Hoosiers Deliver Clear Message to Congress

Hoosiers Deliver Clear Message to Congress

Mark Mix: "The only reason Hoosiers had to battle against the Big Labor machine for years to enact a Right to Work law is that Congress imposed forced unionism on their state . . . ." Credit: wsj.com   Indiana Right to Work Battle 'Really Resonates With Americans' (source: National Right To Work Committee February 2012 Newsletter) Hoosier legislators' approval early this year, by decisive margins in both chambers of the General Assembly, of H.B.1001, a measure making Indiana America's 23rd Right to Work state, is giving a boost to freedom-loving citizens' efforts to secure votes in the U.S. Congress on national Right to Work legislation. Wall Street Journal "Potomac Watch" columnist Kim Strassel alluded to the potential impact of a Right to Work victory in Indiana on a Fox News broadcast aired January 14, just as the battle at the state capitol in Indianapolis was heating up: "This is an issue in Indiana that really resonates with Americans . . . 'Are you going to be forced to join a union and pay dues?' Most Americans don't agree with that. If Republicans can frame that in a national debate, it definitely helps them." Bad Federal Policy Is the Reason Indiana Had to Pass a Right to Work Law Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Committee, later commented on Ms. Strassel's observation: "Of course, scientific surveys regularly show rank-and-file Democrats and Independents, as well as rank-and-file Republicans, overwhelmingly oppose compulsory unionism.

Pundits, Labor Policy Specialists Explain Why Right to Work's Right For Indiana, America

Pundits, Labor Policy Specialists Explain Why Right to Work's Right For Indiana, America

(source: National Right To Work Committee February 2012 Newsletter) I submit that the real [Right to Work] debate is about unions' fear that if this legislation passes, members will run out the door and their decline will be hastened. Instead of unions fighting [Right to Work], they should ask why their members would want to leave in the first place . . . . Abdul Hakim Shabazz, editor, Indypolitics.com, Indianapolis Star, January 11, 2012 [U]nion contracts do not have to cover nonunion employees. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed unions' ability to negotiate "members only" contracts. Unions voluntarily negotiate contracts covering all workers, members and nonmembers alike. They do so because union contracts benefit some workers at the expense of others. Unions do not want to let the workers they hurt opt out. . . . Unions want everyone under their contract, especially those they hold back. James Sherk, senior policy analyst in labor economics, Heritage Foundation, Miami Herald, January 7, 2012 I think this is really almost a life-and-death issue for Indiana. Twenty percent of Indiana's workforce is in manufacturing . . . . They have got to be competitive with the southern tier of [Right to Work] states we saw on the map, or those companies will inevitably migrate. There's a lot of outmigration in Indiana right now. The level of real incomes is falling because of all the manufacturing going to the [Right to Work] South. It is a make-or-break deal for Indiana . . . . Dan Henninger, deputy editorial page editor, Wall Street Journal, "Journal Editorial Report," Fox News, January 14, 2012 How significant is the lack of a [Right to Work] law in Indiana? We estimate if Indiana had adopted such a law in 1977, . . . Indiana's personal income in 2008 would have been $241.9 billion, 8.4 percent more than the actual $223.2 billion. Nearly $19 billion in annual income was lost because of Indiana's lack of a [Right to Work] law. Alternative statistical estimates yield slightly smaller but still highly robust results. Richard Vedder, economics professor, Ohio University (and two coauthors) "Right-to-Work and Indiana's Economic Future," January 2011

Pundits, Labor Policy Specialists Explain Why Right to Work's Right For Indiana, America

Pundits, Labor Policy Specialists Explain Why Right to Work's Right For Indiana, America

