Card Check: a cautionary tale

posted at 12:55 pm on March 25, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Mitt Romney has become an outspoken advocate against Card Check, the proposal that would strip employees and employers of the secret ballot in union organizing elections.  He puts pen to paper today for the Washington Times to tell a “cautionary tale” of how Card Check worked in Massachusetts.  The big target for unions in the Commonwealth wasn’t a sweatshop or even Wal-Mart, but in co-opting a threat to one of the most active unions in public works — charter schools.

Deval Patrick signed the Card Check bill that Romney had vetoed in the previous administration, and the union went to work:

With this powerful new tool, for the first time ever in Massachusetts, a charter school was unionized. One reason so many parents want their children in charter schools is precisely because they operate free of union contracts, so that when administrators want to try something new, they can implement it quickly.

For this, charter schools are fiercely resented by teachers unions as a competitor to failing public schools. Charter schools use a merit system, rewarding teachers according to results in the classroom. They don’t have complicated work rules that smother creativity, nor are they burdened with termination rules that make it almost impossible to dismiss an incompetent teacher.

The union drive started last year when the American Federation of Teachers met with a small group of teachers from the Conservatory Lab Charter School in Boston. Throughout the summer, they worked behind the scenes to sign up a majority of the 20 teachers at the school. Administrators learned of the successful organizing effort only after the decision to unionize had been made. For parents who may have liked the idea of a union-free school, there was no chance to be heard.

Not surprisingly, the chairman of the school’s trustees is worried that a collective bargaining contract will be loaded with so many workplace restrictions that it will make it harder for the school to fulfill its mission to experiment with new ideas.

Romney wrote this as part of the Times’ “Reinventing Conservatism” series, and he makes clear that he supports unions — as long as the majority of employees truly want them and can vote their conscience through the secret ballot.  I agree, although I’d add that unions should have no right to “closed shops”, and that employees who do not want to participate in unions should not be forced to pay dues to them.  Some states have right-to-work laws that prohibit closed shops, and those should be maintained, as “freedom of association” also means the freedom to not associate, especially in the private sector.

The targeting of a charter school reveals why the unions want Card Check.  They’re not looking to free workers — they want to limit choices and options, and protect union sinecures.  The unions talk about Wal-Mart and their supposedly exploitative employment arrangements, but Wal-Mart doesn’t represent a threat to established union turf the way charter schools do.  I somehow doubt that the compensation at the charter school in question was worse than that offered by Wal-Mart or any other employer demonized by Card Check’s advocates.  The NEA just wants to kill charter schools so that they can control the education monopoly entirely once again.

I’ll be interviewing Governor Romney on today’s Ed Morrissey Show, and we’ll talk about this as well as his evaluation of Geithner’s plan and Deadbeatonomics.  Don’t miss it!


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

I’ll be interviewing Governor Romney on today’s Ed Morrissey Show, and we’ll talk about this as well as his evaluation of Geithner’s plan and Deadbeatonomics. Don’t miss it!

Everytime he answers a question, respond with:

Yeah. But you’re a mormon.

lorien1973 on March 25, 2009 at 12:58 PM

I hadn’t even considered what it would do to the charter schools… Thanks for pointing it out Mitt.

myrenovations on March 25, 2009 at 12:58 PM

Looks like we’re gonna have a deep bench in 2012, folks.

cs89 on March 25, 2009 at 1:03 PM

(sigh)

If only Romney had been a Baptist…

pseudonominus on March 25, 2009 at 1:03 PM

The next target will be hospitals. Just wait until a hospital can’t fire an incompetent nurse or orderly who causes a mass infection or even death of patients. I’ve maintained for years that the real reason Democrats want national health care is so they can get a million health care workers in unions and use those massive new union dues to elect more Democrats.

