Michigan "Right to Work" Bill

Snippets from the article:

"LANSING (WWJ) - Ahead of a historic vote in Lansing on legislation that would make Michigan the nation’s 24th right-to-work state, Governor Rick Snyder told WWJ Newsradio 950 it’s all about freedom of choice for workers and bringing new jobs to the state.

Speaking live on-air Tuesday morning, Snyder said the Senate will pass the legislation and he plans to sign it when it reaches his desk.

“I believe it will pass. The house will take up two bills, one for the public sector and one for the private sector, and they should pass those bills today. The bills likely wouldn’t arrive at my desk until the following day,” he said."




"The bottom line in passing the legislation, Snyder said, is giving workers the opportunity to join a union and pay any associated dues if they please, instead of forcing workers to pay union dues as a condition for employment.

“The point here is to give workers a choice, it’s their freedom to choose. And I encourage unions to be very proactive as to presenting the right value case as to why it’s good to join and when they do, I would expect that people do join… That’s the main point here is worker choice, freedom to choose,” he said. “It’s good for workers to have a choice. They can decide if they see value or not and should their dollars go to the union or not based on seeing that value.”

Snyder said research shows that right-to-work laws have brought new and better jobs in states where they’re enacted."


http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/12/11/gov-snyder-right-to-work-will-pass-give-workers-freedom-of-choice/


This is a wonderful thing.  Let the employee choose whether or not they want to be in the union.  It shouldn't be mandatory.  Of course, there are big protests, which I don't really get...the unions are still free to do what they do, only they can't force workers to join.

[brice1967]

The deal here is, wages should remain the same regardless of union representation or not, for equally trained/qualified employees.

[Vance2335]

School kids are home today because thousands of teachers called in sick/vacation day to go protest. Sickening...every teacher who went should be fired. YOUR JOB IS TO EDUCATE THE FUTURE NOT TELL PEOPLE THAT A UNION IS A REQUIREMENT TO WORK IN A PROFESSION.

A right-to-work law is a statute in the United States of America that prohibits union security agreements, or agreements between labor unions and employers that govern the extent to which an established union can require employees' membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring.

If your against this law then your against the worker.

[orphanedhawk]

This law is another example of twisted phrasing.
The right to work laws actually mean, right to work like Chinese peasants.
What it should be called is the right for employers to treat workers like chattel, law.

[hrsepwrguy]

Right To Work Bill Passes In Michigan

LANSING, Mich. (AP) -- The Republican-led Michigan House has approved a contentious right-to-work bill limiting unions' strength.

The measure approved Tuesday morning deals with public-sector workers. Another bill focusing on the private sector was approved last week, when the Senate OK'd both bills.

When final versions have cleared the House, they'll go to GOP Gov. Rick Snyder for his expected signature as early as Wednesday.

Passage followed numerous challenges and changes sought by Democrats as well as raucous protests inside and outside the Capitol from pro-union demonstrators. Thousands descended upon downtown Lansing to rally against the legislation that prohibits requiring nonunion employees to financially support unions at their workplace.

Backers say a right-to-work law would bring more jobs to Michigan and give workers freedom. Critics say it would drive down wages and benefits.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/11/right-to-work-protests-michigan-lansing_n_2277686.html

[Vance2335]

OH so a person should not be able to work at a company and not join a union if they don't want to?
If I got a job at a place that had a union, I would have to join the union, pay dues that goes to the DNC and I should be ok with that? I should be ok with the union doing that with my money?

Millions and millions of people work jobs without unions and do just fine and make a good living.

[nursegirl6572]

This law is another example of twisted phrasing.
The right to work laws actually mean, right to work like Chinese peasants.
What it should be called is the right for employers to treat workers like chattel, law.


How do you figure?  If someone wants union representation, they can choose that.  If not, they're on their own.  How can that not be a win-win situation?  They're not taking unions away, they're making them OPTIONAL, which they should be!