(source: National Right To Work Committee February 2012 Newsletter) I submit that the real [Right to Work] debate is about unions' fear that if this legislation passes, members will run out the door and their decline will be hastened. Instead of unions fighting [Right to Work], they should ask why their members would want to leave in the first place . . . . Abdul Hakim Shabazz, editor, Indypolitics.com, Indianapolis Star, January 11, 2012 [U]nion contracts do not have to cover nonunion employees. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed unions' ability to negotiate "members only" contracts. Unions voluntarily negotiate contracts covering all workers, members and nonmembers alike. They do so because union contracts benefit some workers at the expense of others. Unions do not want to let the workers they hurt opt out. . . . Unions want everyone under their contract, especially those they hold back. James Sherk, senior policy analyst in labor economics, Heritage Foundation, Miami Herald, January 7, 2012 I think this is really almost a life-and-death issue for Indiana. Twenty percent of Indiana's workforce is in manufacturing . . . . They have got to be competitive with the southern tier of [Right to Work] states we saw on the map, or those companies will inevitably migrate. There's a lot of outmigration in Indiana right now. The level of real incomes is falling because of all the manufacturing going to the [Right to Work] South. It is a make-or-break deal for Indiana . . . . Dan Henninger, deputy editorial page editor, Wall Street Journal, "Journal Editorial Report," Fox News, January 14, 2012 How significant is the lack of a [Right to Work] law in Indiana? We estimate if Indiana had adopted such a law in 1977, . . . Indiana's personal income in 2008 would have been $241.9 billion, 8.4 percent more than the actual $223.2 billion. Nearly $19 billion in annual income was lost because of Indiana's lack of a [Right to Work] law. Alternative statistical estimates yield slightly smaller but still highly robust results. Richard Vedder, economics professor, Ohio University (and two coauthors) "Right-to-Work and Indiana's Economic Future," January 2011

Big Labor; Big Money; Big Lies

Big Labor; Big Money; Big Lies

Brietbart.com looks at the upcoming torrent of political spending fueled by forced union dues money: The largest American labor federation promised this week it would launch the most aggressive campaign effort in the labor movement's history, tapping at least 400,000 union members to fill the voter contact and get-out-the-vote voids in the larger Democratic operation. AFL-CIO chief Richard Trumka formally endorsed President Barack Obama on Wednesday, though it came as no particular surprise: labor's 2008 contributions to Democratic candidates neared a record half-billion dollar threshold. All while draining pension funds, the same groups have pledged to contribute another $400 million to the president's reelection effort later this year, putting Big Labor’s total contribution to Barack Obama’s political career at well over a billion dollars. But the presidential contest is just one front of a grand operation wherein a number of marquee statewide races -- gubernatorial and legislative bouts in Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana and Minnesota are said to register atop their agenda -- will be targeted.

Major Right to Work Victory in the Midwest

Major Right to Work Victory in the Midwest

After years of intensely lobbying their elected officials and mobilizing their fellow citizens, pro-Right to Work Hoosiers saw a measure prohibiting forced union dues and fees signed into law this month. Indiana Becomes the 23rd State to Abolish Forced Union Dues (Source: February 2012 National Right to Work Committee Newsletter) Just as this edition of the National Right to Work Newsletter went to press, Indiana became the 23rd state to adopt a Right to Work law prohibiting union officials from taking money from employees' paychecks as a condition of getting or keeping a job. In the late afternoon on January 25, a 54-44 majority in Indiana's state House of Representatives stood up to taunts and threats emanating from the hundreds of union bosses and other Big Labor militants who had been crowding the halls of the capitol for hours. Consequently, H.B.1001, a measure making it illegal to fire employees for refusal to pay dues or fees to an unwanted union, was adopted and sent to the state Senate. On February 1, the Senate, which had already passed another version of the Right to Work legislation, 28-22, approved H.B.1001 and sent it to GOP Gov. Mitch Daniels' desk. Heeding the pleas of thousands and thousands of Hoosiers who passionately oppose compulsory unionism, late last year Mr. Daniels had publicly announced he was strongly in favor of making Indiana a Right to Work state. Keeping his word, Mr. Daniels proceeded to sign the Right to Work measure into law once he got the chance. Landmark Victory Comes Only After Nearly a Decade of Intense Mobilization Efforts Right to Work's Indiana victory could never have occurred without many years of careful preparation. In 2003, Indiana citizens who were determined to free themselves and their fellow Hoosiers from the shackles of compulsory unionism launched what they knew from the start would be a sustained, and often difficult, effort to pass a Right to Work law. Subsequently, the organization these citizens put into high gear in 2003, the Indiana Right to Work Committee, mobilized an ever-loudening drum beat of support for employee freedom and built up opposition to forced unionism in the state Legislature. Over the course of the long campaign, the Indianapolis-based Right to Work group repeatedly benefited from the counsel and experience of the National Right to Work Committee. And National Committee members and supporters who live in the Hoosier State have been the bulwark of the Indiana Right to Work campaign. This campaign undertook major mobilization efforts in the last four election cycles and secured three "unsuccessful" roll-call votes in the state House prior to last month's successful one.