Neighborhood Ministries

I live just outside Bowling Green which is a small Midwestern city which is largely rural and not dominated by unions so it supports the Republican party with its conservative values. The Democratic Party has very little foothold here compared to the large industrialized cities where unions control a lot of the politics. Therefore it was surprising to learn that in records listing sources of campaign funds, the Democratic candidate running for mayor in a recent election received large amounts of campaign funds from unions across the State and even from out-of-State unions. Those organizations will not receive any benefit from their investment. It is likely they are laundering contributions from other union sources to bypass contribution limits in order to install politicians who will support their union organizing in Bowling Green. While candidates need to satisfy their constituents to stay in office, money is needed to run campaigns. One has only to follow the money to see why Democrats vote for bills favoring abortion, labor unions, and Gay rights, in spite of widespread opposition to them by the majority of voters. It is almost certain that the candidate would be more likely to support proposals that would benefit those outside sources who supplied most of their campaign funds rather than those that would benefit local people who did not support their programs. When voters are easily swayed by flashy campaigns, as many are today, Democrats cater to large contributors such as Planned Parenthood, Gays Rights groups, and labor unions as well as liberal corporations who will contribute to their campaign chests enabling them to beef up their campaigns. Democrats are able to spend 5-10 times the money of Republicans who depend primarily on donations by conservative individuals and corporations. The candidates also provide special benefits to unions over those of the average worker. If politicians don’t vote the way the voters tell them to, voters need to find someone who will. But that requires that the voter check the politician’s record and watch what they vote for. Unfortunately, few voters today bother to do that. That is why our country is in the mess it is in. Fortunately, the candidate lost, however it illustrates how determined unions are  to sway local politics, particularly in rural areas dominated by Republicans. Local elections are supposed to represent the will of the people and a large flow of money from outside gives local politicians a disadvantage.

The 1973 U.S. Supreme Court’s infamous decision in United States v. Enmons against the crew and cast of Top Chef for not hiring union people exempts union bosses from federal prosecution for coordinating campaigns of violence and extortion in pursuit of what they consider “legitimate union objectives.” Which means that unions can destroy your property and injure or kill you if it furthers the unions goal of forcing you to pay them money in order to get a high paying job. Somehow I think freedom and democracy got lost somewhere. Are violent threats and vandalism ever legitimate means? There is no “objective” that could justify vandalism, arson, assault and even murder. This decision has allowed union bosses to threaten and intimidate workers in order to force them to submit to union representation and forced dues. It has also allowed unions to engage in violent strikes, including beatings, arson, and even murder to intimidate non-union workers and prevent them from filling in while the union is on strike and has enabled them to badger State and federal legislators into providing government workers with lavish union wages and benefit packages at taxpayer expense. It has also allowed them to force large corporations to submit to union demands. Congress needs to pass a law guaranteeing Americans freedom from union violence and holding unions accountable for their actions like anyone else.

Canada is dominated by unions and labor law requires forced union dues as a condition of employment. The  Prime Minister says that the U.S. has an economic advantage because 28 of the 50 States have Right to Work Laws. He believes that the U.S. should adopt a national law promoting compulsory union dues to level the playing field. Opponents support the Right to Work laws because they feel that workers should have the right to get and hold a job without being forced to join or bankroll a union. U.S. law permits Right to Work laws that protect that right. However, Canada’s Prime Minister wants the U.S. to ban Right to Work laws as part of  renegotiating tariffs. Forced union wages and obstructive union rules are a hindrance to job creation in union dominated States. Industry is currently moving out of union dominated States to States with Right to Work laws. Forcing Right to Work States to impose mandatory union dues would not help Canada or union dominated States, it would only drive jobs overseas. A National Right to Work Act would break the power of unions to force mandatory union dues as a condition of employment. Regardless, people should not have to pay to support causes they do not agree with as they do when union dues are mandatory, and they should not have to pay the union in order to be able to work. Everyone should be free to compete for a job based on their performance, and not have to pay for the privilege of getting and keeping a job.

The National Right to Work Act has been introduced again to repeal Big Labor’s power to force workers to pay union dues just to get or keep a job. Union bosses are fighting it to protect their privileges, but they cannot afford to have it debated publicly and voted on by Congress. Currently millions of workers must surrender a part of their paycheck to get and keep a job. In closed union shops, you cannot work there unless you belong to the union. In areas where they cannot require membership in the union, they often require those who do not join to still pay dues. Those funds pay for “organizing drives” to include more people and to fund politicians who will enact bills extending the power of unions. They also fund liberal causes like Planned Parenthood, yet workers often cannot designate where the funds go or withhold funds from causes they do not support. Some States have laws allowing members to withhold funds that go for non-union activities such as funding political campaigns but  the unions often hide those funds under activities labeled as union activities. Several States have recently passed Right to work legislation freeing workers from mandatory requirements to pay dues, yet union bosses continue collecting dues in violation of the law. The unions claim that they have a right to extort protection money from workers even if they don’t belong to the union in exchange for the privilege of working. They also use threats and actual violence to terrorize workers into joining. They outlaw secret ballots when possible so they can target and intimidate workers that don’t want to join. Unions force excessive pay raises and work rules that destroy productivity and make it difficult for businesses to compete through crippling strikes, resulting in many businesses moving plants overseas and contracting out auxiliary services such as janitorial, labs, and printing, to non-union companies. Many businesses have also been forced out of business. Politicians supported by unions also enact laws which place excessive taxes and regulations on small businesses to force them out of business to limit competition to union businesses.