[brice1967]

"Work like Chinese peasants?"  One thing a right to work state does is allows one to have a job without paying union dues for "representation" that may never be needed.  A person in that situation is still covered by labor laws.

In a union, you are obligated to pay union dues.  Right to work means that you can have a choice to pay union dues or not.  (Even with union representation, if you enter into litigation with your employer, it is very common to incur costs for lawyers.)
.

[MrsPincince]

If this law was SO good, why were thousands of workers protesting it?

[teko]

And why didnt they put it on the ballot for Michingan Voters to say what they wanted? Why do it the way it was done, thru the Koch brothers and pubs? Please some one tell me why why why they didnt put it on the ballot?

[specialmom]

I have to say that I would always want an option to join a union or not.  Not sure why anyone wouldn't since it gives them so many 'things' that others don't have that work just as hard.  

[MrsPincince]

Because it would've NEVER passed...I read that the Gov. of MI campaigned against this law but once elected, he changed his mind (cus he was safe) I swear the Republicans are making it easier to get themselves voted out of office for good because I'm sure the workers that are protesting are not all dems. I'm sure there are repubs in there as well...

[teko]

Is this governor not on his way out of office? Anyone know?

[Vance2335]

MrsP: Why were thousands protesting it...because they were union workers who were told what to do. How is choice bad? Please explain to me how it is bad. You want women to have a choice when it comes to abortion, then why not have a choice for all workers?

teko: Why do they have to put it on the ballot? Very few things actually go on the ballot for people to vote on, as why we have elected officials. We elect people to represent us. But I'll ask you what I asked MrsP, how is choice for a worker a bad thing? Why should someone have to belong to a union if they don't want to? Why should they have to pay union dues if they don't want to?

A friend is a postal worker, did not have to join the union if he didn't want to, but was told that if he didn't then the chance of him moving up is slim. So he joined, paid his dues and got sick when his money went to support Hillary 4 yrs ago and then to Obama this year. Why should a union donate money to political campaigns? Money that came from the people who they claim to represent.

Remember how Vegas got it's start? Union loans to "businessmen" who were fronts to the mob. Unions have no oversite but force people to give them money.

[MrsPincince]

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/12/09/1306031/michigan-newspaper-slams-governor-snyder-right-to-work/

The Detroit Free-Press, which endorsed Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (R) in his 2010 campaign and has generally supported him since, blasted his decision to ram through a union-busting “right-to-work” law in a lame-duck legislative session. At Snyder’s urging, the state House and Senate each passed versions of the law this week. The editorial board slammed his move as a “failure of leadership” and observed that his “about-face” amounted to a betrayal of Michigan’s voters.

The paper noted that while it “trusted Snyder’s judgment,” that trust “has now been betrayed.” It expressed disappointment on behalf of independents who thought Snyder more independent and visionary “than partisan apparatchiks like Wisconsin’s Scott Walker or Florida’s Rick Scott,” adding:

    His insistence that the legislation was designed to promote the interests of unionized workers and “bring Michiganders together” was grotesquely disingenuous; even as he spoke, security personnel were locking down the capital in anticipation of protests by angry unionists.

    Snyder’s ostensible rationale for embracing right-to-work legislation — it was, he insisted, a matter of preserving workers’ freedom of association — was equally dishonest.

    The real motive of Michigan’s right-to-work champions, as former GOP legislator Bill Ballenger ruefully observed, is “pure greed” — the determination to emasculate, once and for all, the Democratic Party’s most reliable source of financial and organizational support.

[teko]

Right to work for lower wages is all it is. LOL Dumb!  I often wonder why people are going out of their way to criticize the union and talk about how bad they are and paid ungodly amounts compared to others.

But those same people will sit around on the weekend and watch someone throw a ball or kick a ball, pat each other on the tush, make ungodly amounts of money to do it, and everyone goes YAY!  Not a word about the ungodly unfair amount of money spent to pay these guys to toss or kick a ball. LOL

[Vance2335]

Yes thinkprogress opinion piece is so truthful and not biased.

