From the diaries, by Erick.

Much to the pleasure of the organized labor movement, Sen. Tom Harkin, as the Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, stands to offer a tremendous amount of help to Big Labor. By pledging to pass a misleadingly-named and detrimental bill called the Employee Free Choice Act, Sen. Harkin is revealing his true loyalties – and his inconsistent rhetoric.

With union pension plans grossly underfunded, EFCA presents a number of threats to workers and businesses, and a number of benefits for union bosses. In their quest for more political spending power, union bosses have been feverishly pushing for the swift passage of EFCA and the question arises as to what Sen. Harkin has been saying about the bill. The answer is quite egregious.

In July of this year the Senator assured the public that Democrats were “not doing anything” about EFCA due to other priorities on the docket such as healthcare. But on September 9, he told a group of pro-union activists that in July he had the 60 votes needed for EFCA to pass, and then proceeded to audaciously blame the lack of a vote on the recently late Senator Edward Kennedy. On October 22, Harkin admitted to a news source that Democrats are “very close to having an agreement” on the bill, though he didn’t go into details.

Read More →

I’ve mentioned before that Democrats in Washington would face a major problem once it became clear that they were headed for significant losses in 2010. Specifically, once everyone agrees that the window is closing on major statist change, there’s an incentive for interest groups to fight for their pet cause over others. Environmentalists, high-taxers, health-care-rationers, opponents of traditional values, and other liberal wingnuts might play nicely while they think the pie is growing. But when they realize that the pie is shrinking, everyone wants to grab a slice.

Well, Jimmy Hoffa has decided to grab a fork:

Teamsters President James Hoffa said dropping the so-called public option wouldn’t be a “deal killer” for health-care legislation, signaling a split among leaders of unions that are a core constituency of President Barack Obama.

Read More →

Arlen Specter is, admittedly, the most unprincipled opportunist in Washington, but something sure seems fishy.

Back in April after switching parties, Arlen Specter said, “I will not be an automatic 60th vote and I would illustrate that by my position on employees’ choice, also known as card check. I think it is a bad deal and I am opposed to it and would not vote to invoke cloture.” He was pretty adamant about it.

Well, Specter goes to the lefty blogger confab in Pittsburgh on August 14th and is asked, “Is it fair to say that on the climate legislation, on Employees Free Choice, on the public option health care plan, these are all areas where you would be voting with the majority for cloture?”

Specter’s response? “Yes.”

Guess what. Three days after Specter’s yes, Obama decides to raise money for Specter.

Sure, Obama had already said he’d campaign for Specter, but had actually done not one thing to help Specter. Heck, Obama did absolutely nothing to keep Sestak out of the primary, something Obama could have done.

But Specter goes on record saying he will now vote for cloture on stuff four months ago he adamantly was opposed to and now Obama says he’ll raise money for Specter, as will Joe Biden.

The question is: which came first? Did Specter saying ‘yes’ persuade Obama or did Obama persuade Specter?

The buzz in Pennsylvania last week was that Obama would not be helping Specter despite promises to do so. Now Obama is all in.

Unless you think the news is wholly coincidental, we must now consider the need to spell Arlen Specter’s last name with a dollar sign instead of an “S”.

It sure looks like Presidential bribe to get a filibuster proof Senate.

Tomorrow, Pittsburgh is going to be home to thousands of political activists from both sides of the aisle. (Although if you watch cable news you would think it was only the left.) Netroots Nation and RightOnline are both in town for their annual events. And although there will probably be little if any crossover traffic, there is certain to be crossover content.

Take, for example, card check, otherwise known as the inaptly named Employee Free Choice Act. Tomorrow at RightOnline the first afternoon session is titled: “Forced Unionization: Card Check, Mandatory Arbitration, & Right to Work,” on why and how card check will cement progressive power.

At Netroots Nation, the AFL-CIO is hosting a session titled “The Secret Plan to Defeat the Right Forever,” on why and how card check will cement progressive power. It’s going on right now, but you won’t find it on the AFL-CIO site. They recently deleted the blog entry discussing it. Curious.

