http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2012/05/03/cmnea-submits-petition-elect-teacher-representative/
Columbia Missourian
Thursday, May 3, 2012 | 3:44 p.m. CDT; updated 3:53 p.m. CDT, Thursday, May 3, 2012
BY ABIGAIL GEIGER
COLUMBIA — Columbia teachers will likely vote in the fall on a proposal to elect a teacher group to collectively bargain with the district, Columbia Public Schools Superintendent Chris Belcher said.
The Columbia Missouri National Education Association, one teacher group in Columbia, submitted an election petition Friday to the district to further a collective bargaining policy approved in January.
CMNEA's submission sets the foundation for other labor unions and associations to have a more active role in the district’s dialogue with teachers. Other teacher groups have at least 20 days to send their submissions to the district to be considered for the election.
A school board notice said that the deadline for teacher groups to send in submissions is 4:30 p.m. on June 1.
Belcher said once this time period has passed, the submissions will be reviewed for completion by a "designated person" who is not part of a teacher group or the district. Then, the school board will set a date to review them. Belcher said the school board will probably see the submissions this summer.
The vote:
If the petition is approved, the vote would occur in the fall. District spokeswoman Michelle Baumstark said the district is still in the process of defining whether teachers will be the only employees eligible to vote.
Teachers would have the option to vote for a group to be exclusive representatives or to maintain the current “meet and confer” system, which is a less formal communication between teacher groups and the district. Either option needs to receive 50 percent, or a simple majority, to win.
Policy change sparks idea for exclusive representation
In January, the issue of collective bargaining was put at the forefront of teacher and district discussions when the school board passed two policies, HA and HH.
Baumstark said these policies work as guidelines for how the district approaches the collective bargaining process. She said the district uses policy HA as a guideline for the "meet and confer" system.
Policy HH proposes to use one teacher group, such as CMNEA, as an "exclusive representative" for the teachers to address salaries, benefits and other conditions of employment with the district.
Belcher and Baumstark said policy HH comes in response to a 2007 Missouri Supreme Court decision that made collective bargaining legal for teachers and other public employees. Old labor precedents set in the 1940s did not include teachers and applied collective bargaining only to private sector workers.
Baumstark said that once the court made its decision, Missouri school districts expected the state legislature to create a law defining how teachers would be represented for collective bargaining. No such law was proposed, so districts took the issue into their own hands and created their own policies.
Helping to 'keep the conversation flowing'
CMNEA president Susan McClintic said elections for exclusive representation for teachers are difficult because there is no official law that defines the process. She said groups such as CMNEA serve as a way to determine the district's and the teachers' responsibilities. They are there to keep the conversation flowing.
"What we think we can bring to the table are discussions that are driven by employees and employers and also have experts at the table," McClintic. "Then you get to have the people that matter at the table, which can essentially create better learning environments for children."
Belcher said he’s concerned policy HH could make collective bargaining and teacher representation in the district too bureaucratic. He said he is afraid that the dialogue between the district and the teachers might not be as inclusive or open with the proposal.
Moreover, he said, the collective bargaining process needs to focus solely on the teachers and what they want.
"This is truly the teachers' decision," Belcher said. "It's not my decision, it's not the board of education's. It's the teachers'."
Friday, May 4, 2012
Friday, April 27, 2012
More on ALEC. They've been writing legislation for Missouri legislators for a long time. Anti-labor legislation is one of their priorities.
Study: ALEC has 'secretive influence' in Missouri statehouse
JASON HANCOCK
The Kansas City Star
At least 30 bills have been introduced in the Missouri statehouse in recent years that are nearly identical to legislation originally written by a conservative organization whose membership includes some of the country’s largest corporations.
A study released Monday by the liberal group Progress Missouri purported to detail how the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, has “exerted extraordinary and secretive influence in the Missouri legislature and other states.”
Nearly 50 current and former legislators in the Show-Me State have ties to ALEC, including House Speaker Steven Tilley, House Majority Leader Tim Jones and Senate President Pro Tem Rob Mayer.
