With jobs so hard to come by for many Americans, you would think a private company deciding to create more than 1,000 jobs would be cheered by Republicans and Democrats alike.

But President Obama’s National Labor Relations Board is doing everything it can to stop Boeing from opening a new plant in North Charleston.

And as sad as it may seem, at the heart of the board’s actions is political cronyism at its absolute worst.

Since South Carolina is a right-to-work state, workers at Boeing’s new plant can’t be forced under the threat of losing their jobs to hand over a portion of their hard-earned money to union officials in dues.

The labor board’s attempt to force Boeing to stay in a non-right-to-work state where the union bosses can force workers to pay up or be fired is political payback for their undying support during the last presidential campaign.

If the Obama administration succeeds, it could result in the virtual destruction of right-to-work laws all across the country: No longer could private companies decide for themselves where to move or open new facilities; the government would now take on that responsibility and make decisions based solely on what benefits the big-labor elite. Right-to-work states would be left out in the cold.

According to the National Institute for Labor Relations Research, right-to-work states had more than double the job growth of forced-unionism states over the past decade. In other words, big-labor control over American workers is a drag on our economy.

It was organized labor’s stranglehold that drove the big three automakers to the brink of bankruptcy — until American taxpayers were forced to rescue them. And it’s not just in the private sector. Big labor’s control of government workers in California, Illinois and elsewhere has driven those states to the brink of bankruptcy.

Once government union bosses gain “bargaining power” over government workers, the idea of providing taxpayers with the best service at the lowest cost goes out the window. Instead, electing big-government politicians who support skyrocketing salaries, bloated pension packages and other ultra-costly perks becomes priority No. 1.

That’s why I believe the fight against the National Labor Relations Board in South Carolina is so important.

During these tough economic times, throwing our economy under a big labor lock and key would be a tremendous mistake.

Time For Politicians in Both Parties to Own Up to Their Mistakes

In late February, many concerned Americans in other states were paying close attention to the fierce, and still unresolved, battle over public-sector union monopoly bargaining in Wisconsin.

Many observing the Madison showdown from their homes inwere undoubtedly amazed by what they saw.

These five states, like roughly a dozen others, have no statutes on the books empowering government union officials to act as state and local public employees’ monopoly-bargaining agents.

When elected officials in such states make a judgment that a reform in public-employee compensation packages and work rules is necessary and can be prudently implemented to give taxpayers a better return on their money, they have the power to proceed.

It is then up to the voting public to judge whether the reform was a good idea or not.

In Wisconsin, however, like in other states which statutorily mandate union monopoly bargaining over public employee pay, benefits, and working conditions, elected officials from the governor on down have far less control over the roughly 50% of public expenditures that go into employee compensation.

In the Badger State, half of state and local government employees are unionized. Elected officials and their appointees cannot make any significant changes in the way these employees are compensated or in how they are instructed to do their jobs without government union bosses’ approval.

Today, millions of Americans whose state and local governments operate free from Big Labor constraints appreciate, after watching the bitter struggle in Wisconsin unfold, better than ever before the importance of keeping union monopolists out of the government workplace.

Only Intense Right to Work Lobbying Blocked Monopoly-Bargaining Bill

What most freedom-loving Virginians, North Carolinians and Texans probably don’t realize is that, just last year, the U.S. Congress came within a hair of taking away their prerogative to decide how their state and local government workplaces are run.

At the outset of the 2009-2010 Congress, the votes were there to pass the so-called “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act” in both the House and the Senate. Furthermore, President Obama was publicly vowing to sign this legislation as soon as it reached his desk.

This measure, more accurately labeled the “Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill,” would have foisted Wisconsin-style labor relations on state and local public-safety departments in all 50 states.

When the House first voted on this legislation in 2007, nearly 99% of the Democrats voting sided with Big Labor, and 98 GOP congressmen also voted for it.

Naturally, many Washington insiders considered approval of federally mandated union monopoly bargaining a sure thing after Barack Obama became President.

But an intense, two-year-long lobbying and public mobilization campaign by the National Right to Work Committee kept this power grab from ever reaching Mr. Obama’s desk in 2009 or 2010.

Recent Past Should Not Be Forgotten

Fortunes change swiftly in politics, and today the momentum is on the side of proponents of rolling back compulsory unionism in government, not expanding it. (See, e.g., this month’s Newsletter cover story.)

But in fighting for a brighter future, pro-Right to Work citizens should not forget the recent past.

Politicians in both parties who recently supported federalizing monopolistic government unionism should be held accountable for what they almost succeeded in doing.

As a start, Right to Work members (especially constituents) are urged now to contact the U.S. representatives listed below.

Politicians Pledging to Back Right to Work Take Charge of House

Thanks in significant part to the efforts of National Right to Work Committee members across the country, starting this month the U.S. House of Representatives will be led by a speaker and a majority leader who have pledged full support for Americans’ Right to Work without being forced to join or pay dues to a union.

Now Committee members’ job is to make sure Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), and other members of Congress turn their pro-Right to Work promises into action.

John Boehner, Eric Cantor Owe Leadership Posts to Worker-Freedom Advocates

Mr. Boehner and Mr. Cantor enjoy their top leadership positions in the House in part due to pro-Right to Work Americans’ support for congressional candidates nationwide who had pledged to oppose compulsory unionism.

Millions of pro-Right to Work Americans mobilized against candidates who supported compulsory unionism, or tried to hide their position on freedom in the workplace. These Americans expect Mr. Boehner and Mr. Cantor to lay the foundation for a new federal labor policy respecting each employee’s ability to decide for himself or herself whether or not to join or financially support a union, declared Committee President Mark Mix.

“Poll after poll shows nearly four out of five Americans who regularly vote support the Right to Work,” explained Mr. Mix.

“When these citizens helped John Boehner and Eric Cantor become the new House leaders, they sent an unmistakable message to Capitol Hill — roll back Organized Labor’s compulsory-unionism privileges.”

In the 2010 elections, voters firmly rejected major Big Labor power grabs such as the “card check” forced-unionism bill, which sailed through the House as recently as 2007 and seemed close to becoming law in early 2009, after Barack Obama became the 44th U.S. President.

Momentum Swings Toward Right to Work

A full-fledged Committee effort to get federal candidates on the record against the “card check” bill, or “Employee Free Choice Act,” as proponents cynically mislabeled it, surpassed expectations in mobilizing citizens and increasing the number of Right to Work supporters in Congress.

To activate Right to Work supporters, the Committee distributed a record-smashing total of nearly 8.4 million federal candidate Survey 2010 “information packets” through the U.S. Postal Service last year. Above and beyond that, the 2010 program had a massive Internet component, including nearly half a million e-mails transmitted in October alone. All this plus radio, TV, and newspaper advertising.

Lobbying by Committee members persuaded hundreds of House and Senate candidates to take a pro-Right to Work position, which in turn helped many get elected. That’s not surprising, given the Right to Work principle’s overwhelming public support.

“The political momentum is now against compulsory unionism,” commented Mr. Mix.