There are also other public workplaces that are not unionized now. My husband is an attorney for the state of New Jersey and the IBEW is trying to organize the attorneys now.

rockmom on March 25, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Hey man, according to the press, “The American people voted for hope and change”. Well, I guess that says it all.

retiredeagle on March 25, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Mitt for Treasury Secretary ’12!!

portlandon on March 25, 2009 at 1:09 PM

pseudonominus on March 25, 2009 at 1:03 PM

There’s still time for this to happen
(ducks)

cs89 on March 25, 2009 at 1:09 PM

(sigh)

If only Romney had been a Baptist…

pseudonominus on March 25, 2009 at 1:03 PM

I’m a Baptist and I don’t give a hoot that he’s *gasp* Mormon…

ladyingray on March 25, 2009 at 1:09 PM

Sure would have been nice to have Romney debating Obama on economics rather than McCain.

Thanks, Huckabites!

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:10 PM

rockmom on March 25, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Don’t even think that. I work for a regional healthcare alliance (7000+ employees) and I don’t need the headache of a union to deal with.

ladyingray on March 25, 2009 at 1:11 PM

I know it’s a nice fantasy to think Romney missed out on the nomination because he’s a Mormon, not the fact that he’s switched positions more often than Jenna Jameson.

jacrews on March 25, 2009 at 1:13 PM

Mitt for Treasury Secretary ‘12!!right now.

portlandon on March 25, 2009 at 1:09 PM

I can dream.

Cindy Munford on March 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM

(sigh)

If only Romney had been a Baptist…

pseudonominus on March 25, 2009 at 1:03 PM

Lifelong Southern Baptist (GASP!). Didn’t care.

AubieJon on March 25, 2009 at 1:16 PM

You know, I can think of very few people over the last year and a half that I debated about Romney where ultimately the Mormon thing was NOT the real reason they opposed him. Jacrews, that includes you. You maintain that Mitt switched positions. Indeed, he became MORE conservative. And that, of course, is a mortal sin. Romney’s the only politician who I can recall being crucified by people for coming closer to their views. And it makes no sense. Unless it is just a cover for other problems–i.e. “Dadgum it, I’d slit my wrists and bankrupt the country with Obama before I’ll let a Mormon near the white house!” Which is, essentially, exactly what happened.

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:18 PM

A right-to-work state isn’t even ideal. In Texas, “a friend” belongs to a union at his shop — not by choice but because the other union members will refuse to work with him on the job.

I don’t understand how that gets around hostile workplace laws, but the company (the largest employer of union labor in the country) doesn’t do anything about it. Now, as a strike looms, my “friend” will be forced to join them and lose his pay.

And, if I remember correctly, Ed wrote in a previous post that under card check, right-to-work state protections would be null and void.

Kel-C on March 25, 2009 at 1:19 PM

Mormon trumps Muslim?

Using Biden’s words. Mormons are “clean and articulate”.

seven on March 25, 2009 at 1:20 PM

Of course, Romney’s right about card check. Unions used to be good, back in the 1800′s and early half of the 1900′s. Has anyone heard of a union doing anything in the last 50 years in America that has been good? Or are they just state mandated channels of contributions to the Democrat party anymore?

This is a serious question: What DO unions do anymore?

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Mitt for Treasury Secretary ‘12!!right now.

portlandon on March 25, 2009 at 1:09 PM

I can dream.

Cindy Munford on March 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM

When will the national Nightmare end? I simply cannot understand the incompetence within the O-dministration. Romney could be a HARE KRISHNA and I’d still vote for him over these morons.

portlandon on March 25, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Thanks, Huckabites!

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:10 PM

Misdirected love. Thank the former Chairman of the RNC, Mike Duncan. It was their machievellian scheme that got Huckabee and Thompson in to split the vote.

eaglesdontflock on March 25, 2009 at 1:24 PM

I don’t know why his mormonism is a turn off. It is possiably the most conservative religon out there. It is also hugely misunderstood. You don’t have to believe thier line to see that thier values are actualy more in line with conservative views than say the anglicans.

sonofdy on March 25, 2009 at 1:26 PM

This is a serious question: What DO unions do anymore?

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Drive up prices and bankrupt once strong employers. That’s pretty much the definition of a parasite.