“Missouri legislators have a right to belong to any organization they want to,” said Bob Quinn, executive director of the Missouri Association for Social Welfare and a former state representative. “But in the interest of transparency, it’s important we be able to point to how ideas from ALEC are translated into proposals here in Missouri.”
Tilley, who is serving his last term in the House due to term limits, dismissed allegations of undue influence. He said he can’t remember ever attending an ALEC meeting.
“I may have gone to one,” he said. “If the leader of the Republican Party in the Missouri House doesn’t remember ever going to an ALEC meeting, that should answer your question that we’re not on the puppet master’s strings.”
Interest groups on nearly every issue try to shape legislation, and many of the most influential have a hand in writing bills. To its supporters, ALEC is simply a research tool that allows legislators to talk with colleagues from around the country and companies that do business in their state to brainstorm ideas they can bring back with them.
“I know a few members who go to ALEC and say they enjoy it and get positives from it,” Tilley said. “But no one can make the accusation that I run the House based on what ALEC tells me to do.”
To its critics, however, ALEC is a means for corporations to write legislation in closed-door meetings with lawmakers far away from the state capitol.
“These are bills written by corporations for corporations,” said Sean Soendker Nicholson, executive director of Progress Missouri.
But while numerous bills identical to ALEC’s model legislation have been introduced in Missouri, very few have become law. Most ALEC-inspired bills that have found success in Missouri were nonbinding resolutions.
Soendker Nicholson said that although the bills haven’t become law, that doesn’t detract from the fact that lawmakers are outsourcing their legislative responsibilities to an outside organization.
In Missouri, bills dealing with labor laws, charter schools, voting rights and a range of other issues have been introduced in recent years that are virtually identical to ALEC model legislation.
One example of a successful bill was the 2010 ballot initiative aimed at keeping Missouri from enforcing the federal mandate to purchase health insurance. The bill’s legislative sponsor, Sen. Jane Cunningham, a Republican, made no secret that she got the idea directly from ALEC.
ALEC touts itself as a free-market advocacy group that brings lawmakers and corporations together to craft model legislation. State lawmakers pay $50 a year to join. Corporate members pay as much as $25,000.
But over the past three years, documents filed with the Internal Revenue Service show that only around $250,000 of the $20 million ALEC has raised has come from state legislators.
Its corporate membership has included national companies such as Koch Industries Inc., Exxon Mobil Corp., Wal-Mart and local entities such as Kansas City Power and Light Co.
To encourage attendance at their conferences, where the work drafting model legislation is done, ALEC offers “scholarships” to members to pay for transportation, hotel and meals. In addition to working groups that actually craft the organization’s model legislation, lawmakers are treated to corporate-sponsored events, such as golf tournaments and evening receptions.
Last summer, more than a dozen Missouri lawmakers and their families and about 30 lobbyists for Missouri companies and political organizations gathered in New Orleans for ALEC’s annual conference.
In recent weeks, ALEC has faced a backlash following criticism of the “Stand Your Ground” laws after the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Florida. The group had lobbied for similar laws in other states.
Numerous corporations, including McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, and Kraft Foods Inc., have since announced they will no longer support ALEC.
In a statement released earlier this month, ALEC executive director Ron Scheberle dismissed the “well-funded intimidation campaign against corporate members.”
“Our members join ALEC because we connect state legislators with other state legislators and with job creators in their states,” Scheberle said. “They join because we support pro-business policies that promote innovation and spur local and national competitiveness. They’re ALEC members because they’re more interested in solutions than rhetoric.”
Study: ALEC has 'secretive influence' in Missouri statehouse
JASON HANCOCK
The Kansas City Star
At least 30 bills have been introduced in the Missouri statehouse in recent years that are nearly identical to legislation originally written by a conservative organization whose membership includes some of the country’s largest corporations.