“That means in this Congress the Committee actually has a chance, if members keep up the pressure, to pick up enough votes from the ‘mushy middle’ to push pro-Right to Work legislation through the House.”

Committee Pushes For Floor Votes

“Instead of just fending off repeated Big Labor attempts to wipe out the meager protections for workers’ freedom as individuals in current federal labor law, Right to Work advocates are ready to go on the offensive in Congress,” Mr. Mix continued.

“This year, it won’t be enough for self-avowed Right to Work allies on Capitol Hill to oppose union-boss legislation. Pro-Right to Work Americans want the politicians they supported to help them regain the freedoms Congress has previously abrogated.”

According to Mr. Mix, Committee supporters will know the new House leaders are truly committed to fulfilling the pledges they, along with many other House candidates, made if they ensure hearings and floor votes on legislation such as:

The National Right to Work Act, which would restore millions of employees’ freedom to hold a job without being forced to pay union dues by repealing compulsory-unionism authorizations in federal law. (For more information, see page four.)

The Rewarding Achievement and Incentivizing Successful Employees (RAISE) Act, which would reform federal labor law by narrowing the scope of union bosses’ monopoly-bargaining privileges. Specifically, the RAISE Act would allow unionized employers to pay individual employees more than a union contract calls for without having to get union bosses’ permission first.

Mr. Boehner Will Need To Hear From Right to Work Supporters

While freedom-loving Americans are hopeful that Speaker Boehner will make good on his 2010 campaign pledges to defend the Right to Work, history indicates pressure from Committee members may well be necessary to keep him on the correct course.

One notable example Mr. Mix recalled was then-Minority Leader Boehner’s decision in the summer of 2007 to give Big Labor Democrats a de facto free pass on legislation federalizing government union bosses’ monopoly-bargaining privileges over state and local public-safety officers.

“When union lobbyists rammed the so-called ‘Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation’ Act through the House in July 2007, the GOP House leadership team failed even to send out an e-mail urging caucus members to oppose the scheme until an hour before the floor vote,” Mr. Mix pointed out.

“Since the House was in session when the last-minute e-mail was finally transmitted, many of Mr. Boehner’s caucus members likely did not even know their leaders were opposed to the public-safety union power grab until after it had already been rubber-stamped by the chamber.

“Fortunately, thanks to Committee members’ determined efforts, this destructive legislation never became law. [See page eight for more information.] Nevertheless, this incident reminds us that Right to Work mobilization is always necessary, regardless of who holds the congressional reins.

“That’s why we will need to watch closely to see if Speaker Boehner allows the Right to Work Bill and the RAISE Act to get fair consideration. I’m confident Committee members will be willing and able to let Mr. Boehner know they want action on these bills.”

Tough Battles Ahead For Right to Work Committee And Its Members

The substantial Right to Work gains in the 2010 elections are encouraging, but freedom-loving citizens must keep their eyes wide open, Mr. Mix cautioned.

“Previous U.S. House speakers like Newt Gingrich [R-Ga.] and Dennis Hastert [R-Ill.] also made campaign pledges to defend the Right to Work, but avoided confrontations with Big Labor once Congress was in session,” he noted.

“However, despite all the pitfalls ahead, if Committee members and supporters remain mobilized, the 112th Congress could be a historic turning point in favor of Right to Work.”

Mr. Mix urged Committee members to call their U.S. representatives at 202-225-3121 (or my e-mail through the Committee’s Website) and urge them to support pro-Right to Work legislation every chance they get. Just ask for your representative by name.

December’s issue contains the following headlines:

Voters Give Forced Unionism a ‘Shellacking’ – But Big Labor Retains Hold Over U.S. Senate, Key State Assemblies

Federal Candidate Survey Mobilizes Millions – Program Maximizes Right to Work Gains in ‘Year of Opportunity’

Obama NLRB to Ignore Mid-Term Election Results – Independent Workers, Firms Face ‘Card-Check Lite’ Implementation

Workers Forced to Bankroll Agenda They Oppose – New Nationwide Poll Shows Union Members Support Right to Work

Iowans Repudiate Pro-Forced Unionism Governor – Right to Work Makes Major Gains in State Legislative Contests

Right to Work: Rx For Job-Losing States – Legislators Look at ‘Oklahoma Model’ For Stronger Economic Growth

The Senate may soon consider a bill that would force states to allow for the unionization of public employees. In addition to the extraordinary amount of mandates imposed under President Obama, Congress has been attempting to extend the burden of collective bargaining imposed upon every state and local government. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D–NV) recently reintroduced the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act in an attempt to rush it through Congress before Republicans take control of the House in January. This legislation would mandate collective bargaining for police, firefighters, and emergency medical personnel—even in states that have passed laws to ensure this can’t happen.

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty made headlines today with his editorial against government unions. It is no secret that unions have increasingly resorted to government employees to boost membership. Minnesota has362,000 union members, and Governor Pawlenty has had his fair share of battles to keep taxpayers from footing the bill.

Government is the easy way to avoid pesky things like efficiency and competition. In September, Heritage expert James Sherk exposed the fact that since last year, most union workers now collect a check paid for by taxpayers. Some of that money is automatically deposited into union coffers to pay for their dues. This is made possible through a taxpayer-funded payroll system.

The rise of government unions has had many troubling effects.

            • Federal workers already receive up to 22 percent more than their private counterparts, resulting in $47 billion in additional taxes.

            • Many states force government employees to join a union or lose their job.

            • Since the beginning of the recession, private sector employment has fallen while federal employment has risen. Government employees have not faced the same hard decisions that many Americans have confronted during the recent economic decline.

            • Unions are able to take the money they receive from their members and lobby for increased wages in the form of more taxes.

Congress should let each state decide whether it wants to force its taxpayers to fund overpaid union employees.

This evening, Senator Reid moved to proceed to the following bills and filed cloture on the motions:

- Calendar #662, S.3991, the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2009 (commonly known as Police -Fire Fighters Forced Monopoly Bargaining Bill);

By unanimous consent, the cloture vote on the motion to proceed to Calendar #662, S.3991 (the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2009) will occur upon conclusion of the impeachment proceedings. We expect to complete the impeachment proceedings Wednesday morning.

********

Sen. Harry Reid is trying to repay his political debts and is attempting for move legislation that would give union bosses monopoly bargaining power over taxpayer money for police and fireman. The Detroit News adds their thoughts on the deal:

Having survived a near-death experience on Election Day thanks largely to massive donations from labor unions, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is paying back his benefactors. The Democrat from Nevada says that during Congress’ lame duck session he will try to once again force through a measure giving police and fire unions the upper hand in dealing with local communities.

Reid will seek a cloture vote on the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, which despite its name has little to do with cooperation. Rather, the bill would be a federal clone of Michigan’s disastrous Public Act 312, which is blamed with ruining the finances of scores of communities, including Detroit, and pushing many to the brink of bankruptcy — that’s you, Hamtramck.

The bill would make it easier for police and firefighters to organize labor unions and force all officers to join, even in right-to-work states. That’s a brazen usurpation of state authority, and very likely unconstitutional.