AubieJon on March 25, 2009 at 1:26 PM

I wish the unions would unionize the DNC. Then the DNC would go bankrupt.

WashJeff on March 25, 2009 at 1:26 PM

You know, I can think of very few people over the last year and a half that I debated about Romney where ultimately the Mormon thing was NOT the real reason they opposed him…

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:18 PM

Not many said it out loud, for sure.

Now look what we’ve got.

pseudonominus on March 25, 2009 at 1:27 PM

Lifelong Southern Baptist (GASP!). Didn’t care.

AubieJon on March 25, 2009 at 1:16 PM

Me too! Me either!!!!!!!

ladyingray on March 25, 2009 at 1:28 PM

This is a serious question: What DO unions do anymore?

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Drive up prices and bankrupt once-strong employers – sort of like a parasite.

AubieJon on March 25, 2009 at 1:28 PM

Stupid internet!!! Stupid Algore.

AubieJon on March 25, 2009 at 1:29 PM

Just wait until a hospital can’t fire an incompetent nurse or orderly who causes a mass infection or even death of patients.

That’s even better because there will be more business for trial lawyers, thus more contributions to the absolutely worthless, corrupt and incompetent Democrat Party.

NoDonkey on March 25, 2009 at 1:31 PM

Algore’s gonna be in my hometown tomorrow night giving a speech! Aren’t we lucky here in his so-called home state of Tennessee.

Puke.

ladyingray on March 25, 2009 at 1:31 PM

portlandon on March 25, 2009 at 1:23 PM

I was just watching a story on FOX about a company that had gone union, basically on the card check rules, who claim that they had been intimated by union members and fellow employees that endorsed the union. They granted a secret ballot re-vote and the union was decertified. I will go find the link but it buoyed my spirits.

Cindy Munford on March 25, 2009 at 1:31 PM

Heh. AubieJon, I know that is their effect…. but presumably that’s not their intent. Unions claim to represent working people, but how and for what, anymore? I don’t know anyone in a union, except possibly a teachers union–and they pay no attention to them.

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:32 PM

ladyingray on March 25, 2009 at 1:31 PM

Crank up the snow plows, then, sister gray.

AubieJon on March 25, 2009 at 1:33 PM

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:18 PM

My problem isn’t his faith, it’s that the positions he’s taken have all been politically convenient.

jacrews on March 25, 2009 at 1:33 PM

“Everytime he answers a question, respond with:

Yeah. But you’re a mormon.”

You know, you see these kind of posts and think it’s just another idiot crapping on freedom of speech…..they just squat and dump…..pathetic.

sheryl on March 25, 2009 at 1:34 PM

Heard it said that one provision in the card check is that it would over-ride states right-to-work laws. Any confirmation?

Tom

marinetbryant on March 25, 2009 at 1:35 PM

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:32 PM

I know a guy in Michigan who retired from GM. He was a paint mixer, union, and was making $90,000 a year when he retired 20 years ago.

AubieJon on March 25, 2009 at 1:35 PM

AubieJon on March 25, 2009 at 1:33 PM

Now that you mention it, rain has moved in and the temp has been dropping….

ladyingray on March 25, 2009 at 1:36 PM

marinetbryant on March 25, 2009 at 1:35 PM

I’ve heard that as well but I haven’t heard any details of what the damage will be.

ladyingray on March 25, 2009 at 1:37 PM

Okay, jacrews: In theory, Romney “takes politically convienient” positions. And that differs from McCain, how? You assume that in reality Romney is–what? A far leftist? A moderate? So that at WORST, he’d be McCain? Gee, I feel better we nominated the guy who openly screws conservatives over because there was a chance Romney MIGHT do the same! Let us just settle for the certain screwing then!

All of our candidates were flawed. Thompson talked the best red meat, but showed absolutely no inclination to follow through. Guiliani was what Romney was accused of being: a social liberal and economic liberal who was tough on terror. McCain stabs conservatives in the back gleefully. Huckabee never met anyone who knew the term “fiscal conservativism.” Plus, Huck explicitly religion baited everyone. And Romney was accused of “flip flopping.” Except he only really went one way–more conservative. Too bad you hate him for that! Jacrews, I hope you are enjoying Obama! It’s partially your fault he’s in charge, you know.