A study released Monday by the liberal group Progress Missouri purported to detail how the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, has “exerted extraordinary and secretive influence in the Missouri legislature and other states.”
Nearly 50 current and former legislators in the Show-Me State have ties to ALEC, including House Speaker Steven Tilley, House Majority Leader Tim Jones and Senate President Pro Tem Rob Mayer.
“Missouri legislators have a right to belong to any organization they want to,” said Bob Quinn, executive director of the Missouri Association for Social Welfare and a former state representative. “But in the interest of transparency, it’s important we be able to point to how ideas from ALEC are translated into proposals here in Missouri.”
Tilley, who is serving his last term in the House due to term limits, dismissed allegations of undue influence. He said he can’t remember ever attending an ALEC meeting.
“I may have gone to one,” he said. “If the leader of the Republican Party in the Missouri House doesn’t remember ever going to an ALEC meeting, that should answer your question that we’re not on the puppet master’s strings.”
Interest groups on nearly every issue try to shape legislation, and many of the most influential have a hand in writing bills. To its supporters, ALEC is simply a research tool that allows legislators to talk with colleagues from around the country and companies that do business in their state to brainstorm ideas they can bring back with them.
“I know a few members who go to ALEC and say they enjoy it and get positives from it,” Tilley said. “But no one can make the accusation that I run the House based on what ALEC tells me to do.”
To its critics, however, ALEC is a means for corporations to write legislation in closed-door meetings with lawmakers far away from the state capitol.
“These are bills written by corporations for corporations,” said Sean Soendker Nicholson, executive director of Progress Missouri.
But while numerous bills identical to ALEC’s model legislation have been introduced in Missouri, very few have become law. Most ALEC-inspired bills that have found success in Missouri were nonbinding resolutions.
Soendker Nicholson said that although the bills haven’t become law, that doesn’t detract from the fact that lawmakers are outsourcing their legislative responsibilities to an outside organization.
In Missouri, bills dealing with labor laws, charter schools, voting rights and a range of other issues have been introduced in recent years that are virtually identical to ALEC model legislation.
One example of a successful bill was the 2010 ballot initiative aimed at keeping Missouri from enforcing the federal mandate to purchase health insurance. The bill’s legislative sponsor, Sen. Jane Cunningham, a Republican, made no secret that she got the idea directly from ALEC.
ALEC touts itself as a free-market advocacy group that brings lawmakers and corporations together to craft model legislation. State lawmakers pay $50 a year to join. Corporate members pay as much as $25,000.
But over the past three years, documents filed with the Internal Revenue Service show that only around $250,000 of the $20 million ALEC has raised has come from state legislators.
Its corporate membership has included national companies such as Koch Industries Inc., Exxon Mobil Corp., Wal-Mart and local entities such as Kansas City Power and Light Co.
To encourage attendance at their conferences, where the work drafting model legislation is done, ALEC offers “scholarships” to members to pay for transportation, hotel and meals. In addition to working groups that actually craft the organization’s model legislation, lawmakers are treated to corporate-sponsored events, such as golf tournaments and evening receptions.
Last summer, more than a dozen Missouri lawmakers and their families and about 30 lobbyists for Missouri companies and political organizations gathered in New Orleans for ALEC’s annual conference.
In recent weeks, ALEC has faced a backlash following criticism of the “Stand Your Ground” laws after the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Florida. The group had lobbied for similar laws in other states.
Numerous corporations, including McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, and Kraft Foods Inc., have since announced they will no longer support ALEC.
In a statement released earlier this month, ALEC executive director Ron Scheberle dismissed the “well-funded intimidation campaign against corporate members.”
“Our members join ALEC because we connect state legislators with other state legislators and with job creators in their states,” Scheberle said. “They join because we support pro-business policies that promote innovation and spur local and national competitiveness. They’re ALEC members because they’re more interested in solutions than rhetoric.”
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Conservative group’s clout is seen in legislation
Corporations writing the laws, then buying legislators to pass them. Find out more at http://alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed.
