Card Check backers: For us, it’s all, or nothing

posted at 1:32 pm on March 23, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The backers of Card Check put themselves in a box after three retailers floated a compromise that would have meant the end of both the arbitration and the Card Check portions of the EFCA.  Despite bleeding moderates that want to find a middle ground and avoid the elimination of the secret ballot, Card Check advocates insisted that they would not compromise on any of their demands.  The result will likely put a stake through the heart of Card Check for this session:

An alternative offered by three of America’s largest corporations to a labor bill that would facilitate union organizing has been shunned by the legislation’s most prominent champions on Capitol Hill.

Costco, Starbucks and Whole Foods offered the alternative to the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) Sunday to open up a different approach to reforming labor law. Known as the Committee for a Level Playing Field, the coalition has been met by harsh words from lawmakers in Congress.

“This proposal is unacceptable. It was written by CEOs for CEOs. It is not a serious attempt at labor law reform because it fails to fundamentally address key problems that currently prevent workers from being able to join together and bargain for a better life,” said Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) and Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) in a joint statement.

Unfortunately for Harkin and Miller, they’re discovering that they’re on the fringe rather than the mainstream on Card Check.  They had plenty of support when support was essentially meaningless, as George Bush would have vetoed the bill even if they got it passed through Congress, which they have never yet done.  Now that Barack Obama is in the White House, many of their former allies have retreated on EFCA, especially in the current business climate.

The compromise plan effectively enables moderates to hold out.  They can point to Lanny Davis’ involvement in tubing the card-check and arbitration provisions as legitimate concerns over the more radical proposal from Harkin and Miller.  They have no reason now to move to the left on Card Check.  It probably couldn’t get 60 votes before the compromise proposal, and it may not even get a majority after it.

In any event, it seems very unlikely to get out of Congress in this session.  As reluctant as moderates are to pass Card Check this year, they’ll be even more skittish in an election year, especially if the Obama administration keeps fumbling the economy and railroading radical expansions of government.  In 2011, Congress will probably look very different than it does now, and Obama will need to start shifting towards moderates in order to campaign for re-election.   Card Check looks more and more like a dead letter.

Previous posts on Card Check:

Tags: , , , , ,

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Too bad we can’t put a lock on that box.

BadgerHawk on March 23, 2009 at 1:33 PM

All or nothing?

Then you’ll get nothing…and like it.

Rocks on March 23, 2009 at 1:33 PM

Nothing is in the best interest of the country.

Wade on March 23, 2009 at 1:34 PM

Judge Smails already stopped by, I see.

A Balrog of Morgoth on March 23, 2009 at 1:37 PM

They will figure out a way to re-introduce this in the future. I will have a slightly different name and a different look and will be buried unnoticed in a bill somewhere. Vigilance is the premium we pay for freedom.

Tommy_G on March 23, 2009 at 1:37 PM

Glad to see this one. As I stated in my post on the previous thread about the proposed compromise:

The only thing that bothers e is that I’m kind of having a “Don’t give them any ideas” moment. IE: if this thing is stalled, let it stay stalled. Don’t give the legislators any ideas about how to restart any part of it.

But the likelihood is it won’t stay stalled for long. Better to pass the LEAST offensive parts of it as a gimme to the union thugs than to let THEM pick the parts that get passed.

Still leaves a bad taste in my mouth though. Ugh.

Well, things in my mouth are tasting MUCH better now knowing that the morons pushing Card Check don’t have the savvy to know a gift when they see it. Go ahead you Union Thugs, demand all or nothing. I’ll be enjoying a US without card check for the foreseeable future.

wearyman on March 23, 2009 at 1:40 PM

They can just slip it into some other legislation, it’s not like the stuff gets read by anyone.

myrenovations on March 23, 2009 at 1:40 PM

Whew!! for now.

jeanie on March 23, 2009 at 1:46 PM

We can only hope it goes away. But Myrenovations is correct we have 2 problems with congress. Either they don’t read them or they read them and don’t understand what they have read.

400lb Gorilla on March 23, 2009 at 1:46 PM

DOA along with crap and trade.

Less stuff to repeal once we throw out the Democrats in 2010.