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:40 PM

Romney wrote this as part of the Times’ “Reinventing Conservatism” series, and he makes clear that he supports unions — as long as the majority of employees truly want them and can vote their conscience through the secret ballot. I agree

I don’t.
If a business monopoly is bad and needs to be broken up, so do labor unions.

Count to 10 on March 25, 2009 at 1:42 PM

Card Check because businesses in no longer exploiting their workers.

darktood on March 25, 2009 at 1:47 PM

Guiliani was what Romney was accused of being: a social liberal and economic liberal who was tough on terror.
Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:40 PM

Eh?

Count to 10 on March 25, 2009 at 1:49 PM

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:18 PM

+100

Here in Massachusetts most folks are ready to keelhaul Obama lite* and are waxing nostalgic for the good ol’ Romney days.

* pimp my state Deval Patrick

dmann on March 25, 2009 at 1:51 PM

Count to 10 on March 25, 2009 at 1:42 PM

I can’t stand unions, what is the point with them anyway. But I understand freedom of association and such. The only unions that should be against the law, are unions under the government,ie the teachers union.

Conservative Voice on March 25, 2009 at 1:57 PM

What do unions do? Here’s a snippet of the bargaining report from the union about the negotiations going on between AT&T and CWA for the landline employees, over 100,000 in five states.

As if that isn’t bad enough, the Company’s proposal will no longer consider the Day after Thanksgiving as a Holiday but substitute it with another day off. To add insult to injury, their language also includes terrible work rules. The Bargaining Committee Considers this, “ANOTHER SLAP IN THE FACE!” This proposal is MEAN SPIRITED and a PERSONAL INSULT to our Members. For the Company to even consider this type of RETROGRESSION shows NO REGARD for our Premise Technicians and NO REPECT FOR OUR MEMBERSHIP!

Yes, they think giving the day after Thanksgiving as an additional vacation day instead of a holiday is a travesty.

The terrible work rules? No more Sunday differential and the addition of merit pay. The gall!

The retrogression? Giving union employees the same health care benefits as management, who have to pay monthly for their benefits whereas the union members do not. The nerve!

They’re gonna strike in a couple of weeks over this — over 100,000 employees without pay in this economy.

Kel-C on March 25, 2009 at 2:05 PM

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:40 PM

Look, you claimed that everyone’s objection to Romney stems from his religion and I replied by stating why I have reservations about Romney and that I can’t understand people’s enthusiasm given his shaky record. You then change the subject by comparing him to the other primary candidates.

I can’t speak to your opponent’s beliefs, but I can see your debating technique leaves much to be desired

jacrews on March 25, 2009 at 2:10 PM

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:18 PM

Hey, I voted for Mitt in the primaries not because I thought he was a conservative, but because I thought he might be a conservative AND the Huckabee campaign played the religion card.

The idea that Mitt was crucified though is laughable. Sarah was crucified and NOBODY even came distantly close to taking the kinda vitriolic abuse she did.

Don’t even begin to make that comparison.

Palin/Romney 2012

or

Palin/other dude 2012

Sapwolf on March 25, 2009 at 2:19 PM

If I’m not badly mistaken, the card check bill is an amendment to the National Labor Relations Act, which means it doesn’t apply to the public sector. Since virtually all charter school teachers are public sector employees, NEA and AFT wouldn’t be able to use it to organize them.

State card check laws are a different matter, of course, which is why Romney wrote what he wrote.

Mike Antonucci on March 25, 2009 at 2:22 PM

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:32 PM
I know a guy in Michigan who retired from GM. He was a paint mixer, union, and was making $90,000 a year when he retired 20 years ago.

AubieJon on March 25, 2009 at 1:35 PM

Yep. And that is why I will NEVER buy an American car EVAH!