By RUDI KELLER
Columbia Tribune
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
JEFFERSON CITY — For more than an hour yesterday, the subject of which is supreme — the United States government or Missouri — was debated on the state House floor.
When it was over, the House had decided it was more powerful and gave first-round approval to a bill that makes it a crime for any federal employee to attempt to enforce the Affordable Care Act — the federal health care overhaul named "Obamacare" by Republicans.
The 109-41 vote was an example of a growing view among conservatives that states have the right to nullify federal laws that are viewed as violations of the division of power between states and the government in Washington, D.C.
"It is our duty as state legislators, as the sovereign state of Missouri, to uphold our end of the Constitution," said Rep. Kurt Bahr, R-St. Charles. "When the federal government oversteps its bounds, it is our duty to stand up and say that is not something you are allowed to do, to enforce that act on our citizens."
The issue of state versus federal sovereignty, and a host of other issues on the conservative agenda, is a major part of the legislative agenda pushed by the American Legislative Exchange Council. The group, funded by corporate donations and dues from lawmakers across the country, is coming under increasing fire for its role in promoting the "stand your ground" law cited as a defense for George Zimmerman in the Florida slaying of Trayvon Martin.
ALEC also is deeply involved in efforts to roll back hard-won rights, said Sean Nicholson of Progress Missouri, which held a news conference yesterday calling on lawmakers to reject ALEC-inspired bills. The bills cited include "right to work" and voter ID measures.
"Missourians do not elect corporations and their lawyers to write laws for their benefit," Nicholson said.
The report issued by Progress Missouri named 40 current or former lawmakers who have pushed bills modeled on ALEC legislation. Nicholson noted that several major corporations, including Coca-Cola and McDonald's, have recently withdrawn funding from ALEC.
ALEC did not return a call seeking comment. But in an article last week in USA Today, ALEC spokeswoman Kaitlyn Buss said the attacks on the organization are about more than concerns over the "stand your ground" law.
"This is an attempt to silence our organization," she said. "We are a target because our opponents believe they have the opportunity to attack an effective, successful organization that promotes free-market, limited-government policies that they disagree with."
Of the legislation cited by Nicholson, only one measure listed as ALEC-inspired — the "castle doctrine," which is similar to Florida's "stand your ground" law — has become law in Missouri.
Claiming the state has the right to nullify or ignore federal law under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is a major ALEC goal. That political theory almost led to civil war in 1832 when South Carolina refused to collect federal import taxes. That history didn't stop the Missouri House from approving Bahr's bill.
Bahr's bill would make it a misdemeanor for an "official, agent or employee" of the federal government to attempt to enforce the Affordable Care Act. Those who are subject to enforcement attempts could sue.
"Where can you show me in law where a state can arrest or interfere with a federal officer in the business of enforcing a federal statute?" Rep. Chris Kelly, D-Columbia, asked Bahr on the floor.
"I say yes," Bahr replied.
"We all know that is not true," Kelly said.
By RUDI KELLER
Columbia Tribune
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
JEFFERSON CITY — For more than an hour yesterday, the subject of which is supreme — the United States government or Missouri — was debated on the state House floor.
When it was over, the House had decided it was more powerful and gave first-round approval to a bill that makes it a crime for any federal employee to attempt to enforce the Affordable Care Act — the federal health care overhaul named "Obamacare" by Republicans.
The 109-41 vote was an example of a growing view among conservatives that states have the right to nullify federal laws that are viewed as violations of the division of power between states and the government in Washington, D.C.
"It is our duty as state legislators, as the sovereign state of Missouri, to uphold our end of the Constitution," said Rep. Kurt Bahr, R-St. Charles. "When the federal government oversteps its bounds, it is our duty to stand up and say that is not something you are allowed to do, to enforce that act on our citizens."