In Michigan, where most major police and firefighters are already unionized, the largest impact would be in rural areas, since the law would also likely apply to volunteer fire departments. That would put most of those volunteer outfits out of business, and destroy an important grass-roots community protection network. These volunteers are often highly trained individuals who provide the only defense for their neighbors’ homes and property.

But the worse part of Reid’s union-buttering bill is that it would codify in federal law a state act that Michigan must get out from under if communities are to regain control of their finances.

Public Act 312 has been horrible for Michigan. The act — as would the Senate bill — requires that contract disputes between public safety unions and municipalities go to binding arbitration. The arbitrator is not required to consider a community’s finances when ordering a settlement, and would not be under the federal legislation, either.

This provision has severely limited the ability of local government to control operating costs. And it’s reduced the incentive of the unions to bargain. Why agree to a compromise contract when an arbitrator might award you the whole enchilada?

The act has been especially harmful for Detroit, where it has forced bad choices. Since the ability to negotiate concessions is so limited, the city’s option has been to reduce public safety manpower, which it can usually do outside of the contract.

Unions have gotten around that relief valve in many suburban communities by sponsoring ballot initiatives mandating minimum staffing levels.

We’ve noted a number of times that PA 312 was the work of the late Coleman Young when he was in the Legislature during the 1970s. When he became Detroit’s mayor, Young rued the act as the worst work he’d ever done.

Taking PA 312 national would amount to another unfunded federal mandate that would further erode the financial stability of communities already on the edge. That’s not what Congress is supposed to do.

We knew there was a reason we were rooting so hard against Harry Reid in the recent election. The Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act is it.

From The Detroit News:

Having survived a near-death experience on Election Day thanks largely to massive donations from labor unions, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is paying back his benefactors. The Democrat from Nevada says that during Congress’ lame duck session he will try to once again force through a measure giving police and fire unions the upper hand in dealing with local communities.

Reid will seek a cloture vote on the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, which despite its name has little to do with cooperation. Rather, the bill would be a federal clone of Michigan’s disastrous Public Act 312, which is blamed with ruining the finances of scores of communities, including Detroit, and pushing many to the brink of bankruptcy.

In Michigan, where most major police and firefighters are already unionized, the largest impact would be in rural areas, since the law would also likely apply to volunteer fire departments. That would put most of those volunteer outfits out of business, and destroy an important grass-roots community protection network. These volunteers are often highly trained individuals who provide the only defense for their neighbors’ homes and property.

But the worse part of Reid’s union-buttering bill is that it would codify in federal law a state act that Michigan must get out from under if communities are to regain control of their finances.

(Source: September 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

Over the past two years, Big Labor bosses have repeatedly succeeded in getting their favored federal politicians in competitive U.S. House districts and states to cast “politically difficult” votes.

Early in 2009, for example, union lobbyists twisted arms to secure majorities in both chambers of Congress for controversial “stimulus” legislation. Since it became law, the “stimulus” has bilked taxpayers of hundreds of billions of dollars to ensure that bloated, unionized government payrolls stay bloated, but furnished no detectable help for America’s private sector.

And, more even than President Obama or any other elected official, top union officials are responsible for Congress’s narrow votes to reconstruct America’s enormous health-care system in late 2009 and early 2010.

As the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics reported March 22, 2010, “in the final push before the vote,” many union bosses and union operatives “displayed their clout through threats to withhold endorsements from lawmakers who failed to back the bill. They also vowed to support primary challenges or third-party bids against incumbents who opposed” ObamaCare.

Now polls indicate that voters across the country are poised to punish vulnerable U.S. representatives and senators for doing what Big Labor told them to do.

Undoubtedly compounding the woes of many of the endangered politicians who backed the government union boss-friendly “stimulus” package and ObamaCare is that they are also on the record in support of forced-unionism initiatives that, due to stiff Right to Work opposition, have yet to be enacted.

Most of all, millions of freedom-loving citizens are furious with their incumbent politicians for having backed Big Labor’s now-stalled “card check” forced-unionism bill and its still-pending scheme to federalize government union monopoly bargaining over state and local public-safety employees.

National Union Boss Vows ‘Massive Incumbent Protection Program’

But despite poll after poll showing the public thinks little of the forced-unionism agenda and the politicians who have helped implement major parts of it, AFL-CIO chief Richard Trumka clearly believes he can build on the “achievements” of the 2009 “stimulus” and ObamaCare.

This fall, Mr. Trumka and his cohorts are expected to spend well over a billion dollars, mostly derived from union dues and fees employees are forced to pay as a condition of employment, on electioneering efforts designed to benefit their puppet politicians.

Union kingpins calculate that their forced dues-funded phone banks, get-out-the-vote drives, and propaganda mailings, mostly conducted under the radar, can help dozens of Big Labor politicians who would otherwise go down to defeat this year secure reelection.

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME/AFL-CIO) union President Gerald McEntee has frankly called what he and other union bosses are up to a “massive incumbent protection program.”

Mr. Trumka and Mr. McEntee know that, if they can show this November that backing Big Labor’s agenda on vote after vote has relatively little political downside, despite that agenda’s unpopularity in the polls, it will be much easier for them to ram through “card check” and more in the 2011-2012 Congress.

But the National Right to Work Committee and its members (now 2.6 million, and growing) are now fighting to ensure that congressmen and senators who have carried water for Big Labor time and again are held accountable this fall.

Right to Work Survey 2010 Can Help Ensure Politicians Are Held Accountable

The principal Committee program for holding politicians’ feet to the fire is the federal candidate Survey 2010.

The ongoing Survey 2010 consists of three phases.

In the first phase, candidates receive questionnaires asking them how they intend to vote on a number of forced unionism-related issues, including mandatory “card checks,” federalized public-safety union monopoly bargaining, and national Right to Work legislation.

“The Committee’s goal is not just to secure enough support to block enactment of forced-unionism schemes like ‘card check’ legislation, but also to forge pro-Right to Work majorities in the House and Senate,” explained Committee President Mark Mix.

“That’s why the Right to Work survey raises the pressure on candidates to oppose the expansion of Big Labor’s forced-unionism privileges, and also to support rolling those privileges back.”

In the second phase of the Survey 2010, Committee members call and write the candidates, asking them to answer their questionnaires 100% in favor of Right to Work.

In the final phase, the Committee, through TV and newspaper ads, e-mails and the postal service, reports back to members and friends at the local level on how their candidates responded. That keeps the heat on non-responsive candidates to take a clear stand on the Right to Work issue.

“The aim of Big Labor’s billion-dollar, forced dues-funded electioneering program is to divert public attention from the damage that union-label politicians have wrought on America over the past two years and the even more severe damage they will do over the next two if they can,” said Mr. Mix.

Public Doesn’t Support Compulsory Unionism

“Big Labor has far more money at its disposal than do Right to Work supporters, but the union bosses have one major problem: The general public, and even the workers they claim to represent, don’t support what they are selling,” Mr. Mix continued.