Unless the union vanishes, I’m a Honda man. Sorry, but the US Auto industry needs to be loyal to AMERICAN customers.

Sapwolf on March 25, 2009 at 2:23 PM

I can think of very few people over the last year and a half that I debated about Romney where ultimately the Mormon thing was NOT the real reason they opposed him. Jacrews, that includes you. You maintain that Mitt switched positions. Indeed, he became MORE conservative. And that, of course, is a mortal sin. Romney’s the only politician who I can recall being crucified by people for coming closer to their views. And it makes no sense. Unless it is just a cover for other problems–i.e. “Dadgum it, I’d slit my wrists and bankrupt the country with Obama before I’ll let a Mormon near the white house!” Which is, essentially, exactly what happened.

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 1:18 PM

WELL SAID.

Was going to write just about that very thing, you’ve already done so.

The criticism of Romney seems to have been one of “using whatever could be thrown” — and none of it reasonable or productive, just general griping that resulted in the wrong candidate being nominated.

NOW, let’s stop all this and elect a new and a Conservative President. I think Mitt Romney has more than displayed the fact that he’s got what it takes to solve many of our nation’s problems, and is particularly one very intelligent guy. I’ll vote for him, I would have voted for him, let’s get on with things.

Lourdes on March 25, 2009 at 2:24 PM

I was just watching a story on FOX about a company that had gone union, basically on the card check rules, who claim that they had been intimated by union members and fellow employees that endorsed the union. They granted a secret ballot re-vote and the union was decertified. I will go find the link but it buoyed my spirits.

Cindy Munford on March 25, 2009 at 1:31 PM

Cindy,

You gotta get that linke posted. I’d love to read that one.

Thanks ahead of time.

Sapwolf on March 25, 2009 at 2:24 PM

Thank the former Chairman of the RNC, Mike Duncan. It was their machievellian scheme that got Huckabee and Thompson in to split the vote.

eaglesdontflock on March 25, 2009 at 1:24 PM

Well, also Ed Rollins. Who is again rallying a Huckabee campaign effort.

Lourdes on March 25, 2009 at 2:26 PM

My first post disappeared so my apologies if this doubles up. Unless I am badly mistaken, the proposed federal card check legislation doesn’t apply to public sector employees, which would include virtually all charter school teachers. NEA and AFT wouldn’t be able to use it to organize them.

State card check laws are a different matter, of course, which is why Romney wrote what he wrote.

Mike Antonucci on March 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM

Jacrews: I never said every single person who opposed Romney was biased on religion. In fact, I remember one fellow here at HotAir highly opposed to Romney; it wasn’t about his faith.

But the majority–the vast majority– of people opposed to Romney did so ultimately because of religious bias.

If you want to know why people are enthusiastic about Romney, it’s real simple: Romney is competent. He’s only failed in one thing, and that was beating out McCain. I guess he failed by not knocking out Teddy in Massachusetts either, though he came closer than anyone ever has.

But he knows how to run an organization. He knows how to stay in budget. He’s made a career of saving failing institutions. He did it in business–Staples, Dominos, and more. He did it for governmental things–the US Olympics and Massachusetts. Don’t you think a competent person is quite attractive right now?

Even today, there’s no one on the Republican or Democratic scene who are as competent on the economy as Romney. Palin and Jindal are still unproven, though I’ll grant you I’d not mind either. Sanford is making waves that are interesting.

But Romney has taught me stuff I didn’t know about. I can’t say that about many politicians. I learned a lot about insurance issues from Romney that I’d never thought of.

Yes, Palin took far more abuse than Romney did–I’ll grant that. Would it have been equal if Romney WAS the nominee? I bet so.

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 2:34 PM

Don’t even think that. I work for a regional healthcare alliance (7000+ employees) and I don’t need the headache of a union to deal with.

ladyingray on March 25, 2009 at 1:11 PM

You should prepare yourself because the new Labor Secretary, Hilda Solis, has said that her highest priority is to unionize ALL the healthcare workers. Oh joy.

mrsmwp on March 25, 2009 at 2:47 PM

You gotta get that linke posted. I’d love to read that one.