The issue of state versus federal sovereignty, and a host of other issues on the conservative agenda, is a major part of the legislative agenda pushed by the American Legislative Exchange Council. The group, funded by corporate donations and dues from lawmakers across the country, is coming under increasing fire for its role in promoting the "stand your ground" law cited as a defense for George Zimmerman in the Florida slaying of Trayvon Martin.
ALEC also is deeply involved in efforts to roll back hard-won rights, said Sean Nicholson of Progress Missouri, which held a news conference yesterday calling on lawmakers to reject ALEC-inspired bills. The bills cited include "right to work" and voter ID measures.
"Missourians do not elect corporations and their lawyers to write laws for their benefit," Nicholson said.
The report issued by Progress Missouri named 40 current or former lawmakers who have pushed bills modeled on ALEC legislation. Nicholson noted that several major corporations, including Coca-Cola and McDonald's, have recently withdrawn funding from ALEC.
ALEC did not return a call seeking comment. But in an article last week in USA Today, ALEC spokeswoman Kaitlyn Buss said the attacks on the organization are about more than concerns over the "stand your ground" law.
"This is an attempt to silence our organization," she said. "We are a target because our opponents believe they have the opportunity to attack an effective, successful organization that promotes free-market, limited-government policies that they disagree with."
Of the legislation cited by Nicholson, only one measure listed as ALEC-inspired — the "castle doctrine," which is similar to Florida's "stand your ground" law — has become law in Missouri.
Claiming the state has the right to nullify or ignore federal law under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is a major ALEC goal. That political theory almost led to civil war in 1832 when South Carolina refused to collect federal import taxes. That history didn't stop the Missouri House from approving Bahr's bill.
Bahr's bill would make it a misdemeanor for an "official, agent or employee" of the federal government to attempt to enforce the Affordable Care Act. Those who are subject to enforcement attempts could sue.
"Where can you show me in law where a state can arrest or interfere with a federal officer in the business of enforcing a federal statute?" Rep. Chris Kelly, D-Columbia, asked Bahr on the floor.
"I say yes," Bahr replied.
"We all know that is not true," Kelly said.
Friday, April 6, 2012
In Midwest, GOP shrinks from union battles
Lesson learned: When they try to take our union rights, we have to raise hell and make them pay.
Apr 6, 2012
By PATRICK CONDON
Associated Press
ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) -- Fifteen months after taking control of Minnesota's Legislature, Republicans have put a gay marriage ban on this November's ballot, moved to expand gun rights and cast dozens of votes to cut state spending. But there's one issue where they failed to get traction: watering down the strength of organized labor with a right-to-work law.
The problem isn't so much opposition from Democrats. And it isn't a lack of enthusiasm for the idea, which many conservatives consider essential for creating a business-friendly economic climate. The problem lies with Republicans who fear triggering a huge rebellion among opposition labor unions and sending a surge of sympathetic voters to the polls in November to vote Democratic.
In Minnesota and elsewhere across the Midwest, the question of what to do about the right-to-work issue is pitting Republican against Republican, straining relationships among longtime allies and weighing cherished ideals against political tactics.
"We wait and we wait and we wait, and then if we get the opportunity and we fail to take it, then the issue is done," said Michelle Benson, a frustrated Republican state senator from suburban Minneapolis who sounded off after House and Senate leaders' recently decided not to move on the issue.
The passage of a right-to-work measure in Indiana this year emboldened supporters in Minnesota, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin and Missouri to try to carry the initiative across across the Rust Belt. But many GOP leaders were instead more impressed by the furor that the unions kicked up in defeat. Throngs of protestors mobbed the state capitol in Indianapolis and Democratic lawmakers periodically disrupted the legislative session with boycotts. Huge demonstrations also came after Wisconsin Republicans stripped public employees of collective bargaining rights last year.
"Whether you agree with right to work or not, you've got to agree there'll be millions of dollars coming in from other states, and thousands of people," said Minnesota state Rep. Tony Cornish, a Republican who opposes trying to pass a bill. "Buses emptying out, banners, people camping."
