Wisconsin is having a tough time balancing the budget, and even harder time keeping school doors open. Together unchecked spending and special interest groups have created an economic mess that many Midwestern states have encountered. One battle involving government employees, like public school teachers, has reached a boiling point.

The state is trying to balance the budget, exploring various cost-cutting solutions. One way Wisconsin is trying to save money and decrease the $3.6 billion deficit is by eliminating public employee bargaining rights and “force public workers to pay half the costs of their pensions and at least 12 percent of their health care coverage.” Newly elected Republican governor Scott Walker estimates that such a measure would save the state $300 million over the next 2 years.

Everybody can agree that budgets need to be balanced, but the issue at hand is which programs deserve to be reduced and how those adjustments are negotiated. For teachers, who see this as a direct attack on their profession, Walker’s agenda seems unfair and continues to take advantage of education employees throughout the state.

In response, teachers across the state have marched on Madison to protest Walker’s proposed legislation. Teachers have long held the position that their profession is underpaid and underappreciated. Educators also feel that by eliminating collective bargaining rights, the teachers union will be unable to fairly negotiate wages in the future. Moreover, by altering retirement and health care plans, teachers are further being taken advantage of – especially those using public employees’ retirement fund as a primary source of income after leaving the profession.

The massive protests have overshadowed the fact that voters in Wisconsin elected Walker and a Republican majority during the last election cycle to do exactly this: cut spending using a pro-business model by reducing public employee cost. If last November’s polls are indicative of Wisconsin’s overall sentiment, the proposed legislation is the type of changes wanted by the majority of citizens.

Credit Walker for not wavering in his stance or holding an ulterior motive for proposing such cost-cutting measures, even in the wake of being prank called by blogger impersonating known business leader David Koch. Walker genuinely believes that eliminating collective bargaining rights is a step forward and one that will save Wisconsin millions of dollars in the future. He might have made some inflammatory comments regarding the opposition, but he never showed a lack of integrity.

This is not to say, however, that eliminating union collectively bargaining rights is just. It’s hard to understand why Walker continues to push for such a measure after the unions have already conceded to the proposed budget cuts in exchange for keeping their collective bargaining rights.

As President Barack Obama said, “Some of what I’ve heard coming out of Wisconsin, where you’re just making it harder for public employees to collectively bargain generally seems like more of an assault on unions. And I think it’s very important for us to understand that public employees, they’re our neighbors, they’re our friends. I think everybody’s got to make some adjustments, but I think it’s also important to recognize that public employees make enormous contributions to our states and our citizens.”

The budget needs to be reduced, and one way to do that is by adjusting the amount of compensation public employee receive. That seems fair, right? Couple those cuts by reducing additional state sponsored programs, significant chunks of inflated budgetary spending can be eliminated. I agree with Walker’s decision to cut spending through such measures because it’s common sense; Wisconsin can’t afford, right now, to pay public employees at the current rate without avoiding deficits that will greatly hinder the state’s functionality long-term.

What doesn’t make any sense, though, is taking away a union’s ability to collectively bargain in the future. Obviously Wisconsin needs to trim its budgetary waistline right now, but those cuts should not be permanent. If Walker’s legislation is passed that disallows unions from collectively bargaining with the state, only the political party in power will be able to dictate wages and benefits for public employees in the future.

Unions were created to protect workers’ rights through negotiation and compromise, finding a balance between employer and employee that both feel is fair. Unions are why we have minimum wage, 8 hour working days, health and retirement benefits, and safe work places, which is something taken for granted. Unions have been good for the average American worker.

Unions, though, have become a scapegoat for elected officials to explain bloated budgets, incredibly high deficits, and reduction of state services. The reasoning is that unions have forced state governments to provide public employees with unreasonably high wages and retirement packages that cannot be sustained, bankrupting the state.

That explanation sounds terrific, but the reality is that the blame doesn’t solely fall on unions’ shoulders. Remember, both unions and state government had to agree to the proposed compensation packages. The deficit that Wisconsin faces isn’t simply the result of powerful unions, but the poor judgment of elected officials that allowed excess spending. Governments have allowed their budgets to balloon without check while unions have helped drive the surplus spending. The reality is that both parties are to blame.

I fear that eliminating collective bargaining rights for unions would result in a slippery slope leading toward policies similar to that of the 19^th century Robber Baron era. My fears are similarly shared by Democratic state legislators who have fled Wisconsin, which is the only way to stop the proposed bill, in response to Walker’s staunch, uncompromising stance. Nobody disagrees that the state needs to cut its budget; however, the long-term ramifications of the proposed bill are disastrous. Employees will no longer be able to constructively and effectively voice their concerns, bending to the will of partisan politics without collectively bargaining rights.

So, what should be done? For starters, the elected Democratic lawmakers need to return to work, ceasing to hide in other states to avoid debate. Walker, likewise, needs to be open to having a debate and realize that collective bargaining rights are essential to the negotiation of fair wages and healthy workplaces for public employees.

Like many Midwestern states, Wisconsin needs to balance its budget by reducing costs. Instead of pitting the state government against unions, however, why isn’t Walker trying to work with them? In Michigan, Rick Snyder was elected as governor in November on pro-business ideals (also held by Walker) to reign in the states’ economy, but he isn’t attacking or trying to eliminate unions. Instead, Snyder is trying to find a compromise to reduce spending by working with both sides of the aisle.

The budget is going to be cut, but the long-term consequences of life without unions needs to be deeply discussed. Removing union collective bargaining rights will not solve budgetary issues. Such an act will only create resentment from people, like teachers, who feel they are being swindled and a precedent that would regress the American workplace.