Thanks ahead of time.

Sapwolf on March 25, 2009 at 2:24 PM

Filmed story on FOX today…try their website (foxnews.com)

Lourdes on March 25, 2009 at 2:47 PM

Cindy,

You gotta get that linke posted. I’d love to read that one.

Thanks ahead of time.

Sapwolf on March 25, 2009 at 2:24 PM

Ed has it posted on the front page.

thomasaur on March 25, 2009 at 2:48 PM

I don’t know if you heard the interview on larry king the other day, but Romney was so kind to Sarah and said what a great job she did when she spoke, that she really connected with the people.
I wish he was the Pres, things would be so different.

Bambi on March 25, 2009 at 2:57 PM

I can’t stand unions, what is the point with them anyway. But I understand freedom of association and such. The only unions that should be against the law, are unions under the government,ie the teachers union.

Conservative Voice on March 25, 2009 at 1:57 PM

Well, there is that, but the current unions mostly only exist because the law enforces them. It is a violation of freedom of association to be forced to join a union or to be prevented from offering better work for less pay because of one.
Still, if you break up monopolies, you are obligated to break up unions. They are the same thing.

Count to 10 on March 25, 2009 at 3:06 PM

I can think of only one union that actually does some good for their members. The MSTA (Missouri State Teachers Association). My wife is a member and the only reason is, is because if something were to happen, say, a small child hugged her and she patted him/her on the shoulder, and the parents took it as a sexual thing, MSTA would send a lawyer to represent my wife. My wife doesn’t belong to the NEA or whatever it’s called, it costs too much and she doesn’t like their politics. MSTA also helps teachers in discussions with school administrators, whether it be about salary or some directive that is not quite kosher. MSTA sends out reports during election years to all it’s members. These reports give each candidate a rating on how they stand towards school issues. They don’t bring candidates in to talk to the teachers, they don’t care whether the candidate is a Republican or Democrat, and they don’t tell the teachers how to vote. They just give information. That’s the only union I can think of that does that, this coming from a guy who was born and raised union. So much so, that when I had a part-time job during college as a security officer, and I had to cross a picket line, I wasn’t sure I could do it. I did my job though.

Torch on March 25, 2009 at 3:28 PM

Sorry for the long paragraph, I should have broken that up. Kinda ugly isn’t it.

Torch on March 25, 2009 at 3:28 PM

I know it’s a nice fantasy to think Romney missed out on the nomination because he’s a Mormon, not the fact that he’s switched positions more often than Jenna Jameson.

jacrews on March 25, 2009 at 1:13 PM

It’s pretty easy to see who the Huckabee suporters were.

petunia on March 25, 2009 at 3:32 PM

You should prepare yourself because the new Labor Secretary, Hilda Solis, has said that her highest priority is to unionize ALL the healthcare workers. Oh joy.

mrsmwp on March 25, 2009 at 2:47 PM

Is that part of Obama’s plan to “bring down health care costs?”

Because that’s not what happens when sectors become unionized.

petunia on March 25, 2009 at 3:35 PM

You should prepare yourself because the new Labor Secretary, Hilda Solis, has said that her highest priority is to unionize ALL the healthcare workers. Oh joy.

mrsmwp on March 25, 2009 at 2:47 PM

My sister has worked for 15 years for a big health care management firm. She is terrified that a union will come in there and she will lose her job because the company cannot afford to increase wages and cut overtime and such. Management has already told the employees that unionization will mean large layoffs. The working conditions there are tough, but the company has been very good to her through some serious illnesses and has been generous with raises and bonuses for her. She is 55 years old and single, and will be virtually unemployable if she loses her job. And she’ll be the first fired because of her age and health issues. I’ll probably end up supporting her for the rest of her life.

So I am following this issue very closely, especially as it might affect the health care industry.

rockmom on March 25, 2009 at 3:58 PM

Here in Massachusetts most folks are ready to keelhaul Obama lite* and are waxing nostalgic for the good ol’ Romney days.

