EFCA in trouble in Senate

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Down with the EFCA!

[Associate Justice PiT]

I'd be one of those dickish Democrats who'd vote against it no matter what, haha.  Although Considering labor is spending, what, 80 millionish, and Business is spending probably at least twice that to fight this bill, I might be tempted to announce I'll vote for whichever side blatantly wastes less money in this dire economy.


For the record, business is surprisingly winning despite the huge Senatorial advantage the Democrats have.  They've already managed to frame this debate as whether intimidated employees have the right to have anonymous voting or not.

I'm not surprised, as I have stated earlier.  60 votes is a high threshold for a controversial measure and not only is Franken stymied but Kennedy is largely unavailable.  There is no shortage of highly business friendly/lukewarm to labor senators in the Democratic Caucus.

The strategic question for labor is if they should agree to a watered down version now which Landrieu, Pryor, Lincoln and Specter would probably sign onto or if they should wait for post-2010 and go for broke.  If something isn't passed by Obama's reelection in 2012, there will be hell to pay.

     Not only that, but the Democrats control the large majority of seats up in 2012. They basically can't gain more than 1-2 seats at that point.

[Associate Justice PiT]

It's worth noting that unions can be eliminated in the workplace without a secret ballot. For those of you who oppose this, would you support changing that as well?

I notice this question drew no responses and thus must have gotten lost in the shuffle.

     I guess someone should respond. Anyway, I oppose changing it, as I oppose the notion of labor unions existing in today's economy.

[Associate Justice PiT]

It's worth noting that unions can be eliminated in the workplace without a secret ballot. For those of you who oppose this, would you support changing that as well?

I notice this question drew no responses and thus must have gotten lost in the shuffle.

     I guess someone should respond. Anyway, I oppose changing it, as I oppose the notion of labor unions existing in today's economy.

"Today's economy" as we know it would never have existed without unions.

But I do appreciate your honesty. The real motivation behind defeating this bill is in creating greater imbalance in the labor-management relationship, not in trying to keep it in balance as some supporters have claimed.

     I know today's economy would never have existed without unions. They were useful at one time for protecting the rights of workers, but the government does that well enough today, & the people have come to expect a certain level of equity. I strongly doubt that if unions just disappeared things like weekends & 8-hour work days would disappear without massive public uprising occurring as a result.