Home › Blogs › Warner Todd Huston's blog ›

These Are the People Supporting EFCA

Submitted by Warner Todd Huston on Fri, 02/27/2009 - 07:05

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), the union friendly law currently sitting idle in Congress awaiting a Big Labor financed president to get around to addressing it, has some very interesting supporters. We've been told, of course, that we shouldn't worry about Barack Obama and his followers, that they are just as American as anyone else. That claim of red-blooded Americanness is a bit hard to reconcile, however, where it concerns the EFCA.

While taking a small uptick in numbers the last few years, union membership has been down compared to the heyday of union labor in the US. Unions backed Obama with many millions of dollars during the campaign and have been keenly interested in enacting the EFCA, a bill that will help grow union membership in the country. They expect pay back for supporting Obama and he's pledged to give it to them.

The chief aspect of this bill is the "card check" feature that will tend to eliminate the right of prospective union members from voting for or against the union in the most common process of western democracy; the secret ballot. Future workers will be forced to openly declare their choice of pro or anti union by signing a public card. This public declaration leaves every voter open to any form of intimidation and this is why unions want this bill passed. It will be all the easier to force new members to say "yes" to unionism.

But, it isn't just union thugs that are supporting the unAmerican ideals inherent in this bill. Communists and socialists are too. And by that I mean communists in the United States. (I won't call them "American communists" because it is impossible to be both at the same time)

For instance, the North Texas branch of the International Socialist Organization (ISO) is passing out fliers (see image here) in support of the EFCA.

The disgusting image of the commie Jesus I used above is from their MySpace photos page where one can also see photos from their meetings.

So, this serves as a good illustration of the sort of people that support the EFCA. If the communists are for it, how could any true American join them?

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

1
Your rating: None Average: 1 (4 votes)

Comments

These are the people opposed to EFCA

Submitted by NextRightNando on Fri, 02/27/2009 - 11:35.

Bank of America and AIG are using TARP funds to lobby against it.

If they are against it, how bad can it be?

This Republican supports EFCA

Submitted by davidfarrar on Fri, 02/27/2009 - 22:57.

You can't lose a right you ain't got and you never had.

I challenge anyone who is against this legislation to show me where in present law employees have a "right" to a secret ballot when it comes to voting on unionization.

Come on Huston,  I'm calling you out on this one. Don't sulk away to your own forum after posting these lies here on this one and God knows how many others.  Stand up and defend your post like a man.  

If, and when, Huston finds enough cajones to respond...I'll be waiting. If he doesn't, I rest my case on the grounds that uncontested testimony is the truth, or as close to it as we here are ever going to get.

ex animo

davidfarrar

You crack me up. Were your

Submitted by Warner Todd Huston on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 04:19.

You crack me up. Were your oh, so harsh words supposed to mean something to me? Was I supposed to feel chastized because you are so smart? Am I somehow obligated to speak to the likes of you? Do you govern my life, pay my salary, indluence my family? Or are you just some idiot on the Internet? What do you think?

So, since your premise is that people don't have "rights," prove your case. Why is it you are so against people having rights?

Still, I don't think you understand the difference between the natural rights I was talking about and what you imagine is statute.

But, I am intrigued. WHY is it that YOU agree with the communists that Americans should have no right to vote on their own status?

Come on big guy. Why would a purported Republican be against people having a say in their own lives? Or is it that you really aren't a Republican at all. Is it that you are just some fool on the Internet pretending like so many other little fellas do?

Knock it off

Submitted by Paleo-Skeptic on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 12:26.

David's been here a long time.  He's one of the spending hawks around here.

WTH, you seem to have an ax to grind with unions.  But your one-size-fits-all approach is unrealistic (that's one of the nicer terms I can think of for it).

I'm a member of a trade union.

I also served in the USN under Reagan.  Went to basic in Orlando, A-school at Keesler AFB.  Received special training as a part of an all-volunteer duty assignment.

Do you really think that I am a communist?

Your terms are so broad as to be unmanageable.

 

My Dear Mr. Huston,

Submitted by davidfarrar on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 20:12.

 

under present law, it is the employer, not the worker, that has the "right" to call for a secrete ballot of their workers to express their choice over unionization. Under the EFCA amendments, the worker, not the employer, will have the right to decide how to express their own choice over unionization: either through the card-check process OR through the NLRB election process.

So you see, Mr. Huston; since we both support the Republican party's political platform affirming the worker's "natural" right to voluntarily participate in labor organizations and to bargain collectively, corporate Republicans should not pursue their own political agenda in opposing EFCA legislation but support it, as do many grassroot Republicans.

ex animo

davidfarrar

I've asked this before

Submitted by artigiano on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 21:17.

Last time I posted this question I got no response. So I'm still puzzled.

Given that labor unions represent a very large pool of voters, and trial lawyers represent a very large pool of political donors, why are almost all elected Republicans reflexively anti both groups?

What is it about them and their aims that is not in line with Republicanism?

It's not good enough to say "They always support Dems, so we are against them." That's meaningless circular logic.

Different types

Submitted by Paleo-Skeptic on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 21:56.

I'm a member of a trade union.

I don't know of one single member that is a Democrat.  Of course, the guys in the office talk about Dems, but they're paper shufflers.  The guys in the field are almost all Republicans.

That said, not all unions are trade unions.

That is, in a trade union, you serve an apprenticeship from 2 to 5 years, then you turn out as a journeyman.  At that time, it is accepted that you have a trade-- not until then.

Compare that to the AFT or the AFSCME.

Those are people that I love to hate. 

It's because our party isn't governed by its political platform.

Submitted by davidfarrar on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 21:43.

It is governed by one wing of the party only, the corporate wing. Our party has been held hostage by the corporate wing of the party so long, I am not sure if we can ever regain a semblance of political balance.

I know what our corporate wing is thinking even now,"All we have to do is demonize Obama significantly enough and the grassroots will be hollering for us to come in and take over again, without having to share power."

ex animo

davidfarrar