* pimp my state Deval Patrick

dmann on March 25, 2009 at 1:51 PM

Isn’t it interesting how so many of Axelrod’s black clients have turned out to be disasters in office? Patrick, Obama, that Philly mayor (whose name I forget).

I wonder if Axelrod’s ever put a black person in office who’s actually been successful (at governing, I mean, not at winning the office — we know he can do that).

AZCoyote on March 25, 2009 at 4:30 PM

I am a member of the teacher’s union and feel Card Check is a terrible idea. In my school district, if you are not a member of the union, then you cannot serve on faculty committees. This limits the voice of many good and thoughtful teachers. How would this fly in corporate world? How long before businesses go bankrupt or move overseas? We have to look no further than the automotive and manufacturing sectors to see the answer.

Unions have played a positive role in the past and may play a positive role in the future. But the present course is not good for society.

bej on March 25, 2009 at 4:39 PM

Romney is a data-cruncher extraordinaire. He examines the results of policies to honestly assess what works an what doesnt. He is keenly aware of what he calls the “second order effect” which is to say the unintended consequences or those things that happen down the road after the initial effect. In this method he understands the results of policy whether it is good or bad. I love that! I wish all leaders in government would think before they act.

Romney is a leader who can be trusted to do the right thing. He kept his campaign promises as governor, all 100. No one need think he cannot be trusted. He says what he will do and then he does it. He improves everything he touches. That is his record, that is his reputation among those who know him.

What he pays attention to on the issue of card check is the consequence of the policy. Does the policy make us stronger and preserve our freedom both individually and as a nation? Evaluate everything against that metric.

Does Obama have such a metric? Maybe it is that his policies ensure his support among the unions. That metric is mostly what Obama cares about. Any harmful affect on the country is secondary, even tertiary to his interest. First interest is what helps him get elected. Second interest is what moves the nation toward liberalism. Third MIGHT be his concern for the strength of the nation, …maybe.

Lori on March 25, 2009 at 4:50 PM

Yes, Palin took far more abuse than Romney did–I’ll grant that. Would it have been equal if Romney WAS the nominee? I bet so.

Vanceone on March 25, 2009 at 2:34 PM

If you believe Romney would have taken as much hate as Sarah took as the veep candidate, you are in fantasyland.

I like Romney, but you are on Pluto if you really believe that. Yes, his Mormonism would have been attacked by the Obama/Axelrod camp, but in a roudabout way. But it would not have been like what was done to Palin.

You know why? The Dems knew that Romney as veep with McCain would not have won and was not a strong threat. And that is why Sarah triggered the amount of MSM bias/hate/unhinged. They crucified her because they truly beleived the Messiah stood to possibly lose the election.

Sapwolf on March 25, 2009 at 5:42 PM

I was just watching a story on FOX about a company that had gone union, basically on the card check rules, who claim that they had been intimated by union members and fellow employees that endorsed the union. They granted a secret ballot re-vote and the union was decertified. I will go find the link but it buoyed my spirits.

Cindy Munford on March 25, 2009 at 1:31 PM

I saw the same story on Fox this morning. It was rather frightening. Even women workers were harassed and bullied into voting to join the union. One woman who spoke out against it was threatened by other pro-union workers and had to be escorted to her car when she left work.

sarahpalinfan99 on March 25, 2009 at 6:54 PM

petunia on March 25, 2009

I think it’s disgraceful of you to suggest that Jenna Jameson supported Huck. I have it on good authority that Huckabee never visited her more than five or six times. You owe an apology to porn stars everywhere.

Seriously, an intelligent man like Romney (you want to argue that he’s not intelligent, Jacrews?) would not “flip” conservative knowing the MSM would savage him unless he believed in it, however belatedly, and was willing to take the heat.
Whatever I think of Mormonism, I know Romney is solid and wise and morally upright. He is well worthy of support. Huckabee is hollow plastic with a thin veneer of religiosity. He won’t pass the scratch test.

SKYFOX on March 26, 2009 at 5:00 AM