WE tell the companies how much to pay pro athlets. We attend the events, we buy the merchandise. They do something that less then 1% of the population can do to a standard they can do. Can I hit a baseball...sure. Can I hit a 95mph fastball 400 feet, nope. Can I throw a football...yep. Can I throw a football 40 yards on the back shoulder of a receiver, nope. No one here can come even close to doing what those guys can do. But again WE as the public pay them. If people stopped going to events and stopped buying product salaries would shrink.

Back when baseball and football 1st started those people would have other jobs as well.

[hrsepwrguy]

States with the lowest unemployment rates

Unemployment Rates for States
Monthly Rankings
Seasonally Adjusted
Oct. 2012p

1 NORTH DAKOTA 3.1
2 NEBRASKA 3.8
3 SOUTH DAKOTA 4.5
4 IOWA 5.1
5 UTAH 5.2
5 WYOMING 5.2
7 OKLAHOMA 5.3

List of Right to Work States
•North Dakota
•Nebraska
•South Dakota
•Iowa
•Utah
•Wyoming
•Oklahoma

Well that covers the top 7 and if you look 8 of the top 10 lowest unemployment rates are right to work states.
Coincidence ?

[specialmom]

I don't like the unions that the players belong to, for sure.

I  believe in paying for unique talents that others can't duplicate.  If any jo shmo can go out there and pitch a perfect game, then the pay would be less.  But since it is their unique athletic talent that people pay to watch----  I really can't fault them for earning what they do.  

[specialmom]

Very true Vance.  One of my bestest buds father was a pitcher for an MLB team that went to the World Series and won.  Yep, he pitched in a world series game.  And he worked as a salesmen the whole time as well to support his family.  This was in the early 70's.  He didn't earn enough to just play baseball as his career.  We want to see our teams play, we pay the bucks to do it now.  

[teko]

I don't know much about what is going on in Michigan right now but I do know the way this was done is wrong. They should have put it on the ballot and let the majority of the people decide. This governor should not have betrayed what he ran on. This strong arming tactic is getting very old. I'm guessing there will be a backlash to this unlike one we have seen. Mrs.P I think you are right on the money when you say it has more to do with politics than not, otherwise it would not have been done this way imo.

[Vance2335]

My grandfathers uncle or someone like that in the 50's get drafted by the Giants (baseball) but turned it down because of the money he would make. Had a family to support and could not do it on a baseball salary.

So lets put abortion on the ballot then and see what the people want. This right to work law is not something for the people to vote on. It would lose because of union power in Mich. How is choice for a worker not good? It hurts unions because people don't have to join them now. But why would the people vote on this? No reason. You said this was a strong arm tactic. Is not having to join and pain a union a strong arm tactic?

[teko]

BS

This reeks of tea party to me.

[Vance2335]

What does it matter what it is, it's good to give people a choice. It's called freedom.

[teko]

Then put it on the ballot where it is clear for all that this is truly what the people want. No brainer it is. The way it was done reeks of underhanded alterior motives.

[teko]

The conservative group Americans for Prosperity is enticing supporters to rally at the Michigan state capitol in support of right-to-work legislation with $25 gas cards and free food and drinks, according to a staffer for the organization's Michigan chapter.

AFP's Michigan chapter also used gas cards and free lunches to lure supporters to a lobby day on December 6, the day GOP Gov. Rick Snyder and Republican lawmakers abruptly unveiled their right-to-work bills. Greg George, a government affairs associate with AFP-Michigan, says no one has taken the group up on its most recent gas card offer, but that the offer remains. "We've offered to gladly give them out," he says. (Because it is a nonprofit organization, Americans for Prosperity, which is partially backed by the Koch brothers, does not publicly disclose its donors.)