“Poll after poll shows that nearly 80% of Americans agree that no one should be forced to join or pay dues to a union, simply in order to keep his or her job.

“The Committee survey program works simply by ensuring that the Right to Work issue, which already has overwhelming public support, remains in the spotlight throughout the campaign season.

“With members’ generous support, I’m confident that this fall the federal survey will force candidate after candidate either to pledge to stop attacking employees’ Right to Work, or face serious repercussions at the polls.”

Since forced-unionism cheerleader Barack Obama became President in January 2009, Big Labor bosses and their yes-men in the U.S. Congress have helped him inflict a lot of damage on employees, businesses, and taxpayers across America.

To take just the latest example, last month union puppet politicians in the Senate and House rubber-stamped a special-interest measure (H.R.1586) that will ultimately extract an additional $10 billion from beleaguered private-sector employees and businesses to maintain and expand wasteful unionized government payrolls.

From 1998 to 2007, the number of instructional employees at K-12 public schools nationwide soared by 15.9% — an increase 3.5 times greater than the 4.5% growth in school enrollment over the same period.

The rapid-fire expansion of school payrolls, roughly 70% of which are unionized, produced no measurable improvement in educational outcomes, but cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.

And the terms on which H.R.1586 piles on another $10 billion are expressly designed to ensure that currently strapped states do not pare back the past decade of teacher union boss-driven growth in K-12 payrolls in order to avoid increasing the burden on taxpaying individuals and businesses.

On August 11, just one day after the House had okayed H.R.1586, President Obama signed it into law.

Big Labor Bosses Still Far From Satisfied

But despite having received a host of handouts like H.R.1586 during the past two years, top union bosses remain far from satisfied. They are making no secret about the fact that they think they are still owed at least a few more juicy legislative plums before the end of this Congress.

After all, as union dons never hesitate to remind the Democratic President and congressional leaders, they, more than any other special-interest group, are responsible for giving one political party control of the White House and lopsided Senate and House majorities at the same time.

It’s estimated that, in 2007 and 2008, the union political machine pumped well over a billion dollars, mostly siphoned off from workers’ forced union dues and fees, into efforts to put Big Labor Democrats in firm control of the executive and legislative branches of the federal government.

Consequently, union barons expected to see enacted in the current Congress legislation that would help them sharply increase the share of all private-sector workers who are under union monopoly-bargaining control.

Their original vehicle for achieving this objective was S.560/H.R.1409, the so-called “Employee Free Choice Act.”

Sponsored by Big Labor Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Congressman George Miller (D-Calif.), S.560/H.R.1409 would grease the skids for union-boss workplace takeovers in several ways. Most famously, it would effectively end secret-ballot elections in union organizing drives, replacing them with so-called “card checks.”

That means, if S.560/H.R.1409 became law, union organizers would have far more opportunities than they currently do to intimidate individual workers into signing not just themselves, but all of their nonunion fellow employees, over to Big Labor control.

Right to Work Resistance Has Stalled Power Grab

Unfortunately for union bigwigs, since early 2009 the National Right to Work Committee and its allies have mobilized massive public opposition to S.560/H.R.1409, greatly lowering its prospects for passage in its current form.

In response, for many months now Big Labor lobbyists and politicians have huddled together with the intent of concocting new, passable legislation that would accomplish the same objective through somewhat different means.

Now it seems that their “Plan B” might well emerge in the 2009-2010 Congress — but not until after Election Day!

On August 12, union-label Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) publicly confirmed what freedom-loving Americans have suspected for some time: that he will reconvene the Senate soon after Election Day on November 2. Under his plan, the “lame duck” chamber could remain in session until well into December, with only a brief Thanksgiving recess.

Reid lieutenant Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) has confirmed that the Senate will be considering major policy initiatives, and not just “must-pass” budget bills, after Election Day.

“It may well be we have to wait until a lame-duck session to pass whatever we’re able to pass,” Mr. Bingaman admitted to the Capitol Hill newspaper Politico in mid-August.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has also made it clear she intends to hold a “lame duck” session in her chamber, though she has yet to publicly announce a schedule

“Union bosses from AFL-CIO czar Richard Trumka on down are now reiterating their demand that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi bring up the ‘card check’ bill, or its near equivalent, before the 2009-2010 Congress is over,” noted Right to Work President Mark Mix.

“Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi are desperate to satisfy their Big Labor patrons. But at the same time they want to minimize the electoral damage that voting for this power grab would do to vulnerable union-label politicians in their caucuses. That’s why the Big Labor Democrat leaders lean to the ‘lame duck’ strategy.”

Public-Safety Union-Monopoly Bill Could Also Be on ‘Lame Duck’ Agenda

“And ‘card-check’ forced unionism isn’t the only major rewrite of federal labor policy that may come up in the Big Labor Congress after November 2,” Mr. Mix continued.

“Another strong possibility is H.R.413/S.3194, legislation cynically mislabeled as the ‘Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act.’

“This measure would, at a time when government budget deficits are already sky high, hobble the ability of states and localities to keep their expenditures of taxpayer dollars under control.

“H.R.413/S.3194 would empower Federal Labor Relations Authority bureaucrats to survey all 50 states and identify which have failed to meet ‘core standards.’ And the key ‘core standard’ is mandatory union monopoly bargaining.

“Localities in all 50 states would be denied the option to refuse to grant a single public-safety union the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who don’t want to join.

“Monopoly bargaining, euphemistically labeled as ‘exclusive representation,’ would be foisted on police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide. And in most states that already authorize public-safety union monopoly bargaining, H.R.413/S.3194 would widen its scope.”

Right to Work Supporters Must Not Let Their Guard Down — Even After Election Day

Mr. Mix pointed out that, up to now, the Right to Work Committee and its members have led a successful campaign to block the union brass from ramming police/fire monopoly-bargaining legislation through Congress.

However, he added, large majorities of both chambers of Congress, including a number of Republicans as well as practically every Democrat, are on the record in favor of H.R.413/S.3194. Now is certainly not the time to declare victory.

“Right to Work members and supporters nationwide must be prepared to keep turning up the heat on their senators and congressmen, even after Election Day, to ensure that neither a gussied-up version of ‘card check’ nor police/fire monopoly bargaining is enacted late this year,” said Mr. Mix.

“It might be hard for some people to believe that even Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and President Obama would be audacious enough to try to grant enormously consequential new special privileges to Big Labor during a ‘lame duck’ congressional session.

“But the grim determination of these politicians to help union bosses corral workers into unions, by hook or crook, cannot be overestimated.

“Forced-unionism opponents can’t afford to let their guard down for one moment. Not now, with crucial elections just a few weeks away. But not after Election Day, either.”

If freedom-loving citizens don’t keep turning up the heat on their senators and congressmen late this fall, a looming “lame duck” session of Congress could end up doing severe damage to the Right to Work.

Today, Big Government, not the private sector, is Big Labor’s bread and butter. That’s why union officials push relentlessly for higher taxes and bigger government and seem completely unconcerned that the policies they advocate will slash overall private-sector job growth in future years.

