|
Conservatives like me are opposed to card check, but not to unions. Mitt Romney is as conservative as any other RINO. |
|
Posted on 04/10/2009 8:19:53 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
QUINCY - In 2006, my last year as governor of Massachusetts, I vetoed a card-check bill that allowed public workers to organize if a majority signed union authorization cards as opposed to casting a traditional secret ballot. The veto was a gain for the rights of employees and employers to a fair election, but the victory was short-lived. After I left office, organized labor had another run at replacing the secret ballot with a card check. With the support of Democrats in the Legislature, that same bill was passed in 2007 – and my Democratic successor signed it into law. What happened next is a cautionary tale for Congress as it moves toward a vote on national card-check legislation.
With this powerful new tool, for the first time ever in Massachusetts, a charter school was unionized.
One reason so many parents want their children in charter schools is precisely because they operate free of union contracts, so that when administrators want to try something new, they can implement it quickly. For this, charter schools are fiercely resented by teachers’ unions as a competitor to failing public schools. Charter schools use a merit system, rewarding teachers according to results in the classroom. They don’t have complicated work rules that smother creativity, nor are they burdened with termination rules that make it almost impossible to dismiss an incompetent teacher.
By tilting the playing field in favor of unions, card check not only robs workers of a secret ballot, it deprives management of the right to express its point of view. It will dramatically change the workplace as we know it. Small businesses will have to hire labor lawyers and follow burdensome new rules. If the parties can’t agree on a contract, mandatory arbitration follows and employers that don’t yield to union demands will have contracts foisted on them. All of this will raise costs, leading to more unemployment.
Unions are supposed to serve the interests of working people, yet in this case more power for the unions would help destroy many thousands of jobs throughout the economy.
Conservatives like me are opposed to card check, but not to unions. At their best, labor unions have always fought for the rights of workers, and generations of Americans have been better off for it.
But the card-check proposal is not an example of unions at their best – it is a case of union organizers rewriting the rules at the expense of working people.
Its advocates claim that card check is a step forward for labor, as if workers should thank them for making unions less democratic. But anyone who would deny a worker’s right to vote on unionization by secret ballot is not advancing the cause of labor. No one should be forced to publicly declare their intention before their employers and co-workers.
Leaders in the Democratic Party are eager to pay back the union bosses for their campaign support, even if it means selling out the American worker. Responsible members of Congress need to make it clear that Washington will not act to virtually impose unions on businesses.
By guarding against coercion and intimidation in the workplace, we can protect our economy from great harm, and secure the rights of employers and employees alike. The working people of America should be able to unionize the way their fathers and mothers did – by free choice and secret ballot.
Mitt Romney is a Republican and former governor of Massachusetts.
|
Conservatives like me are opposed to card check, but not to unions. Mitt Romney is as conservative as any other RINO. |
|
.
I am not opposed to unions per se, however I am opposed to “closed shop” workplaces where union membership is a requirement. I’m also opposed to union dues being used for political purposes without the express consent of the worker. Finally, I am adamantly opposed to card check in any way, shape, or form.
“The working people of America should be able to unionize the way their fathers and mothers did “
He should look out for Black Cats.
Please stop the Romney bashing.
I don’t oppose unions either. Neither did Reagan, nor most conservatives.
It’s their involvement and allegiance to the Democrat liberal agenda that I oppose, not unions.
Romney makes a lot of sense on so many issues.
He actually vetoed it, and the veto was sustained?
“Conservatives like me are opposed to card check, but not to unions. At their best, labor unions have always fought for the rights of workers, and generations of Americans have been better off for it.”
That’s in the DISTANT past now Mitt. I guess I would’ve supported unions back in day with 14 hour shifts in dangerous factories and crap. Today they are universally a drain on the economy.
I’m in agreement with you on that.
This is the kind of idiot commentary that will guarantee Republicans or the nearest thing to conservatives a place in the back seat of power. Reagan Democrats were union workers. Nixon made it with the help of the Teamsters. When elections matter by one or two percent, you don't spit in the face of someone who holds 90 percent of your values. Perhaps you think the union busting business that hire illegal aliens to undercut union workers are morally superior?
You got that right. Romney haters are a real sick bunch. Most of them distort the facts and have nothing else to offer so they just belch out garbage.
Indeed, we all know that to be too true at this site.
Do tell us all, please.
I'll support Mutt whole-heartedly...for a position as administrator in the UK's National Plan. Other than that, you're joking, right?
Logical? Well, ...
(1) Romney is taking a public stand against Card Check, and using his business experience to bring credibility to the conservative argument. That is good, right?
(2) When you find a national Republican that states he is "opposed to unions", let us know. Provide a link. Otherwise, you are highlighting how Romney is out there effectively promoting conservative causes while with other Republicans it is crickets chirping.
You are praising Romney with this faint damn.
So how long has Mitt been away from being Governor of Massachusetts? Quite awhile. I would imagine the liberal nitwits that have been running the state would screw things up even worse. That said I do not think the government should be running health care.
So it sounds like everything that has happened in Massachusetts since he left is his fault.
So with state-run health care. No one has ever claimed that it's a disaster immediately. Equally, no sane person has ever claimed that it's anything but a disaster ultimately.
Mutt spread the dioxin, metaphorically, and -- notwithstanding the Marxist jackass who is governor -- he knew full well what a calamity it would be, or, if you would argue that he did not know, then he's a moron.
In criminal law, such action would be termed ''accessory before the fact''.
There is no way that you can spin Mutt's state-run healthcare programme into anything positive. And there's no way he can duck responsibility for it.
“Conservatives like me are opposed to card check, but not to unions.”
If you recall in the GOP primary debates, every GOP candidate from McCain to Tancredo was positive about unions. The fawning was embarrassing but understandable.
That is required to avoid stepping in the hole the Dems will make about “anti-union” equals “anti-worker”. Lots of union votes.
Huckster even got the NEA endorsement ... and was proud of it! (yuck)
The good of unions are when they protect workers. The evil of unions is when they become mob-like rackets, either for lining their own pockets, or for political activism. The unions have been corrupted into pawns of the DNC, abusing worker and diverting worker dues for massive and corrupt political contributions to advance the liberal agenda and Democratic party candidates.
“I don’t oppose unions either. Neither did Reagan, nor most conservatives.”
Reagan was President of the Screen Actors Guild! A Union man!
It’s beyond silly to lambaste any Republican for not attacking unions sufficiently. it would be insane for any politician to be that counter-productive in attacking powerful groups with many (voting!) members.
Unions per se are not the problem. laws that give unions monopoly power and undermine worker free choice are. Attack the bad laws not the organizations (which is what Romney wisely did).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
