Dems Readying For the "Nuclear Option" In The Lame Duck Session
As we've reported for many months, EFCA (the Employee Free Choice Act) is not dead.
It should be dead. But it is not dead.
Why?
Because of the period between the elections in November and the seating of a new Congress in January, 2011.
Even the most optimistic Democrats know they are about to be taken to slaughter by the General Public in November but they also know that they remain in Congress, even if they lose, until January.
Hence, the "lame-duck" session where the losers have nothing left to lose and can vote their consciences or at least pay back those whom they owe.
Which brings us to EFCA. The threat is to resurrect EFCA after the elections in November during the lame-duck session. It would pass Congress by a large majority and, depending on who wins and who loses in the Senate races, a possibility that it might pass there also. The chances of President Obama signing it if it hits his desk are 100%.
A good example of other legislation recently proposed in anticipation of the losers electing what we'll call the "nuclear option" is California Congressman Brad Sherman's (D) legislative proposal to repeal the “Right-to-Work” laws in 22 states. With less than a month before the mid-term elections and five weeks before a lame-duck session in Congress, Sherman introduced legislation that would otherwise be laughed out of Washington. (Note: there are 22 states in the U.S. that have laws where workers who are employed at companies that are unionized have a choice whether or not to join or pay the union. These states are known as Right-to-Work states. And in the 28 Non-Right-to-Work states (also called union security states), it is legal for a union to negotiate a “union (income) security clause” that requires all workers covered by the union to pay the union does or ‘agency fees’ as a condition of employment. If the workers refuse to pay the union, under a “union (income) security clause,” the union can have them fired from their jobs. The point of this legislation is to require every employee in a union environment to join the union and pay dues, regardless of their personal wishes or beliefs.
This is a clear finger in the face of the voters who have opposed both EFCA and have supported "right to work" laws for more than 50 years.
In the end, politics is not about satisfying the majority. It is about satisfying who contributes. And that is why we must remain vigilant against attempts by the "lame ducks" in November from changing the future of America for many years to come.
It should be dead. But it is not dead.
Why?
Because of the period between the elections in November and the seating of a new Congress in January, 2011.
Even the most optimistic Democrats know they are about to be taken to slaughter by the General Public in November but they also know that they remain in Congress, even if they lose, until January.
Hence, the "lame-duck" session where the losers have nothing left to lose and can vote their consciences or at least pay back those whom they owe.
Which brings us to EFCA. The threat is to resurrect EFCA after the elections in November during the lame-duck session. It would pass Congress by a large majority and, depending on who wins and who loses in the Senate races, a possibility that it might pass there also. The chances of President Obama signing it if it hits his desk are 100%.
A good example of other legislation recently proposed in anticipation of the losers electing what we'll call the "nuclear option" is California Congressman Brad Sherman's (D) legislative proposal to repeal the “Right-to-Work” laws in 22 states. With less than a month before the mid-term elections and five weeks before a lame-duck session in Congress, Sherman introduced legislation that would otherwise be laughed out of Washington. (Note: there are 22 states in the U.S. that have laws where workers who are employed at companies that are unionized have a choice whether or not to join or pay the union. These states are known as Right-to-Work states. And in the 28 Non-Right-to-Work states (also called union security states), it is legal for a union to negotiate a “union (income) security clause” that requires all workers covered by the union to pay the union does or ‘agency fees’ as a condition of employment. If the workers refuse to pay the union, under a “union (income) security clause,” the union can have them fired from their jobs. The point of this legislation is to require every employee in a union environment to join the union and pay dues, regardless of their personal wishes or beliefs.
This is a clear finger in the face of the voters who have opposed both EFCA and have supported "right to work" laws for more than 50 years.
In the end, politics is not about satisfying the majority. It is about satisfying who contributes. And that is why we must remain vigilant against attempts by the "lame ducks" in November from changing the future of America for many years to come.
posted by Jim Karger at 3:15 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home