Despite what its supporters claim, right-to-work legislation does not prevent so-called "forced unionization." That's because forced unionization is a myth: No worker can be forced to become a full-fledged union member. What right-to-work would do is ban unions from collecting dues from nonunion members for representing them with management. After all, nonunion members can benefit from contracts negotiated by unions. Right-to-work allows those nonmembers to receive union representation without paying for it—unions deride those folks "free-riders." The result of right-to-work laws is that unions see their treasuries diminish and membership take a hit.

[teko]

Michigan's Republican-controlled legislature fast-tracked three pieces of right-to-work legislation last week that would allow nonunion members in workplaces in the public and private sectors to receive representation without paying any dues. The bills would likely deal a killer blow to the state's unions. (Police and firefighters are exempt from the proposals.) Snyder's public support for the legislation signaled a whiplash-worthy turnaround for the governor—he previously said right-to-work was not a priority, and tried to stand apart from the rest of the union-blasting class of 2010 governors like Wisconsin's Scott Walker and Ohio's John Kasich. Snyder is expected to sign the right-to-work legislation as early as Tuesday.

Just as AFP lured supporters to Lansing, unions bussed in members and supporters to protest the right-to-work bills, according to Chris Fleming, a spokesman for the American Federation for State, County, and Municipal Employees. A We Are Michigan spokesman adds that union allies are paying for their own lunches. Thousands of union members and supporters packed into the Michigan state capitol and the surrounding grounds to demand that Snyder veto the right-to-work bills.  

AFP wanted the right-to-work fight. The group played a visible role in supporting other GOP governors pushing anti-union agendas in Wisconsin, Ohio, and elsewhere. Now AFP stands on the cusp of a major win in a cradle of organized labor. AFP-Michigan director Scott Hagerstrom said last week that passing right-to-work in the state would be "the shot heard round the world" in the battle against unions. "A victory over forced unionization in a union stronghold like Michigan," Hagerstrom said, "would be an unprecedented win on par with Wisconsin that would pave the way for right to work in states across our nation."

[el_em_en_oh]

I'm not certain what is so bad about a law that gives people a CHOICE, of whether or not to join a union.

MrsP: if you had a job, and were FORCED to join a union, when you didn't really want to, would you like that?

Teko: Puleez... put it on the ballot? Dumb. LOL;-) Let's go ahead and put abortion on the ballot while we're at it, and see what people think about that.

Listen, here in Texas, there are almost NO unions, and we seem to be doing JUST FINE, and workers aren't abused and mistreated and are paid fairly, etc, etc.

Unions are antiquated and archaic. There USED TO BE A PLACE FOR THEM in the American industrial machine... no more.

They should all be legislated out of existence.

[mikesimon]

I guess I'm the only man who gets it.

These guys are so predictably simple minded about this stuff. It's shocking how limited their perspective is. It's always black and white and I really question their optics - can they see nuance or gray or any subtle shades of any color?

[teko]

Its just a round about way to bust the union. I got an idea!

Hmmmm. How about an amendment to these so-called Right to Work laws?
Make it so that workers who don't pay union dues cannot share in pay raises and benefits negotiated by the unions.
Whaddaya say, union haters? Wouldn't that be fair? I mean - you guys are always ranting and raving about free stuff..

[specialmom]

So, are you saying it is not a good idea to have a choice when going to work for a company whether or not you join the union?

[teko]

I give up. Propaganda has won. Im done

[specialmom]

Oh yes, I'm a propaganda machine.  LOL  Yeesh.  It's a simple question and I haven't really talked about Michigan at all but am just asking a question in reference to the subject matter.  You do not have to answer if it is upsetting.  :>)

[orphanedhawk]

This is an attempt by the far right to get rid of unions altogether, it isn't about choice.
Thousands of people are protesting in Michigan, not politicians, but the populace.
                                     *        *
   Joshua Holland explained , so-called “right to work” laws, which are being proposed in Michigan, “allows workers who choose not to join the union to take advantage of the union's representation without chipping in to cover the costs. And that effectively defunds the union.”