NoDonkey on March 23, 2009 at 1:46 PM

Good. I doubt you can count on Arlen this time without the cover of a Bush veto. Arlen sees Pat Toomey in his rear view mirror.

Wethal on March 23, 2009 at 1:48 PM

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Ash on March 23, 2009 at 1:54 PM

The result will likely put a stake through the heart of Card Check for this session:

An appropriate end for such a vampiric idea. Who has the garlic and holy wafers?

Count to 10 on March 23, 2009 at 1:55 PM

Card Check backers: For us, it’s all, or nothing

And they reveal that their true goal was to force working americans to join unions, whether they wanted to or not.

A bill is presented that solves the problems they claim they care about, without the extreme solution that they are pushing, and they reject it.

MarkTheGreat on March 23, 2009 at 1:58 PM

Somewhat related to the secret ballot and fair elections, my husband entered more art in another Saatchi showdown. We lost last week to a painting of the Madonna breastfeeding a rabbit. However, the efforts of Hotair readers helped us finish respectably, and I thank everyone who supported us and voted.

It worth noting that a couple of good things happened as a result of my husband promoting his artwork. We received interest through Saatchi Gallery themselves, or through their website. Traffic was diverted from there to Bob’s website.

My husband has a meeting with a Toronto gallery this afternoon, and he got an art show in NYC, as well. There will be a short documentary about that.

So, we entered a painting from a show he put together very quickly last year. It is not as finished as could have been done with more time, but I think it is still pretty good. We entered it more in the spirit of fun, since the voting for the showdown seems pretty arbitrary.

Please take a moment to vote, if you like. Thank you very much.

chunderroad on March 23, 2009 at 2:02 PM

This proposal is unacceptable. It was written by CEOs for CEOs by unions for unions. It is not a serious attempt at labor law reform because it fails to fundamentally address key problems that currently prevent workers from being able to join together and bargain for a better life companies from being driven into the ground by parasitical union legacy demands especially in the current economic climate.

Showing how easily his dismissal can be turned around and shoved right down his socialist throat.

Rogue on March 23, 2009 at 2:03 PM

DOA along with crap and trade.

Less stuff to repeal once we throw out the Democrats in 2010.

NoDonkey on March 23, 2009 at 1:46 PM

Now this is an attitude I can embrace! +1

Rovin on March 23, 2009 at 2:05 PM

I do not believe that Card Check is dead for this term or any time before 2011. The Democrats would have liked to pass it in this form with the “Save Fuzzy Puppies” type title so that they could please the unions.

But now that they cannot, they will break it up into pieces and stick into every possible bill.

I think they back off it now, to make themselves look reasonable and willing to respond to public pressure.

myrenovations on March 23, 2009 at 2:08 PM

“It is not a serious attempt at labor law reform because it fails to fundamentally address key problems that currently prevent workers from being able to join together and bargain for a better life,”

Such as? What is there that prevents workers from going about creating a union? It was tried here where I work – and there was GREAT care to adhere to current laws that prevent management from talking down unions or any such discussion.

As so happened – my employer treats its employees well and the overwhelming majority of employees saw absolutely no benefit whatsoever to union membership – especially having an outside entity have the ability to tell us we wouldn’t be going to work because of management’s perceived unfairness.

The system works – its just that most Americans don’t need unions anymore – and those that do, can organize through a majority with a secret vote.

jrlingreenbay on March 23, 2009 at 2:08 PM

I was a member of a union for over 30 years and was once sent to a convention in Denver. I submitted my expenses and received enumeration 4 times what I had spent to get there, my room, rental car and meals. That was the last time I went to any conventions because my eyes were opened to the crookedness of those whose job was to watch out for the workers.

DL13 on March 23, 2009 at 2:08 PM

So what happens when Union Boss Leaders throw millions and millions of dollars to a candidate to get him into office with the expectations of payback and it doesn’t happen? Do they still break kneecaps?

sherry on March 23, 2009 at 2:14 PM

Nothing’s to good for them… So don’t give them nothing.

