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.

Right to Work Laws  While Democrats claim to support worker’s rights, we are seeing a lot of ads from time to time, extolling the benefits which unions have given us and telling people that the “right to work” movement threatens their communities. While the unions did a lot of good to bring safety to the work place, raise wages, and break the power of tyrannical companies, they have become tyrants themselves. They aren’t run as a democracy. They are run by union bosses who use the union dues to support politicians who in turn pass laws benefiting the unions. As union bosses gained control over politicians, they began supporting other things such as abortion even though the majority of their members opposed it. Because of laws in many States, workers have no voice in how their dues are spent. While some States allow members to opt out of dues which support political candidates, most States don’t allow that. As the union bosses have gained power, they have used union funds to gain control over local, State, and national politicians. Politicians, backed by union funds, have expanded laws supporting causes, like abortion, that the union bosses want, in spite of the fact that many of their members are opposed to it. Union bosses, working with abortion providers and Gay rights groups have united behind the Democratic party to push their agenda, in spite of the fact that their members predominantly oppose those issues. Democratic politicians can often outspend their Republican rivals as much as 4-10 times. As industry declines, unions are declining and so they are trying to expand their power over their members and the industries they control. In fact, unions have been preying upon those in other occupations, who are unhappy with making so much less than union workers, in order to to expand their power into new industries. Many cities, and some States, like Michigan, are more controlled by union bosses than by the votes of their people. “Right to Work” laws abolish mandatory union membership and dues allowing workers to work without belonging to the union or paying dues to support causes they don’t believe in. The only thing they threaten is the union’s control over workers.

A-Q President Biden and liberals in Congress are continuing to push the infrastructure bill in spite of its massive expense and extensive pork barrel spending designed to entice people to support the party. The bill contains dangerous clauses designed to advance the power and reach of the unions. It would abolish the Right to Work laws in those States where they exist and would give the unions complete control of the federal, State and local governments, as well as complete control of the corporations where they currently exist. It would be impossible to get a government job or a job in a major industry without belonging to the union Such control violates the American ideal of equal opportunity for all and the Christian belief that all men are endowed by their creator with certain rights including that of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Men should be free to join such unions if they feel the union can help them better themselves but should not be forced to join them if they want to work. In addition, members are forced to pay union dues. While some of the dues support the union, a lot of those dues go to support liberal politicians and liberal causes even though the members believe they are morally wrong and they have no say where their dues go.

Democrats say they support unions and worker’s rights. In the beginning, the factories had a lot of control over workers and worked them long hours for low pay. You either did what they said or got fired. There were always people willing to take your place. The unions did a lot of good in the beginning because they could pressure the companies into making concessions by threatening to shut down production. The unions were able to help the workers by forcing companies to shorten the work week, limit time worked per day, and provide workers with decent wages. However, as the unions gained power, they began pushing wages higher and higher. Wages increases forced increases in the cost of goods they produced which hurt those who were not in the union. In addition, in States like Michigan where the economy was dependent on industry which was dominated by the unions, wage increases prevented companies from competing with non-union companies in other States, forcing many companies to close down, move out of State, or even move overseas to stay competitive. In the end, the unions cost many of those workers their jobs and left Michigan and similar States near bankruptsy. While the unions cry about all the lost jobs, they refuse to acknowledge that they were responsible for the loss of jobs.