Salon’s Josh Eidelson explains further :
“Contrary to much rhetoric – and some reporting – U.S. law already prevents workers from being required to join a union or pay dues, per se. The issue is whether non-members, whom the union is still legally required to negotiate for and represent at work, can be required to pay representation fees.”

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/michigan-house-approves-anti-union-bill-massive-protests-erupt

[nursegirl6572]

I don't get it either.  Everyone is in an uproar about people wanting to get rid of unions, and how wrong it is...fine.  This isn't getting rid of unions, it's giving people a choice.  Win-win.

There's a lot of double standards in play here.

Why should people be forced to join a union if they don't want it?  If people do, it will still be an option for them.  Right now, if someone didn't want any part of a union, certain jobs would be off limits...with this kind of set up, anyone could go after the job.

Someting like this doesn't need a ballot.  Nothing it being taken away...instead a choice is being offered.  Either an employee joins the union, or they don't.  Where is the problem?  Lots of other states are "right to work".

They should all be legislated out of existence. .

I actually agree with you, el...but in the sake of fairness, this is a nice option where people aren't forced to join a union when they would rather not...and yet, it's still not good.  Don't understand that.


Is not having to join and pain a union a strong arm tactic? .

Of course it is, basically.

I just REALLY don't understand the opposition to this.  If anything, it's a perfect solution....people can choose whether or not they join a union...and unions can continue doing what they do for those who decide to join.

In a union, you are obligated to pay union dues.  Right to work means that you can have a choice to pay union dues or not.  (Even with union representation, if you enter into litigation with your employer, it is very common to incur costs for lawyers.)

Well said brice.

This is also a good way to take some of the abused power away from the unions, too.  Maybe they'll start doing what they're SUPPOSED to do if they know people aren't REQUIRED to join.  Maybe they would think twice about backing employees who think it's ok to drink and get high on their breaks.  The unions will actually have to sell people on joining, rather than just handing them the contract and taking their money.

It will bring accountability, and that's a good thing.

[specialmom]

I'm not on the far right but do not care if unions go to the wayside.  

Anyway, glad there is a law that says I don't have to join a union.  I don't think that if someone has no choice in what a union does such as their pay being included in negotiated deals for all in a job should have to pay the union for it.  Maybe someone feels like it is of benefit to the place they work to NOT get a pay raise and they are worried about lay offs, etc.  But the union plunges ahead and raises are given.  The employee had no choice in what the union did, they shouldn't have to pay a fee for it.

My opinion, any way.

[orphanedhawk]

Honestly I don't entirely understand it. I do think people should have a choice and I do think unions serve a good purpose though some need revamping.

What I do know is that many people are upset about this and I do believe big business is trying to bust unions which gives people little recourse to being treated unfairly.

[specialmom]

I'd pay money to bust the teacher's union in my state.  It does not benefit students or the community.  So, I'm a little biased, I guess.  Revamping is fine if we can't ditch them all together.  

[rivll]

As a teacher, I always had a choice to pay my union dues and I happily paid them. I never needed heir help but it was nice knowing they had my back if there something came up.
It really makes me weary.
We have all been over this union stuff how many times???
Everyone has agreed there are abuses, everyone agrees changes need to be made. Many of us do not want to ""throw the baby out with the bath water."
How many times to we need to hammer our points until we all have freaking headaches and have not said added one bit of helpful information to the issues of workers rights?
History has demonstrated that you cannot count on the goodwill of your employers. What is happening in the 3rd world countries to workers w/o representation is largely due to companies in the U,S. not wanting to pay the cost of a living wage and the cost it would take to ensure that the workers are protected from unsafe working conditions.
Yes there are serious abuses by the Unions that need to be worked on. No one is arguing that point.
Why not say that changes need to be made and maybe focus on what and how those changes could be made without beating this poor dead horse again.