I was able to interview Erik Telford of the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, organizer of RightOnline, about just why it is that both the left and the right would have such a similarly themed session at the respective events. Keep reading for that interview PLUS: the blog post the AFL-CIO doesn’t want you to see.

Read More →

As Swamp Yankee noted earlier today, the AFL-CIO is going all-in on the healthcare debate. Their plan, in their own words, is to “organize major union participation in Congressional Town Hall meetings.” Unlike the spontaneous rejection of socialism springing from our grassroots, Big Labor plans to service their symbiotes in government by putting up money, transportation, and talking points in order to influence the healthcare debate and, ultimately, shut you up.

There’s a word for that. I can’t think of it. Rhymes with mastro murfing I think.

Of course, also unlike the senior citizens Obamacare proponents happily smear as an unruly mob, big labor is absolutely ready to use intimidation and scare tactics to get their way. Hey, it’s what they do.

You may be wondering, though, whether they may have a good point. After all, if the unions exist for the purpose of advocating for the rights of workers, couldn’t their support of Obamacare be seen as part of that mandate? Um, could you please stop laughing? I’m going somewhere with this!

So OK, let’s have a look at just how well Big Labor takes care of “the little people” then, shall we?

Read More →

Last week, the New York Times reported that the inaptly named “Employee Free Choice Act” was losing the most controversial and highest-profile provision: card check. Card check legislation, contrary to the title of the act, would take away fair choice for employees by doing away with the secret ballot, opening workers to intimidation from both the unions and the employers. As has been belabored at Redstate, destroying the secret ballot takes away the worker’s freedom to vote his conscience without fear of retribution.

The labor unions, special interests, and Democrats pushing for it not only know this, it’s the point. Intimidating workers into voting to unionize would vastly increase the size and power of the unions and, by extension, the Democratic party. These are all things you already know.

So in light of the Times article, is card check dead? Are workers rights being protected? Don’t answer too quickly.

Read More →

According to the New York Times, labor leaders are turning to the ‘Plan B’ that has been speculated on for months. Faced with the prospect of trying to get swing-state Democrat Senators to vote for a radioactive bill, they have thrown in the towel on the best-known part of ‘Card Check’ - the part that gives the bill its name:

A half-dozen senators friendly to labor have decided to drop a central provision of a bill that would have made it easier to organize workers.

The so-called card-check provision — which senators decided to scrap to help secure a filibuster-proof 60 votes — would have required employers to recognize a union as soon as a majority of workers signed cards saying they wanted a union. Currently, employers can insist on a secret-ballot election, a higher hurdle for unions.

The abandonment of card check was another example of the power of moderate Democrats to constrain their party’s more liberal legislative efforts. Though the Democrats have a 60-40 vote advantage in the Senate, and President Obama supports the measure, several moderate Democrats opposed the card-check provision as undemocratic.

Read More →

The SEIU is one of the most powerful forces pushing for enactment of Card Check. But if a rival union promises better representation for SEIU workers and tries to get a majority of them to sign cards, the SEIU turns to thug tactics and fights them tooth and nail:

One of the leading proponents of a bill that would allow workers to form a union by signing authorization cards is being accused by a California health care union of blocking such a card-check election for its members.

In January, the National Union of Healthcare Workers was established by former leaders of the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West. They had been removed from SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West executive board and steward positions after accusing the SEIU of centralizing power at its Washington headquarters and making “corrupt deals” with employers.

Read More →

According to Senator Tom Harkin (D-Labor), the Senate may vote next month on a Card Check compromise:

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) indicated Wednesday that he will be ready to bring up the long-stalled Employee Free Choice Act next month, following weeks of negotiations with key stakeholders.

“We’re in meetings right now. I’m still hopeful that we can get something done,” Harkin said.

The Iowa Democrat has regularly huddled with Democratic Sens. Mark Pryor (Ark.), Charles Schumer (N.Y.) and Arlen Specter (Pa.) to try to hatch a compromise on the measure, known as “card check.” On Tuesday, Harkin included AFL-CIO legislative director Bill Samuel in the talks—an indication that progress is being made.

Read More →

This is the claim, at least:

A delegation from the Santa Clarita Valley Chamber of Commerce, joined by similar groups from around the country, is in Washington to have meetings to express their opposition to the bill. At around 12:00 eastern time this afternoon, the group met with Senator Diane Feinstein.

