Posted on 09/21/2005 11:33:58 AM PDT by Crackingham
Bob Baker is a union president and a Los Angeles police officer who considers himself generally conservative.
"Don't ever call a cop a liberal," said Baker, head of the Los Angeles Police Protective League.
He even blanches at the word "union," saying it reminds him of corrupt Teamster bosses. Baker, who often works in concert with liberal labor leaders, prefers "recognized bargaining unit."
So it goes with police unions, a hybrid of law-and-order conservatism and bread-and-butter liberalism. They may tilt Republican in party loyalty, but their labor representatives frequently turn to Democrats on matters such as pay and pensions.
That paradox is on stark display in the battle over Proposition 75, a November ballot measure that would require public employee unions to get members' written permission to spend their dues on political campaigns.
California police unions are mobilizing against the proposition and its largely conservative backers. They contend Proposition 75 is designed to make it hopelessly cumbersome for them to raise election funds.
"It's extremely unfair," said Baker, whose league represents 9,200 Los Angeles Police Department officers.
Proposition 75 supporters say the initiative is all about fairness, because the unions finance candidates and causes that many of their members might not favor — namely, Democratic ones.
"They're not always in agreement on where the money should go," said Allan Mansoor, an Orange County sheriff's deputy who is mayor of Costa Mesa. The Republican is among the relatively small number of peace officers who are vocally promoting Proposition 75.
Both Mansoor and the president of the Assn. of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs said that its about 1,700 members are predominantly Republican. Even so, the union endorsed then-Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, for reelection in 2002. The association is now fighting Proposition 75.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Which is the whole point. YES on 75.
I am conservative, unless, of course, my pork is getting sliced...
Yeah, it's really gonna be cumbersome: the union would need to get a little slip of paper from the member saying, "Yes, you can take extra money (beyond costs of collective bargaining alone) out of my paycheck for political purposes." Wow. Cumbersome.
Public sector unions are morally indistinguishable from organized criminal gangs.
And the police unions are armed.
Geez, I wonder why the unions doesn't want this to pass? You'd think they were undemocractic or something...
Says it all !
why would rank & file object ?
More liberal doublespeak and lying. It's no more cumbersome than requiring proof of identity when voting. Everyone has ID but the liberals still claim that requiring ID will "disenfranchise poor blacks." Bull honkey.
What ticks me off is not that the Dems try these arguments. There are scoundrels in even the best of societies. What ticks me off is that the MSM doesn't ever question the fallacious reasoning and arguments. They just print it. The headline reads, "Proposition will disenfranchise minorities, some say" instead of "Democrats promote weak argument to proposition."
If the media did its job and held the Dems accountable, they wouldn't try these lame arguments.
The cops are just another gang.
How about all the CHP who are cheating the disability rules.?
Some people are more equal that others.
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.