Just three decades ago, less than a third of all employees subject to “exclusive” union bargaining worked for the government. Earlier this year, the U.S. Labor Department reported that for the first time ever, a majority of unionized workers across America are now government employees.

The outsized power and privileges of government union bosses clearly are a major force behind the unsustainable growth of government payrolls. According to data furnished by respected labor economists Barry T. Hirsch and David A. Macpherson, nonunion government employment nationwide actually fell by 2 percent, but Big Labor-controlled government employment grew by nearly 4 percent from 2007 to 2009.

Incredibly, nearly all Democrats and many Republicans on Capitol Hill appear eager to make matters even worse by rubber-stamping legislation (H.R. 413 and S. 3194) that would federally grant public-safety union officials monopoly bargaining privileges over state and local public employees nationwide.

In states that don’t already authorize public-safety monopoly bargaining, this legislation would impose it federally, denying localities the option to refuse to grant a union hierarchy the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who don’t want to join. In most states that already authorize public safety union monopolies, H.R. 413 and S. 3194 would widen their scope.

This legislation also would, as former Service Employees International Union second-in-command Anna Burger has boasted, “create a national collective [i.e. monopoly] bargaining standard for all public workers.”

Federalizing “exclusive” union bargaining over public safety employees would be ill advised under any circumstances, but at a time when taxes already are poised to skyrocket and cities and towns across America already are trying to deal with the worst fiscal crisis in decades, Congress would have to be incredibly reckless to enact this bill. By tipping the scales even further in favor of government-employment growth over business job growth, this legislation could kill hopes of reviving America’s private-sector economy for a long, long time.

Nevertheless, the current congressional majorities and the president are so beholden to Big Labor that they are very likely to make police and fire monopoly-bargaining legislation the law of the land soon, unless freedom-loving citizens nationwide contact their congressmen and senators, urging them to oppose H.R. 413 and S. 3194 in massive numbers.

Public-Safety Union Monopoly Undercuts California Law Enforcement

On Tuesday, July 13, Oakland, Calif., became a friendlier place for burglars, embezzlers, car thieves, bad-check passers, extortionists, and an array of other criminals.

That afternoon, Oakland, a major West Coast port city with roughly 400,000 residents, laid off 80 police officers, or 10% of its force, to help eliminate a budget deficit of over $30 million. In response, the city police department implemented a new policy in which officers aren’t being dispatched to take reports for 44 “lower priority” crimes.

Oaklanders whose homes or vehicles are burglarized must now go online or visit a police station to file reports. However, the police department warns them that, even if they do: “There will be no follow-up investigation, and the primary reason for filing the report is for insurance purposes.”

Why is the city recently reported to have the fourth highest violent crime rate in the country slashing the number of cops it employs? Some observers are blaming the recent national recession, which hit California especially hard.

But despite the recession-induced decline in Oakland’s tax revenues over the past couple of years, city officials could still have avoided laying off police this summer — if their hands weren’t tied by California labor policies that promote monopolistic unionism in the public sector.

Decades ago, Big Labor California politicians rubber-stamped legislation forcing local police departments to allow the agents of a single union to speak for all the police on their force, including those who haven’t joined the union and want nothing to do with it, on matters of pay, benefits, and work rules.

Government Union Bosses Prefer Service Cutbacks To Other Alternatives

The same union monopoly-bargaining system was foisted on California fire departments, school districts, prisons, and other government agencies.

As a consequence of government union bosses’ special privileges, California elected officials who face fiscal crises must get Big Labor’s permission before they can attempt to get their budgets back in order by changing the way employees are compensated.

For example, in Oakland, like in many other California jurisdictions, government union-promoted work rules make it almost impossible for police supervisors to schedule officers to work when and where they are needed during their regular eight-hour shifts.

Consequently, local taxpayers rack up enormous overtime costs.

Changing Big Labor scheduling restrictions and other work rules could easily have reduced the Oakland police department’s compensation expenses by as much as laying off 10% of the force does.

However, police union bosses rejected all proposals that would have resulted in a significant net reduction in taxpayers’ compensation costs, making layoffs unavoidable.

“When times are bad, government union bosses generally prefer layoffs that reduce services to other alternatives, partly because they know the layoffs will, very likely, only be temporary,” commented National Right to Work Committee Vice President Matthew Leen. “Consequently, structural problems never get resolved.”

Will U.S. Congress Make Matters Worse?

“That Californians have to deal with this is bad enough,” Mr. Leen continued.

“But incredibly, just as Golden State Congressman Brad Sherman [D] wants to foist private-sector forced union dues on all 50 states [see p. 5 for details], other Big Labor politicians are eager to federalize the public-sector union monopolies that are dragging California cities down.

“Their vehicle is S.3194/H.R.413, sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-Nev.] and union-label Congressman Dale Kildee [D-Mich.]. Unless it is stopped, this legislation could bring Oakland’s woes to other cities across America.”

For more information on S.3194/H.R.413, the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, see pp. 1-2.

Public-Safety Forced Unionism Still High on Capitol Hill Agenda

The American people do not support Big Labor’s legislative scheme to establish a new federal mandate imposing union “exclusive representation” (monopoly bargaining) over state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.

And powerful union-label politicians like U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) know this public-safety scheme (H.R.413/S.3194) is unpopular. That’s why they have repeatedly tried to sneak it through Congress.

Most recently, in June, Ms. Pelosi and her top lieutenants cut a deal with AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and other union bigwigs to attach H.R.413, the House version of the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, to a massive spending bill that provides funding for U.S. troops.

International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) union boss Harold Schaitberger openly admitted to helping concoct the scheme to tack H.R.413 on to H.R.4899, the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act, in a June 30 message to officers of his union subsidiaries. Early last month, the National Right to Work Committee obtained a copy of Mr. Schaitberger’s communication.

Firefighters Union Chief ‘Argued Strongly’ For War Supplemental Strategy

Mr. Schaitberger reported that he had “argued strongly” for attaching H.R.413 “to the War Supplemental funding proposal for our troops in Afghanistan.”

The backroom deal between House leaders and the union hierarchy allowed the public-safety forced-unionism measure to come to the floor so quickly that Right to Work members and their allies had virtually no time to mobilize for the vote.

On July 1, the House rubber-stamped H.R.413 as a provision of H.R.4899. With very few exceptions, the national media overlooked the fact that a pro-forced unionism federal takeover of state and local labor-management relations had been approved as part of an unrelated spending bill.

However, despite the media’s cluelessness, millions of Right to Work members and supporters around the country were well aware of what was going on because the Committee was informing and mobilizing them through e-mails, phone calls, and “snail” mail.

For several weeks in July, freedom-loving Americans mobilized by the Committee campaign contacted their senators again and again, urging them to oppose H.R.4899 on all votes unless and until the public-safety union monopoly-bargaining amendment was removed.

Several organizations representing the interests of local governments and public-safety departments, such as the National Sheriffs’ Association, joined with the Committee in lobbying against the forced-unionism sneak play.