The Minnesota proposal had one committee hearing last month - provoking a labor protest and AFL-CIO sponsored TV ads. Although union membership has declined nationally in recent decades, organized labor remains a political force in Minnesota, with the AFL-CIO boasting about 300,000 members. A big Democratic turnout this November could make it more difficult for Minnesota's GOP to defend the more than 30 state House and Senate seats they seized from Democrats in the 2010 election.
But some conservatives respond with another question: If not now, when? Republicans hold more legislative sway in the Midwest than they have in years as a result of that 2010 landslide. Their ability to pass right to work might never be greater, especially if they lose seats this November.
The GOP's tea party flank also tends to favor action. Last weekend, Benson triumphed in a party endorsement battle with fellow Republican Sen. Mike Jungbauer, a right to work skeptic.
For many conservatives, it's a deeply felt goal. When Steve Drazkowski began serving in the Minnesota House in 2007, Democrats had controlled at least one chamber of the Legislature for a full generation. "Four decades, right there," in which they couldn't achieve their policy goals, Drazkowski said.
After Republicans finally won control in 2010, he put right-to-work state at the top of his to-do list.
His measure, which would preclude unions from collecting dues from workers in union shops who did not want to be union members, would make Minnesota a more attractive place for people to work and businesses to locate, he said. Opponents argue that workers who benefit from the better wages and workplace conditions that unions negotiate should share the costs.
The Minnesota measure would actually be a constitutional amendment that would go before voters - a necessity to get around a certain veto from Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton. But now it is moot.
GOP leaders also fear the political consequences of right-to-work in Ohio and Wisconsin, where the presidential race could be close and where Republicans will also be defending legislative majorities.
In Wisconsin, where GOP Gov. Scott Walker faces a recall election in June as the result of last year's anti-union legislation, Republicans did nothing with right to work this year.
In Ohio, a coalition that includes some tea party groups is collecting signatures to get a right-to-work amendment on the statewide ballot but Republican Gov. John Kasich has publically dismissed the effort. In Michigan, Republican House Speaker Jase Bolger has been leaning toward supporting a right to work measure, but Republican Gov. Rick Snyder has said he wants no part of it.
"Right-to-work is such a divisive issue," said Amber McCann, a spokeswoman for GOP Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville, who has said he would consider Senate passage unlikely.
---------
Associated Press writers Tim Martin in Lansing, Mich., Scott Bauer and Todd Richmond in Madison, Wis., and Ann Sanner in Columbus contributed to this report.
Apr 6, 2012
By PATRICK CONDON
Associated Press
ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) -- Fifteen months after taking control of Minnesota's Legislature, Republicans have put a gay marriage ban on this November's ballot, moved to expand gun rights and cast dozens of votes to cut state spending. But there's one issue where they failed to get traction: watering down the strength of organized labor with a right-to-work law.
The problem isn't so much opposition from Democrats. And it isn't a lack of enthusiasm for the idea, which many conservatives consider essential for creating a business-friendly economic climate. The problem lies with Republicans who fear triggering a huge rebellion among opposition labor unions and sending a surge of sympathetic voters to the polls in November to vote Democratic.
In Minnesota and elsewhere across the Midwest, the question of what to do about the right-to-work issue is pitting Republican against Republican, straining relationships among longtime allies and weighing cherished ideals against political tactics.
"We wait and we wait and we wait, and then if we get the opportunity and we fail to take it, then the issue is done," said Michelle Benson, a frustrated Republican state senator from suburban Minneapolis who sounded off after House and Senate leaders' recently decided not to move on the issue.
The passage of a right-to-work measure in Indiana this year emboldened supporters in Minnesota, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin and Missouri to try to carry the initiative across across the Rust Belt. But many GOP leaders were instead more impressed by the furor that the unions kicked up in defeat. Throngs of protestors mobbed the state capitol in Indianapolis and Democratic lawmakers periodically disrupted the legislative session with boycotts. Huge demonstrations also came after Wisconsin Republicans stripped public employees of collective bargaining rights last year.