Feinstein, a major proponent of the Employee Free Choice Act, broke national news when she told the local delegation that she is withdrawing her support.

“She will not vote for the bill, and she will not support any modification allowing the process to bypass secret ballots, and she believes that now is not the right time for this type of legislation given the downturn in the economy,” said John Shaffery, a local lawyer and vice president for the SCV Chamber Board of Directors, who was in the meeting.

More as we get it.

[UPDATE]: There is as yet nothing elsewhere in the news.
[UPDATE, 3:07 PM]: No official confirmation yet, although I am informed by third-party sources that there will be a statement from the Senator. Let us simply say that it looks very possible that these people are going to be sadly disappointed.
[UPDATE, 3:34 PM] HuffPo’s better at getting somebody from a Democratic Senate office to call back - surprise, surprise! - and is announcing that there will be a ‘clarification‘ this afternoon. Be sure to cross-check it against this from March.
[UPDATE, 3:48 PM] While we’re waiting patiently for them to come up with something that squares the circle, let me just note something; it is not actually unreasonable for the labor unions to get a straight answer on this issue from the Senator. They’ve certainly paid enough for the privilege.

[UPDATE the last, 4:00 PM]: This is what HuffPo calls a ‘firm denial’:

“A statement has been put out mischaracterizing my position on this bill. The truth is that I am working to find common ground between the needs of both business and labor in order to reach a bipartisan solution.

I believe we must find a way to protect the privacy of individual workers so that they may elect whether to form a union free of intimidation.”

So… I guess that means that ’she will not vote for the current bill’, as it has no secret ballot, and ’she will not support any modification allowing the process to bypass secret ballots’; whether or not you believe that ’she believes that now is not the right time for this type of legislation given the downturn in the economy’ is I guess largely dependent on your opinion of the Senator’s reasoning powers. All I know is, I’m pretty sure that she just called a bunch of small businessmen liars.

Smooth.

It seems there aren’t really any convictions Arlen Specter won’t sell in order to help him win reelection. According to his new colleague Tom Harkin, Specter realizes that he’s toast in a Democratic primary if he doesn’t kiss labor’s ring that he was wrong about Card Check:

A spokesperson for Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), the lead sponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act, confirmed today that an agreement is near that will allow Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) to return to his earlier position of support for the legislation.

Specter, originally a co-sponsor of the bill, announced on March 24 that he had switched to the opposition. At the time, as a Republican senator, he was under pressure from business lobbyists and right-wing Republicans lining up against him in that party’s coming primary election.

Read More →

Yesterday Arlen Specter said that despite his switch to the Democratic party, he would not be changing his position on Card Check. It doesn’t seem as if Card Check backers are taking him seriously though. Despite his comments yesterday - which were widely portrayed as a strong statement against the bill - they’re pushing harder than ever:

But [Specter] left himself some wiggle room when he announced his opposition to the bill in March by outlining revisions he says could improve it and gain his support…

Specter has said that he doesn’t support replacing the election process and that the arbitration section would have to be significantly changed to win his support.

But he’s also voiced sympathy with the concerns that labor leaders are trying to address through the legislation. If a deal can be struck, it could well address similar concerns raised by several moderate Democrats and clear the way for passage.

But labor leaders say negotiations will intensify and a breakthrough would carry big political dividends for the Democrats’ newest darling.

Read More →

The New York Times is attempting to spin gold from straw, telling us unicorns are real, expecting the Tooth Fairy to bring a windfall. At least, that is what it seems if we are to believe the Times’ fantasy card check union story from April 20. You see, the Times believes that an overwhelming anti-union vote held via secret ballot is proof that card check is necessary.

This pretzel logic insists that the employer in question was so underhanded that even a secret ballot was corrupted by the efforts by the employer to scare off employees from supporting the union. But, here is the thing that makes no sense: if the ballot is secret, since no employee’s name was connected to the vote, and if the employer was that mean to the workers, WHY did they still vote against the union?