The message clearly got through to a number of senators who normally vote with Big Labor, but are getting antsier and antsier about their next election, regardless of whether they have to face the voters this year, or not until 2012 or 2014.

On the evening of July 22, the Senate voted down the House-passed version of H.R.4899, and then approved a war spending bill without the monopoly-bargaining provision. Finally, on July 27, a chastened House acquiesced to the Senate’s action, and sent a stripped-down war supplemental to President Obama’s desk.

Vast Majority of Americans Reject Monopoly Bargaining

H.R.413 and its Senate companion, S.3194, would force countless police officers, firefighters and EMT’s to accept as their monopoly-bargaining agent a union they never voted for, and want nothing to do with.

Moreover, H.R.413 and S.3194 would, in practice, force tens of thousands of first responders to pay union dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs — despite Big Labor claims to the contrary.

“Americans overwhelmingly oppose monopoly bargaining and forced union dues, period,” noted Committee President Mark Mix.

“The public certainly has no interest in backing legislation designed to help Big Labor grab monopoly-bargaining privileges over hundreds of thousands of additional employees.”

Decades of polling confirm this point. Mr. Mix cited one recent scientific nationwide survey.

This poll found that 81% of Americans who regularly vote in statewide elections believe that employees in unionized businesses should retain the right to bargain for themselves. Just 17% of regular voters believe employees should not have that right, while 2% are unsure.

“Forcing union nonmembers to accept public-safety union officials as their monopoly-bargaining agent is what H.R.413 and S.3194 are all about,” explained Mr. Mix.

“Any state law or local ordinance authorizing public-safety union bosses to bargain on behalf of their members only would get tossed in the scrapheap if either measure became law.

“And, as Service Employees International Union second-in-command Anna Burger recently boasted, H.R.413/S.3194 would ‘create a national collective,’ i.e. monopoly, ‘bargaining standard for all public workers.’

“H.R.413/S.3194 simply can’t withstand public scrutiny. And Big Labor congressional leaders know it.”

Right to Work Committee And Its Members Will Keep Turning up the Heat

“Enactment of H.R.413 or S.3194 would be disastrous, not just for independent-minded public-safety officers and Right to Work advocates, but also for taxpayers and citizens who depend on their local police and fire departments,” Mr. Mix continued.

“That’s why the National Right to Work Committee and its members can’t afford to rest on our laurels for a minute. We will keep turning up the heat in preparation for the next Capitol Hill showdown over this legislation.

“Despite their recent setback, Harold Schaitberger, Richard Trumka, and the rest of the union hierarchy are far from ready to give up on their bid to federalize public-safety union monopoly bargaining.

“A number of the senators who helped defeat the public-safety scheme last month, when they were facing intense pressure from pro-Right to Work constituents, are current or previous cosponsors of this power grab.

“Right to Work supporters shouldn’t, and won’t, make the mistake of assuming such senators will be with us if, as is likely, Congress takes up H.R.413/S.3194 again this fall.

“Freedom-loving Americans must even be prepared for a possible showdown on this legislation during a ‘lame duck’ congressional session in November or December, after the elections, but before the new House and Senate are seated.

“Enactment of H.R.413/S.3194 would deal a harsh blow to the Right to Work cause.

“I know Committee members and supporters across the country understand that fact, and will do all they can to stop this legislation.”

(Source: July 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

Just before the U.S. Congress adjourned for a week-long Independence Day recess, Big Labor House members rubber-stamped legislation that would federally impose union monopoly bargaining over state and local public-safety employees.

The legislation (H.R.413), cynically mislabeled as the “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act,” would, at a time when government budget deficits are already sky high, hobble the ability of states and localities to keep their expenditures of taxpayer dollars under control.

Incredibly, the House voted July 1 to attach this scheme to a massive spending bill that provides funding for U.S. troops. The Senate is expected to take up this war supplemental bill, with H.R.413 attached, some time this month.

H.R.413 would empower Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) bureaucrats to survey all 50 states and identify which have failed to meet the legislation’s “core standards.”

And the key “core standard” is mandatory union monopoly bargaining. Localities in all 50 states would be denied the option to refuse to grant a single public-safety union the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who don’t want to join.

Bill ‘Further Empowers An Already Strong Lobby’

Monopoly bargaining, euphemistically labeled as “exclusive representation,” would be foisted on police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide. And in most states that already authorize public-safety union monopoly bargaining, H.R.413 would widen its scope.

As Wall Street Journal reporter Kris Maher recently noted, under this legislation, if any state refused to institute monopoly bargaining and comply with other mandates, FLRA bureaucrats “would step in and implement” them themselves.

A wide spectrum of political observers, inside the D.C. Beltway and around the country, have blasted H.R.413 and its Senate companion, S.3194, sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), as a budget-busting power grab.

For example, last month both the liberal Washington Post and the conservative National Review ran editorials urging Congress to block H.R.413/S.3194.

“What this bill would do,” charged the Post’s editors, “is impose a permanent, one-size-fits-all federal solution in an area — public-sector labor relations — that has traditionally been left to the states, and where state flexibility is probably more necessary than ever. . . . The bill further empowers an already strong lobby . . . .”

The editors of National Review (online edition) were even more forthright:

“Government employees’ unions already maintain a death grip on the finances of most state and local governments, and a remarkably bad piece of legislation — the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act — threatens to tighten that stranglehold . . . .”

Of course, the fact that liberal, conservative and moderate analysts recognize H.R.413/S.3194 as bad in principle and extraordinarily ill-timed doesn’t trouble Mr. Reid and union-label Democratic Congressman Dale Kildee (Mich.), the lead sponsor of the House legislation.

Harry Reid Cannot Prevail Without GOP Collaborators

The bottom line for them is that their legislation would empower and enrich union officials who are one of the Democratic Party’s “most important constituencies,” as National Review’s editors put it.

However, Democratic politicians, despite controlling the White House and substantial majorities in both chambers of Congress, cannot make Kildee-Reid the law of the land all on their own.

At this writing, due to the death late last month of Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), Mr. Reid’s majority caucus consists of 58 senators, 56 Democrats plus pro-forced unionism “Independents” Joe Lieberman (Conn.) and Bernie Sanders (Vt.).

But, regardless of the total number of senators at any time, it takes 60 to bring up a piece of legislation for a final vote if opponents seek to block it by launching an extended debate.

And the National Right to Work Committee, which is leading the opposition to Kildee-Reid on Capitol Hill, and its Senate allies already have a plan in place to sustain an extended debate against this legislation.

That’s why Harry Reid must pick up several GOP votes, while holding on to the votes of several Democrats from strong Right to Work states, in order to ram H.R.413 through the Senate.

“At this time, six GOP senators are sponsoring S.1611, monopoly-bargaining legislation that is virtually identical to the Reid bill,” noted Right to Work President Mark Mix.

“To thwart the federalization of union monopoly control over public-safety officers, Right to Work supporters must convince at least three of these senators to back away from their support for this scheme, and also convince at least two or three Democrats to oppose H.R.413.