Scarbarian on March 23, 2009 at 2:16 PM

400lb Gorilla on March 23, 2009 at 1:46 PM
3rd option: They can’t read. I’m wondering if a huge job opportunity is going to waste here—hiring people who can read to read these things to the pols and explain as they go.

jeanie on March 23, 2009 at 2:16 PM

Unions are our friends. They block school vouchers, they eliminate secret workplace ballots…
America! Wake the hell up and dopeslap yourselves!

whitetop on March 23, 2009 at 2:16 PM

For the unions, it’s all or nothing. You can bet they’ll be back next year, dangling all that union campaign money in their faces while chanting “You WILL vote for Card Check”.

GarandFan on March 23, 2009 at 2:17 PM

All or nothing is a liberal tenet. This is why we have to fight everything proposed…not just modify their idea.

Fight every law, every concept, every vote.

jukin on March 23, 2009 at 2:18 PM

myrenovations on March 23, 2009 at 2:08 PM

I agree, it’s not dead by any stretch of the imagination. Obama promised to pass this bill and he needs that union money for his campaign and to buy all those brown shirts for his new army.

It’ll be shoved into something and will be found ala AIG bonuses.

Knucklehead on March 23, 2009 at 2:26 PM

just everyone be ready for socialized medicine in any form. or diminishment of gun rights in any way.

kelley in virginia on March 23, 2009 at 2:26 PM

always viligant. semper _____? who is our Latin scholar here?

kelley in virginia on March 23, 2009 at 2:27 PM

the Commonwealth of Virginia’s motto is Sic Semper Tyrannus. Thus always to tyrants.

kelley in virginia on March 23, 2009 at 2:28 PM

Less stuff to repeal once we throw out the Democrats in 2010.

NoDonkey on March 23, 2009 at 1:46 PM

Obama would veto the repeal. We’d need 2/3 of each house to override.

Wethal on March 23, 2009 at 2:39 PM

FDR union thug replay time …

tarpon on March 23, 2009 at 2:50 PM

Harkin is such an embarrassment for my state, Iowa. I apologize to the rest of you for his place in the Senate.

beatcanvas on March 23, 2009 at 2:52 PM

Too bad we can’t put a lock on that box.

BadgerHawk on March 23, 2009 at 1:33 PM

Sammy Hagar put it best in 1983:

Suckers walk, money talks! But it can’t touch my three lock box

Er, wait, that was about the Holy Trinity and it’s part in Spiritual, Mental, and Physical balance.

Nevermind.

juanito on March 23, 2009 at 3:03 PM

And that compromise was offerd by liberal Seattle based companies; It’s the best they’ll ever get.

anniekc on March 23, 2009 at 3:31 PM

Darn, I wished they’d taken the cheese.

That would have killed this once and for a decade, anyway.

Guess they aren’t as stupid as I had hoped. :)

AnninCA on March 23, 2009 at 3:56 PM

Do Iowans smoke ethanol before they go to vote for US Senators?

eaglewingz08 on March 23, 2009 at 4:47 PM

They will figure out a way to re-introduce this in the future. I will have a slightly different name and a different look and will be buried unnoticed in a bill somewhere. Vigilance is the premium we pay for freedom.

Tommy_G on March 23, 2009 at 1:37 PM

I hope it passes that way.

sethstorm on March 23, 2009 at 5:27 PM

Reagan PATCO era business thug replay time …

tarpon on March 23, 2009 at 2:50 PM

FIFY

sethstorm on March 23, 2009 at 5:28 PM

whitetop on March 23, 2009 at 2:16 PM

If business could provide a true alternative that kills off their ability to intimidate, you would have a deal.

sethstorm on March 23, 2009 at 5:40 PM

semper vigilans

Old Country Boy on March 23, 2009 at 6:02 PM

It was written by CEOs for CEOs.

Yeah, and you know what dirtbags? Your legislation was written by union bosses for union bosses. You know, the kind of dirt licking scum who take a cut out of other people’s pay and only enrich themselves. Much like Democrat Congressmen, actually…

Dig a ditch and jump, Miller and Harkin!

BKennedy on March 23, 2009 at 8:49 PM

BKennedy on March 23, 2009 at 8:49 PM

With that kind of attitude, the issue will never be resolved.

sethstorm on March 23, 2009 at 9:13 PM

settled, nothing it is.

la.rt.wngr on March 24, 2009 at 12:51 PM