[orphanedhawk]

Thank you rivil for some common sense.

Let's change topics, I'm ready.

[specialmom]

I'm ready too.  Didn't mean to insult anyone that is a teacher and part of the union.  Knowing what I do of you Rivll, I'm sure you were/are an excellent teacher.  

I have very valid reasons for being against teacher's unions though.  

I guess if we want to change subjects, these stories will have to stop being in the news?????  It's current events and these things are in today's news so they get posted and everyone wants to weigh in on it I guess.  

[Vance2335]

teko: Just heard last night that there was something on the ballot, which was to ban this right to work legislation and it didn't pass. So I guess you can say it was on the ballot.

[nursegirl6572]

Rivil, I agree we've beat this horse to death a few times, but that's only to be expected when it's a topic that so many feel strongly about on both sides.  I think we all have pretty strong opinions about this, and a lot of us have our own personal experiences (good and bad) to draw on, which intensifies our views that much more.

I feel strongly enough that I wouldn't mind seeing unions go bye-byes in general, but if revamping is more fair, that's fine, I'm game.  Something needs done though.  These recent stories are just outrageous (the Chrysler plant as just one example).

I think, while some of you may disagree, states becoming "right to work" states will help with that re-vamping.  Unions WOULD have to be held more accountable, be less concerned about money, and more concerned about workers.  They would need to sell people on joining...so they're going to have to make people see the value in it.  Especially when some union dues are pretty steep.  People aren't going to want to hand over their money if they're not sold on the purpose of the union.  I think it's great...no one takes the unions away, people just make it a choice.  I think that's a perfect idea.  Yes, of course the unions wouldn't be happy about that...that's a given, because they run the risk of seeing their membership #'s decline.

Last comment..I TRULY think that some people hold onto the unions so tightly, almost like a security blanket, out of some misplaced fear.  They've convinced themselves they would be treated just HORRIBLY without the union...that all he** would break loose without them.  I wish people would realize that, in the grand scheme of things....the really big and important stuff they think the union is protecting them from...they wouldn't be able to do much anyway.  Plenty of people function in jobs, get paid and treated fairly, with no union in play.  

This will level the playing field a bit too.  I think it's abusive that union positions will pay sometimes up to 50% more than a non-union worker of the exact same caliber.  That's a big issue in the construction field...and it creates a lot of dissention between union and non-union guys.  Also, union contractors have a HUGE advantage when bidding for jobs.  My hubby stopped trying to get gov't prevailing wage projects ages ago...they go to the union EVERY single time, and that's wrong.  The very issues they claim to protect (discrimination, fair wages, equal opportunities), they actually create for other people.

I would like to keep an eye on the MI situation.  I'm curious to see if the UC numbers improve.  

I'm putting my stick down...I've whacked this horse enough!  :0)

[brice1967]

Hysterical.... Anyone see how the union bullies were acting at that rally yesterday?  Knocking down a tent and punching people....?  Nice work again, unions.  (You'd think these union guys were the Tea Party, but nope.... good old democrats.... how can it be?  Everyone knows that democrats are sensible, reasonable, and peaceful!)

[el_em_en_oh]

"...thousands of people are protesting..."

Yeah, the UNIONS are protesting. Who else would be protesting this?

Kind of a silly statement, that THOUSANDS of people are protesting. Let's talk about WHO is protesting, and don't just say "1000's of people", shall we?

[el_em_en_oh]

Okay, monopoly breeds inefficiency. The unions have become that. The right-to-work measure breaks that monopoly.

Hi-tech startups wouldn't have made the profound impact that we've seen had they been forced to be unionized. In fact, can you name one hi-tech startup that is unionized? And when these companies grow bigger (Apple, Google, Intel, etc.), the unions want to stick their nose in.

We can't belittle what the unions had accomplished, but time has changed. There is nothing that can ONLY be accomplished by the unions. Yes, China/India/Indonesia/etc. still need the unions.