“One Senate Democrat, North Carolina’s Kay Hagan, has already said publicly she will oppose the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, even though she usually votes with Big Labor. She reiterated her opposition just last month.”

History Shows Appeasement Won’t Insulate GOP Politicians

“Committee leaders are hopeful that, if pro-Right to Work constituents keep raising the pressure, they can ensure that Ms. Hagan keeps her word, and that a couple of other Democrats join her in opposing H.R.413,” Mr. Mix continued.

“But that won’t be enough to defeat the Kildee-Reid bill unless several would-be GOP appeasers of Big Labor reconsider their support for expanding government union bosses’ monopoly privileges.

“Right now, freedom-loving constituents are turning up the heat on all six GOP sponsors of S.1611, especially Sens. Scott Brown [Mass.], Mike Johanns [Neb.], and Lisa Murkowski [Alaska].

“Right to Work supporters are also reminding these senators that, in 2008 alone, four GOP senators who had tried to appease Big Labor by cosponsoring the 2007-2008 version of the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill were tossed out by their constituents.

“History shows forced-unionism appeasement won’t insulate politicians from Big Labor attacks — but will anger their constituents.”

Bill Would Pave Way For Union Monopoly Control Over All Public Employees

Mr. Mix acknowledged that Right to Work supporters face an uphill battle to block H.R.413 in the Senate. But this power grab is so dangerous, he added, that Committee members must do everything possible to stop it.

“Kildee/Reid would constitute a major step towards Big Labor’s decades-old goal of enacting a federal law that foists union monopoly bargaining on front-line state and local employees of all types across America.

“As union bigwig Anna Burger, head of the ‘Change to Win’ union conglomerate, recently boasted, H.R.413/S.3194 would ‘create a national collective,’ i.e., monopoly, ‘bargaining standard for all public workers.’

“In other words, if Congress federalizes union monopoly control over public-safety employees, the federalization of union monopoly bargaining over teachers, and state and local public servants of every other kind, will be next.

“Enactment of H.R.413/S.3194 would deal a harsh blow to the Right to Work cause. I know Committee members and supporters across the country understand that fact, and will do all they can to stop this legislation.”

A Nation of Trentons

Government employees’ unions already maintain a death grip on the finances of most state and local governments, and a remarkably bad piece of legislation — the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act — threatens to tighten that stranglehold, imposing the unionization of public-safety workers in the 21 states that currently do not extend that privilege. We are not surprised that most Democrats are supporting the bill, which empowers and enriches one of their most important constituencies; we are surprised and disheartened that some Republicans are backing it.

This bill is bad policy and bad politics. It is bad policy because government employees are overpaid and overpensioned, and wider unionization will make that worse. State and local governments already heave under the burden of their swollen payrolls, while the time-bomb of unfunded government-worker pension liabilities is set to blow a multitrillion-dollar hole in state and local budgets within a few years.

Some states and municipalities are in deep crisis already, while others have managed their affairs with relative aplomb. In most cases, those jurisdictions that have come through the recent recession without descent into utter crisis have been those that enjoy the flexibility and ability to innovate that comes from having a fluid work force — which is to say, a work force that is not subject to the rigidities imposed by public-sector unions. The size of paychecks is not the only concern, or even the principal one, when it comes to the unionization of government work forces: Inflexible work rules, the politicization of the work place, and the protection of low-performing workers are equal problems, if not greater.

Congress should let states handle their own labor relations

ALL ACROSS America, state and local governments are struggling with recession-induced budget crises as revenue has plummeted and demand for services has remained high. But the issue is not only cyclical. Many public employees have been promised pay, pensions and health benefits that tax bases cannot sustain even in good times. As a result, voters and political leaders of both parties are rethinking the costs and benefits of public-sector unionism.

Except in Congress, it seems. Senate Majority Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) is pushing to federalize labor relations between state and local governments and some public-sector unions. The Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act would require all states to give police and fire unions “adequate” collective bargaining rights — as determined by the Federal Labor Relations Authority. States deemed “inadequate” could wind up in federal court. Long sought by public-safety unions, the bill is supported not only by Mr. Reid but also by Republicans, including the soon-to-retire Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.). It has a good chance of passing if the Senate can fit it on its busy calendar.

What this bill would do is impose a permanent, one-size-fits-all federal solution in an area — public-sector labor relations — that has traditionally been left to the states, and where state flexibility is probably more necessary than ever. The imposition on Virginia would be dramatic, of course, but even union-friendly Maryland, which lets each county decide whether and how to bargain with its employees, might find itself in costly, time-consuming contention with the feds. Farther afield, Colorado’s “fire protection districts,” special units of government dedicated to providing that service, would face costly collective bargaining even where firefighters and management are working harmoniously without it.

Refusal to Respond to Right to Work Survey ‘Raised Concerns’

Just a few months ago, Kentucky Secretary of State Trey Grayson was widely considered the favorite to win the GOP nomination this year for the U.S. Senate seat now held by pro-Right to Work Republican Jim Bunning, who is retiring after two terms.

A number of pundits contended that the strong support of Mitch McConnell, Kentucky’s senior U.S. senator and the head of the GOP minority in the upper chamber of Congress, would practically guarantee Mr. Grayson’s nomination.

However, the Grayson campaign made serious misjudgments during the final weeks before Kentucky’s May 18 primaries.

Most important to pro-Right to Work Kentuckians, Mr. Grayson refused to pledge to oppose several of the top power grabs now being advanced on Capitol Hill by Organized Labor, the #1 pro-Big Government special-interest group in America today.

More broadly, many voters who were deeply concerned about the rapid growth in federal spending under the George W. Bush Administration as well as under the current one became convinced Mr. Grayson lacked the intestinal fortitude to fight to reduce spending from its current stratospheric level.

‘Any Genuine Opponent of Big Government Would Eagerly Oppose’ Police/Fire Scheme

“One of the top items on Congress’s agenda this year is an intrusive federal mandate that would impair the ability of states and localities to keep their expenditures of taxpayer dollars under control,” noted National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.

“Any genuine opponent of Big Government would eagerly oppose this scheme, union bosses’ Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill [S.3194/H.R.413].

“Yet Trey Grayson refused to say a word against this destructive legislation, despite the fact that thousands and thousands of Committee members and supporters in Kentucky asked him to do so, time and time again.

“And his silence was especially disturbing because a handful of Senate Republicans are already publicly supporting the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill. Even one more could potentially make the difference.

“Fortunately, in this election Kentucky primary voters had several other candidates to choose from who pledged to oppose public-safety union monopoly bargaining and support Right to Work 100%. And one of them, opthamologist Rand Paul, was a top-tier candidate.”

In the end, Mr. Paul, who had started out the primary campaign as the distinct underdog, soundly defeated Mr. Grayson by a whopping 59% to 35% margin.

Big Government Is Big Labor’s ‘Bread and Butter’

By handing Mr. Paul a decisive victory, Kentucky primary voters sent a clear message to Capitol Hill Republicans that they want candidates who really will fight against the expansion of forced unionism and the increased cost of Big Government it brings, and not just mouth “feel good” rhetoric about this serious and rapidly growing problem.

