California politics - Employee Unions

Calif. Measure Targets Unions' Influence
By BETH FOUHY, Associated Press

[My Commentary:
I find this interesting because as a Democrat dedicated to fairness to workers, I don't disagree with proposition 75. I believe that if an employee pays into a union that at least his share of those funds going to political parties should be the parties of his choice so he should have the right to designate that choice. Granted, the union worker would be out of his mind to elect to give to the Republican party, but it should still be his choice.

I've never belonged to a union, but I recall at my workplace that every year I'd get a form from the company asking which party should get "my" share of company PAC money. In management, of course, most of the money went to the Republicans, but actually, not that much more than the Democrats received.

Of course, since democracy is a people thing, I very strongly believe that no company, corporation nor other organization should have the right to donate any amount of money to political parties. I believe that it has to come from ‘named' individuals and only to the $2000 annual limit. I do not believe that the 1st Amendment argument has any validity for any entities other than living citizens.

The limit should apply donations to any political activity whether it is at party level or an individual running for office.

Even that is a lot of money, potentially! If you consider there are one hundred million eligible voters who could each give $2,000 - that comes to $200 billion dollars!

Even that is not completely fair because there are many more wealthy Republicans who can afford the two grand limit than Democrats ...AG]

---------------/---------------
The News article:
Of all the measures Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is promoting on his special election ballot, none has energized conservatives and threatened Democrats as much as a measure to weaken the political clout of public employee unions.

The initiative would require the unions to get written permission from members each year before using their dues for political purposes. If voters approve it Nov. 8, the initiative could reduce a rich source of campaign cash for Democrats and significantly weaken labor's influence in state politics.

It's a prospect savored by Republicans, who complain that unions, particularly the powerful California Teachers Association, enjoy outsized influence over the Democrat-controlled Legislature.

Supporters of the measure point to last summer's decision by the teachers union to impose a $60 annual dues hike on its members. The money went into a $100 million campaign to fund union and Democrat attacks on Schwarzenegger's "year of reform" agenda.

Campaigning for Proposition 75, Schwarzenegger has focused his attacks on union leadership while trying not to alienate rank-and-file union members — many of whom, polls indicate, are potentially receptive to the measure.

"I belong to the Screen Actors Guild and so I'm very proud to be a union member — I believe very strongly in unions," Schwarzenegger said at a recent voter forum. However, "to have union bosses take money out of a worker's paycheck and use it for political campaigns without permission is wrong. Because that worker maybe doesn't believe in what they put the money into."

About 18 percent of California's work force is unionized, compared to 13 percent nationally, according to estimates by the California Labor Federation. Although Proposition 75 would affect only unions representing public employees, it has galvanized opposition across the state's labor movement, with workers accusing the governor and his supporters of trying to muzzle dissent.

"It's a political power grab by the big corporations. If they silence our voice, they'll have the right to do whatever they want," said Bobby Lux, a 57-year old iron worker who attended a Schwarzenegger protest rally Monday. "If we lose our voice, this country will be a two party system — the very, very rich and the very, very poor."

The most recent special election poll shows likely California voters evenly divided on the measure — 46 percent in favor and 46 percent opposed, with 8 percent undecided.

Despite the furor in California, major national unions and conservative groups have not played a visible role in this year's election. That's a contrast to 1998, when a similar California measure, Proposition 226, became a high-profile national rallying cry for both sides.


That initiative, which would have covered all unions, was rejected overwhelmingly after labor groups spent millions to defeat it.

For Proposition 75, both sides have drafted prominent national politicians to draw visibility to the campaign.

Arizona Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record) campaigned with Schwarzenegger and endorsed Proposition 75, but said the same principles should be applied to corporations.

Labor leaders brought in Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, the Democrats' 2004 presidential nominee. He said Proposition 75 "represents part of an ongoing effort by the Republican Party to create an unfair playing field, to change the balance of democracy in America."

Six states — Michigan, Ohio, Idaho, Washington, Wyoming and Utah — have passed similar union dues measures.

Supporters of Proposition 75 have labeled their initiative the "paycheck protection" measure, an effort to convey that its intentions are to protect the interests of unionized workers.

Its critics say supporters and their corporate sponsors care nothing about workers and instead seek merely to choke off unions' participation in politics. They point to an analysis by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, which showed that business interests outspent unions 24 to 1 in the 2004 election cycle.

Unions already offer members a variety of ways to express their political views and to opt out of using their dues for politics if they choose, critics of the measure argue.

"As opposed to what the purveyors of Prop. 75 say, we already have a very democratic process — unlike an Arnold, who can go to a fundraiser and raise $400,000 in a night," Pulaski said.