Big Labor Joe Manchin Dances to Forced-Unionism's Tune

Big Labor Joe Manchin Dances to Forced-Unionism's Tune

Sen. Joe Manchin is often seen as one of the more conservative Democrats in the Senate but when it comes to the rights of workers, Manchin still dances to the tune of the union bosses.  The Huntington News in West Virginia takes him to task for his ongoing relationship: Sad news [last] week for Big Labor and its D.C. allies like President Obama and U.S. Senator Joe Manchin. When no one is looking, Senator Manchin reverts to form and backs the President and his NLRB in a transparent Big Labor power grab. Monday, Federal Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia struck down a new rule "passed" by two members of the National Labor Relations Board. Interestingly, Judge Boasberg is an Obama appointee. Ironically, this rule designed to circumvent proper procedure was cancelled because the court found that the NLRB itself did not use proper procedure in promulgating the new rule. Simply put, the court found that no quorum was present as those backing the new regulation tried to ram through their favor for Big Labor.
Big Labor Joe Manchin Dances to Forced-Unionism's Tune

Big Labor Joe Manchin Dances to Forced-Unionism's Tune

Sen. Joe Manchin is often seen as one of the more conservative Democrats in the Senate but when it comes to the rights of workers, Manchin still dances to the tune of the union bosses.  The Huntington News in West Virginia takes him to task for his ongoing relationship: Sad news [last] week for Big Labor and its D.C. allies like President Obama and U.S. Senator Joe Manchin. When no one is looking, Senator Manchin reverts to form and backs the President and his NLRB in a transparent Big Labor power grab. Monday, Federal Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia struck down a new rule "passed" by two members of the National Labor Relations Board. Interestingly, Judge Boasberg is an Obama appointee. Ironically, this rule designed to circumvent proper procedure was cancelled because the court found that the NLRB itself did not use proper procedure in promulgating the new rule. Simply put, the court found that no quorum was present as those backing the new regulation tried to ram through their favor for Big Labor.
Sen. Jim DeMint -- Pro-Freedom

Sen. Jim DeMint -- Pro-Freedom

The Senate's premiere champion of worker's rights, Sen. Jim DeMint, outlines his support for a balanced approach to labor law.  From Greenvilleonline.com: When people ask me if I’m pro-business or pro-labor, I say I’m neither: I’m pro-freedom. Freedom is the only political principle that cannot be bent to serve special interests. Remember how 7-Up used to call itself the un-cola? Well, freedom is the un-special interest. Freedom, protected by the Constitution and the rule of law, works for everyone. It allows everyone — left or right, young or old, rich or poor — to make their own choices according to their own values. Government’s job shouldn’t be to tilt the field for one team or another, but to guarantee a level playing for everyone. That’s why I’m against forcing workers to join unions, congressional earmarks for favored groups, government bailouts of Wall Street, and energy subsidies — both for oil companies and for green energy. Freedom isn’t perfect, but it is fair. And any time government hands out favors, they’ll be unfair to someone. When Washington picks winners and losers, in the end taxpayers always lose, and Ex-Im is no exception.
Presidential Power Abused at Big Labor's Behest

Presidential Power Abused at Big Labor's Behest

Right to Work Fights Back Against 'Illegal' NLRB Appointments (source: National Right To Work Committee February 2012 Newsletter) Under Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the President has the power to appoint "officers of the United States," but only "by and with the advice and consent of the Senate." The Constitution makes it clear that only in cases when "vacancies . . . happen during recesses of the Senate" may the President make temporary "recess" appointments to offices that normally require confirmation by Congress's upper chamber. Unfortunately, in his eagerness to please union officials Inside the D.C. Beltway, a tiny but crucial constituency for his re-election bid this year, Democratic President Barack Obama is now seeking to render the Constitution's "advice and consent" requirement for executive appointments effectively meaningless. Early this January, the Senate was not in recess. For several weeks starting last December 20, the Senate was instead in a "pro forma" session during which it did not meet every day, but did periodically conduct business under "unanimous consent" agreements. No one can reasonably argue that this "pro forma" session was tantamount to a recess. Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution states that neither the House nor the Senate may over the course of a Congress "adjourn for more than three days" without "the consent of the other." A La Humpty Dumpty, Mr. Obama Insists 'Recess' Means Whatever He Says It Means As syndicated columnist Michael Barone has explained: "The House did not consent to the adjournment of the Senate this year, so there is no recess, and hence no constitutional authority to make recess appointments."
Presidential Power Abused at Big Labor's Behest

Presidential Power Abused at Big Labor's Behest

Right to Work Fights Back Against 'Illegal' NLRB Appointments (source: National Right To Work Committee February 2012 Newsletter) Under Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the President has the power to appoint "officers of the United States," but only "by and with the advice and consent of the Senate." The Constitution makes it clear that only in cases when "vacancies . . . happen during recesses of the Senate" may the President make temporary "recess" appointments to offices that normally require confirmation by Congress's upper chamber. Unfortunately, in his eagerness to please union officials Inside the D.C. Beltway, a tiny but crucial constituency for his re-election bid this year, Democratic President Barack Obama is now seeking to render the Constitution's "advice and consent" requirement for executive appointments effectively meaningless. Early this January, the Senate was not in recess. For several weeks starting last December 20, the Senate was instead in a "pro forma" session during which it did not meet every day, but did periodically conduct business under "unanimous consent" agreements. No one can reasonably argue that this "pro forma" session was tantamount to a recess. Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution states that neither the House nor the Senate may over the course of a Congress "adjourn for more than three days" without "the consent of the other." A La Humpty Dumpty, Mr. Obama Insists 'Recess' Means Whatever He Says It Means As syndicated columnist Michael Barone has explained: "The House did not consent to the adjournment of the Senate this year, so there is no recess, and hence no constitutional authority to make recess appointments."
Obama NLRB Still 'Screwing Up the U.S. Economy'

Obama NLRB Still 'Screwing Up the U.S. Economy'

Pro-Right to Work Congressman Darrell Issa wants to know more about why the Boeing complaint was filed. Credit: www.businesspundit.com House Oversight Chairman Seeks Answers From Board's Top Lawyer (Source:  January 2012 National Right to Work Committee Newsletter) The legal blitz launched against Boeing and its Palmetto State employees last spring by Lafe Solomon, the President Obama-appointed acting general counsel for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), is now over. Unfortunately, the grave threat to American employees' Right to Work stemming from this case is unabated. Last April 20, Mr. Solomon, the board's top lawyer, asked an NLRB administrative law judge to block Boeing from initiating a second Dreamliner 787 aircraft production line in Right to Work South Carolina. Mr. Solomon's case was built on a complaint filed by International Association of Machinists (IAM/AFL-CIO) union bosses. Employees in Right to Work States Are Mr. Solomon's Principal Targets Boeing had no right, union officials claimed, to expand production in a Right to Work state so as to cut the cost to customers, employees and shareholders of the disruptive strikes that the union brass had repeatedly instigated at the company's west coast facilities over the years.