chosen a neutral stance because the present dilemma comes down to either a choice for the common good, of sacrifice on the part of all, at times that pose immense economic threats, both present and future on the one hand, and on the other hand, a choice for the rights of workers to a just compensation for services rendered, and to the upholding of contracts legally made. As Catholics, we see both of these horns of the dilemma as good, and yet the current situation calls many of us to choose between these two goods. Thus the WCC has taken a neutral stance, and this is the point of Archbishop Listecki’s recent statement, which I have echoed.

The question to which the dilemma boils down is rather simple on its face: is the sacrifice which union members, including school teachers, are called upon to make, proportionate to the relative sacrifice called for from all in difficult economic times? In other words, is the sacrifice fair in the overall context of our present situation?

At a time when all are called to sacrifice, this question requires a weighing of the relative sacrifice which all are called upon to make, so that a judgment about just proportions can be made by each one of us.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Culture-Watch, * Economics, Politics, * Religion News & Commentary, Economy, Labor/Labor Unions/Labor Market, Law & Legal Issues, Other Churches, Politics in General, Religion & Culture, Roman Catholic, State Government

3 comments on “The Roman Catholic Bishop of Madison Weighs in on the Wisconsin Budget Battle debate

  1. Creedal Episcopalian says:

    Classic Hegelian dialectic.
    [blockquote] “immense economic threats, both present and future”[/blockquote]
    vs.
    [blockquote] “a choice for the rights of workers to a just compensation for services rendered, and to the upholding of contracts legally made.”[/blockquote]

    How about:
    “Unsustainable government funding catastrophe”
    Vs.
    “lavish compensation of government employees obtained by political manipulation and glad-handing that could rationally be called fraudulent”

    It contrasts the same thesis-antithesis, but I like the wording much better. And I promise not to feed the trolls anymore. 😉

  2. Paula Loughlin says:

    I am disappointed that the good Bishops who have spoken on this issue are unable to distinguish between unions of private workers and public sector unions.

    I think Creedal Episcopalians wording is spot on.

  3. David Keller says:

    Check out today’s USA today for a chart showing how much more public sector employees make than their private sector counterparts. In my tiny state of South Carolina, even with furloughs of pubic employees it is well over $7000 per year higher.