In highly developed countries like the U.S., Canada, Europe, worker protective laws is the most efficient solution. Foreign owned manufacturers in the U.S. have proven that.

[brice1967]

Seems as if I heard a few liberals here on CE at one point touting how wonderful it is to have a choice.  I guess you just can't have a choice when it comes to unions?

Rivll... glad you never had to depend on your union.  (How did you go about not paying dues?  My mom was an educator for 30 years and had to pay her dues....)  My dad thought the same thing as you... 'at least the union will have my back".  The union cut and ran when an entire shift of over 40's was fired from the Las Vegas Hilton in the early to mid 80's.  Not a rep to be found to help them... This group of people had to hire lawyers for any representation.  

That's the real deal on unions!

[rivll]

We can't belittle what the unions had accomplished, but time has changed. There is nothing that can ONLY be accomplished by the unions. Yes, China/India/Indonesia/etc. still need the unions.

Thank you, El. That is what I have been saying to what seems like deaf ears. Everyone is in such a hurry to give their union horror stories (I have plenty too) that it seems that there is no acknowledgment of the good work they have done. I totally agree that they can be bullies and that they can do harm. Yes, we all agree there needs to be major changes.


In highly developed countries like the U.S., Canada, Europe, worker protective laws is the most efficient solution. Foreign owned manufacturers in the U.S. have proven that.

The laws are in place and that's good, but lawyers cost money and beyond that many people are not sophisticated enough to take it to court on their own.
I still believe that unions can serve an important purpose, if we do not lose sight of the good they can do and the changes that need to be done to make them less corrupt and more effective.

[rivll]

Rivll... glad you never had to depend on your union.  (How did you go about not paying dues?  My mom was an educator for 30 years and had to pay her dues....)

I don't remember exactly when it started but sometime in the 2000 decade we were given a choice. Some people stopped paying their dues as a result.
The majority of us did not. I have seen the District's union do a good job and help people in bad situations and I have seen them support people who should have been fired years before. I am well aware of the abuses to the system and they need to be checked just as anyone in power needs to be kept in check.

[orphanedhawk]

Sadly unions have to do more to guarantee worker's rights. They need lobbyists in DC or the corporate run business will continue to destroy whatever controls and protective laws are still in place.

Who is going to protect the little guy in the US ? Who is going to stop laws from changing so there is no protection ?
Not some poor schmo making minimum wage.
And we all know who owns our politicians.

Sorry gang, I think the whole system is broke.
I don't trust those guys in DC to do anything other than what the big money people who put them into office tell them to do.

[brice1967]

You apparently were in a right to work state.... it wasn't all that bad, was it?  And people here in opposition of unions have shouted praise on what unions have provided.  There's no denying that they got us the 40 hour work week, safer work environs.  It's all there now.... what else are they doing?

OH... "They need lobbyists in DC or the corporate run business will continue to destroy whatever controls are protective laws are still in place..."  The unions are in bed with the corporations to some extent.  Union employees are working for corporations all over the country...

Those are the people that are in bed with corporations.  They lobby for corporations and get cushy contracts that employ union workers.  Its right there if you dig deep enough.  There are laws that protect the American worker now

[orphanedhawk]

Sigh~ I truly believe the system is  broken.
We need to delete and begin again~ the only question is how ?

[brice1967]

I'm not entirely for sure how, but it starts with accountability.  That is going to require pointing out the bad guys and completely exposing them for what they are.  DC doesn't have time for that because they are all the "good old boys network".  That is going to be our job and in order to do it correctly (IMO) we are going to have to set party line affiliation aside and read these bastards for what they are.

If we were to audit (and I know we really don't have time for that after they get elected) these people and find out where favors are coming from and flowing too out of DC... that would be a wonderful start.

[rivll]

http://www.upworthy.com/a-politician-loses-it-on-the-state-house-floor-says-what-all-of-us-are-thinking?c=ufb1

I like this guy!