"Whether you agree with right to work or not, you've got to agree there'll be millions of dollars coming in from other states, and thousands of people," said Minnesota state Rep. Tony Cornish, a Republican who opposes trying to pass a bill. "Buses emptying out, banners, people camping."
The Minnesota proposal had one committee hearing last month - provoking a labor protest and AFL-CIO sponsored TV ads. Although union membership has declined nationally in recent decades, organized labor remains a political force in Minnesota, with the AFL-CIO boasting about 300,000 members. A big Democratic turnout this November could make it more difficult for Minnesota's GOP to defend the more than 30 state House and Senate seats they seized from Democrats in the 2010 election.
But some conservatives respond with another question: If not now, when? Republicans hold more legislative sway in the Midwest than they have in years as a result of that 2010 landslide. Their ability to pass right to work might never be greater, especially if they lose seats this November.
The GOP's tea party flank also tends to favor action. Last weekend, Benson triumphed in a party endorsement battle with fellow Republican Sen. Mike Jungbauer, a right to work skeptic.
For many conservatives, it's a deeply felt goal. When Steve Drazkowski began serving in the Minnesota House in 2007, Democrats had controlled at least one chamber of the Legislature for a full generation. "Four decades, right there," in which they couldn't achieve their policy goals, Drazkowski said.
After Republicans finally won control in 2010, he put right-to-work state at the top of his to-do list.
His measure, which would preclude unions from collecting dues from workers in union shops who did not want to be union members, would make Minnesota a more attractive place for people to work and businesses to locate, he said. Opponents argue that workers who benefit from the better wages and workplace conditions that unions negotiate should share the costs.
The Minnesota measure would actually be a constitutional amendment that would go before voters - a necessity to get around a certain veto from Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton. But now it is moot.
GOP leaders also fear the political consequences of right-to-work in Ohio and Wisconsin, where the presidential race could be close and where Republicans will also be defending legislative majorities.
In Wisconsin, where GOP Gov. Scott Walker faces a recall election in June as the result of last year's anti-union legislation, Republicans did nothing with right to work this year.
In Ohio, a coalition that includes some tea party groups is collecting signatures to get a right-to-work amendment on the statewide ballot but Republican Gov. John Kasich has publically dismissed the effort. In Michigan, Republican House Speaker Jase Bolger has been leaning toward supporting a right to work measure, but Republican Gov. Rick Snyder has said he wants no part of it.
"Right-to-work is such a divisive issue," said Amber McCann, a spokeswoman for GOP Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville, who has said he would consider Senate passage unlikely.
---------
Associated Press writers Tim Martin in Lansing, Mich., Scott Bauer and Todd Richmond in Madison, Wis., and Ann Sanner in Columbus contributed to this report.
Tee Time Again!
Time for some fun in the sun, while we raise money to elect pro-worker candidates.
Mid-Missouri Labor Club
Ninth Annual Golf Tournament
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Tee Time – 9:00 a.m.
Lunch – 1:00 p.m.
Cost: $400/team $100/individual
$100/Hole Sponsor
Railwood Golf Course
Holts Summit, Missouri
Registration Deadline: June 1, 2012
For more information, contact:
Dave Anderson - 573-424-9256
Russ Unger - 573-642-1833
Send checks to:
Mid-Missouri Labor Club, P.O. Box 471, Fulton MO 65251
Mid-Missouri Labor Club
Ninth Annual Golf Tournament
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Tee Time – 9:00 a.m.
Lunch – 1:00 p.m.
Cost: $400/team $100/individual
$100/Hole Sponsor
Railwood Golf Course
Holts Summit, Missouri
Registration Deadline: June 1, 2012
For more information, contact:
Dave Anderson - 573-424-9256
Russ Unger - 573-642-1833
Send checks to:
Mid-Missouri Labor Club, P.O. Box 471, Fulton MO 65251
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)