Read More →

One of the more objectionable features of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) is the card check feature wherein a union can simply gather publicly signed cards by employees agreeing to become unionized, thereby eliminating the secret vote for the workers. Opponents say this process is ripe for union abuse leaving workers open to any sort of intimidation and quashing their vote of conscience.

If any more evidence of how corrupt the card check system could be were needed, one need only look at a recent union organizer in Ohio to see the abuse that will happen with card check.

Read More →

Most lefties claim that “no” means “no,” but not where it concerns unions that have lost the organizing argument over and over again. We can see that refusal to listen to the workers in the case of Unions vs. Wal-Mart. Repeatedly Wal-Mart workers have generally refused to unionize, yet instead of taking that as an answer, the unions continue to push. And they are at it again.

The United Food and Commercial Workers is stepping up its efforts to organize Wal-Mart workers yet again.

Read More →

Colorado’s Michael Bennet - who faces the voters for the first time next year - had a rough meeting with ‘progressives’ in Colorado. It sounds as if he thinks that his re-election chances suffer if he supports the Obama agenda. In particular, he doesn’t like Card Check:

Bennet has been one of the few Senate Democrats who have declined to take a stand on the Employee Free Choice Act, a bill favored by organized labor that would make it easier to unionize worksites.

Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., announced Monday that she would oppose the bill, making it all but certain that the bill in its current form can’t muster the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster by opponents.

“We’re going to have to see whether or not there’s a consensus that can be reached that makes it something that can be passed because right now there isn’t something that can be passed,” Bennet told the group at New Belgium.

Read More →

Wisconsin’s Eau Claire County lost 800 full-time jobs and a $50 million investment that was to be rolled out over the next five years because of the Democrat’s Card Check bill. And it wasn’t just a single county in Wisconsin that lost this multi-million dollar development. It was the whole U.S.A. that lost this project.

Thank you Barack Obama. Some help with economic “stimulus” and jobs you are.

Read More →

According to Roll Call, the primary Senate sponsor of the Card Check bill has begun to reach out to Republicans on possible compromise legislation:

With Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) refusing to back a controversial union organizing bill, Senate Democrats have tapped Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) to begin preliminary discussions with a handful of moderate Republicans to try to come up with a new plan for reforming the nation’s labor laws.

Democratic aides said Harkin’s outreach to the GOP is in the early stages and, because of that, declined to identify which Republicans he is courting…

Democratic aides said that should a compromise be reached, it will likely end up somewhere between the card check bill as it’s currently written and an alternative union organizing proposal floated by Starbucks Corp., Costco Wholesale Corp. and Whole Foods Market Inc. That plan would retain the use of secret ballots when workers decide to unionize and would not include binding arbitration provisions. It would, however, include a number of other provisions, including allowing unions access to employees during off-work hours and requiring a fixed date for elections.

Read More →

It’s the normal tale of union thugs acting like union thugs.

At an auto part plant in Indiana, one woman was threatened because she didn’t want the union. Why was she threatened? Because she and her fellow workers were involved in a card check effort and EVERYONE knew what her vote was. Once the union thugs found out she was against their unionization, they harassed her and threatened her to vote their way.

This sort of thuggery is what President Obama, Congressional Democrats, and union thugs everywhere want to visit upon EVERY U.S. worker.

(H/T HotAir.com)

Let’s be clear. Barack Obama has an agenda. He wants to tax our energy and put the government in control of our health care. Given all the damage that Obama wants to do to our economy through these, card check just isn’t that high on his priority list. MSNBC has it:

*** Card check’s death? Did the legislative battle over the Employee Free Choice Act (a.k.a. “card check”) end before it truly began? GOP Sen. Arlen Specter’s decision yesterday to oppose the bill, even though he voted for cloture on the measure in ’07, dealt a blow to organized labor, denying them the 60 votes they need to end debate — even if Al Franken ends up joining the Senate. We can tell you this: The White House appears to be happy (but very quietly so) to have this debate out of the way. No doubt they were for it. But it was always more of a Biden cause than a Barack cause. At this point in time, with everything else on their plate, sticking a finger in business’ eye wasn’t something the White House was looking forward to. Would Obama have signed it? Yes. But he doesn’t have to worry about it now, at least maybe not until 2011.