President Renominates Radical Union Lawyer, Senators Feel Heat
(Source: February 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)
Recently, a number of U.S. senators with pro-forced unionism track records have started to catch on to the fact that their votes in favor of corralling workers into unions will be major political liabilities the next time they try to get reelected.
Consequently, longtime Big Labor lackey senators like Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) are now trying to backpedal away from their June 2007 ballots in support of cutting off debate on the “Card-Check” Forced-Unionism Bill (then H.R.800) so that it could be rammed through the Senate.
Having seen dramatic drops in their poll numbers over the past year, and knowing their current terms end in January 2011, Ms. Lincoln and Mr. Bayh are now suggesting they would not again vote for the “card-check” bill (now S.560/H.R.1409) in its current form.
But pro-Right to Work constituents of Ms. Lincoln, Mr. Bayh, and other such ideologically “flexible” politicians have good reason to doubt the sincerity of their (political) deathbed conversions.
And within the next few weeks, freedom-loving constituents may get a better idea of whether or not senators like Ms. Lincoln and Mr. Bayh are serious about distancing themselves from their pro-forced unionism pasts, or simply blowing smoke as they quietly plan to keep doing Big Labor’s bidding.
Craig Becker: Union Monopoly Should Be Mandated, Even if Most Workers Don’t Want It
Just days after the Senate reconvened last month, President Obama resubmitted to the chamber his nomination of radical Service Employees International Union (SEIU) lawyer Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
Currently, three of the five NLRB seats are vacant. A year ago, Mr. Obama designated as board chairman former union lawyer Wilma Liebman, who once served as council for the notorious Teamster Union.
Consequently, if the Senate confirms Mr. Becker and fellow union lawyer Mark Pearce, another of the President’s pending NLRB nominations, former union lawyers will hold three of the five seats on the board.
Regardless of how they vote, Mr. Obama’s other nominee, GOP Senate staffer Brian Hayes, and George W. Bush appointee Peter Schaumber will be able to do very little to prevent the union-lawyer majority from creatively “reinterpreting” federal labor law to make it more pro-forced unionism.
“The NLRB interprets and administers federal labor laws covering over 90% of businesses and private-sector employees,” commented National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.
“When a President nominates a forced-unionism extremist who would often cast deciding votes on the board, responsible senators will vote to block the nomination.
“And Craig Becker is, without a doubt, an extremist. Over the years, he has publicly acknowledged believing that any employee or employer efforts to resist unionization of a workplace are unacceptable.
“For example, in one ‘labor studies’ journal article, Mr. Becker dismissed the notion that workers should have any say whatsoever, whether as individuals or collectively by secret ballot or ‘card check,’ over whether or not they are unionized.
“Federal policy should not acknowledge employees’ ‘choice to remain unrepresented,’ contended Mr. Becker.
“Their only choice, he explained, should be over which set of union officials get ‘exclusive’ power to negotiate their wages, benefits, and work rules.”
Committee’s ‘Becker Alert’ Has Helped Mobilize Opposition to Nominee
Ever since the President first announced last spring his intention to put Mr. Becker on the NLRB, the Committee has led the charge against the nomination.
Even before the Becker nomination was formally submitted to the Senate last July, the Committee had posted on its web site a video “Becker Alert” sounding the alarm about his radical views.
Subsequently, several business and citizen groups, as well as congressional staff members, used this video as evidence for why the nomination should be opposed.
“The Committee strongly opposed the Becker nomination from the outset. Since then, a number of other major groups have enlisted in the fight,” said Mr. Mix.
“Every senator has now been put on notice: A vote for Craig Becker, just as much as a vote for S.560, is a vote for union monopoly.”
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.
What is the response of Big Labor politicians in Washington, D.C.? Sadly, they appear determined to make matters worse.