“Trey Grayson’s refusal to respond to his Right to Work candidate survey this year, especially to the questions concerning public-sector forced unionism, clearly raised concerns that he was going to be just another ‘Big Government Republican,’” observed Mr. Mix.

“Kentucky voters were right to be concerned.

“Over the course of the past few decades, public servants, especially state and local public employees, have become Big Labor’s bread and butter.

“By 2009, union officials wielded monopoly-bargaining power over 7.5 million state and local employees, nearly 43% of all such employees nationwide, compared to just 8% of private-sector workers.

“Moreover, for many years now, Big Labor featherbedding and counterproductive work rules have sharply increased real taxpayer costs for compensation of state and local government employees.

“In fact, from 1998 to 2008 alone, taxpayers’ aggregate real costs for compensation of state and local government employees soared at a rate nearly 50% faster than the total real growth of private-sector employee compensation!”

Mr. Mix continued: “S.3194 and H.R.413, sponsored, respectively, by Big Labor Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and union-label Michigan Democratic Congressman Dale Kildee, would sock it to taxpayers again.

“This legislation would impose a new federal mandate ensuring that government union bosses get monopoly-bargaining privileges over additional hundreds of thousands of state and local public-safety employees.

“And the reason it is now on the verge of passage is that a handful of Senate Republicans are siding with Mr. Reid. In the House as well, a minority of Republicans, along with practically all Democrats, are in favor of the monopoly-bargaining bill.

“But scientific polls and multiple election results show that citizens across America overwhelmingly oppose public-sector union monopoly bargaining.

“The stinging defeat Trey Grayson suffered in Kentucky, after the Committee had notified hundreds of thousands of citizens through the mail and the Internet about his pointed refusal to oppose Reid/Kildee, is only the latest example.

“I’m cautiously optimistic the Kentucky election results will serve as a wake-up call for the D.C. establishment regarding just how deeply unpopular the Reid/Kildee legislation is.”

System That Congress Wants To Expand Is Currently Bankrupting Los Angeles

Reid-Kildee would federally impose union monopoly bargaining by denying localities the option to refuse to grant a single public-safety union the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who don’t want to join.

Monopoly bargaining, euphemistically labeled as “exclusive representation,” would be foisted on state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.

And in most states that already authorize public-safety union monopoly bargaining, S.3194/H.R.413 would widen its scope.

“In every political jurisdiction, public spending tends to grow faster than taxpayers’ incomes, rendering government costs more and more burdensome over time. But decades of experience shows public-sector monopoly bargaining greatly exacerbates this problem,” Mr. Mix commented.

“For example, this summer the skyrocketing costs of public-safety monopoly bargaining are frighteningly close to driving the once-great city of Los Angeles into insolvency. L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa [D], himself a former union organizer, has acknowledged the real possibility.

“Congress must not federalize the very system that is now bankrupting Los Angeles. It’s just that simple.”

Both Candidates in Arkansas Democrat Run-Off Back Forced Unionism

Shortly after this month’s National Right to Work Newsletter goes to press, incumbent U.S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln will face a run-off contest against Lt. Gov. Bill Halter as she seeks her Democratic Party’s nomination for a third term.

Ms. Lincoln and Mr. Halter ran neck-and-neck in Arkansas’s May 18 primary, and neither received a majority of the votes. (That is why the June 8 run-off is required under Arkansas law.) Most election observers expect the run-off will also be close.

But one thing is already clear in advance of the Lincoln-Halter showdown: The victor will have a track record of supporting forced-unionism power grabs and giving the back of the hand to the overwhelming majority of Arkansas citizens who support their Right to Work law and oppose tampering with it.

The only substantial difference between Ms. Lincoln and Mr. Halter on the forced-unionism issue is that the senator has very recently, with an eye toward the general election this fall, tried to obscure her long history of pro-forced unionism votes.

Ms. Lincoln is now suggesting to freedom-loving Arkansas employees and employers that she is an “independent” voice on labor-policy issues.

Far from it. As recently as 2007, Ms. Lincoln voted to quash a Right to Work filibuster and help Big Labor ram through its notorious “Card-Check” Forced-Unionism Bill. Fortunately, 48 other senators heeded pro-Right to Work Americans and opposed this scheme, so Ms. Lincoln and her cohorts did not prevail.

Lincoln-Backed Bill Paves Way For Dragging All State, Local Employees Into Unions

And even in the current Congress the newly “independent” Ms. Lincoln is continuing to support major forced-unionism power grabs whenever she thinks she can get away with it.

One major example is Ms. Lincoln’s move just before the Senate’s Christmas recess last year to sign on as a cosponsor of the so-called “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act” (S.1611, reintroduced this year as S.3194).

This cynically mislabeled bill would institute a federal mandate foisting union “exclusive representation” (monopoly bargaining) on state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.

It would also constitute a major step towards Big Labor’s decades-old goal of enacting a federal law that imposes union monopoly bargaining on front-line state and local employees of all types across America.

For his part, Lt. Gov. Halter secured the primary support of many top Big Labor bosses in Washington, D.C., and their lieutenants in Arkansas by vowing to be an even more predictable defender of forced union dues and union monopoly bargaining than Ms. Lincoln.

Publicly, Mr. Halter admits he intends to help union strategists ram through some version of the “card-check” bill that would make it even easier for Big Labor to grab monopoly-bargaining privileges over private-sector workers.

Privately, Mr. Halter is likely committing himself to support for an array of other special privileges for Big Labor.

Candidate Survey Is ‘One of the Committee’s Most Effective Tools’

But whoever prevails in this month’s Democratic run-off will face increasing pressure this summer and fall to repudiate forced unionism, thanks to the National Right to Work Committee’s federal candidate Survey 2010.

As longtime Committee members know, the federal candidate survey asks U.S. congressional candidates to commit themselves to oppose forced unionism consistently and support national Right to Work legislation if elected.

The survey is “one of the Committee’s most effective tools,” observed Committee Vice President Matthew Leen.

“In Arkansas, Senate candidates in both major parties already got a chance during the primaries to return their surveys and answer 100% in favor of Right to Work.

“But Right to Work supporters will again be mobilized this fall to lobby candidates to respond to their Right to Work surveys. The Democratic standard bearer, Ms. Lincoln or Mr. Halter, will be asked to join GOP Senate nominee John Boozman in pledging 100% support for Right to Work.

“The success of the survey program is key for the Committee’s future ability to defeat Big Labor power grabs in Congress and, ultimately, pass a national Right to Work law.

“For that reason, the Survey 2010 is targeting not just the Arkansas Senate race, but critical Senate and House campaigns across the country.”

In an outrageous display of intimidation, SEIU activists violated private property and stormed the home of Bank of America executive Greg Baer. When Rockville, MD police arrived they discovered two DC police cars — police cars that  escorted the law breakers to the protest. (Note: please read the Washington Examiner article for updated denials).

This is an another example of why the Police-Fire Union Monopoly Bargaining Bill is so dangerous to our security.