"Right to work" amendment advances in Senate

dave thompson.jpg
GOP Sen. Thompson: Mandatory union membership "is a job tax, and I don't think we ought to pay a job tax in this country."
The so-called "right to work" bill was approved by the Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committee earlier today, but it's unclear whether the measure has enough support to be approved by both the House and Senate.

Today's committee vote was 7-6, with Sen. Bill Ingebrigtsen, R-Alexandria, joining five Democrats in voting against right to work. Ingebrigtsen helped organize a sheriff's deputies' union in the 1970s

The bill -- which, if approved by both the House and Senate, would appear on ballots this November as a constitutional amendment -- would make union membership non-mandatory. Those opting out of union membership would effectively become free riders since the measure wouldn't hinder the collective bargaining process.

More than 1,500 unionized workers showed up at the Capitol today to protest the bill, some chanting "Hey Hey, Ho Ho, union busting's got to go!"

Sen. Dave Thompson, R-Lakeville, is the chief sponsor of the proposal. He characterized mandatory union members as a "job tax." Other GOP supporters of the measure said they believe workers who don't support union principles shouldn't be forced to pay dues.

Opponents argue there's no compelling reason to for a right to work constitutional amendment, especially considering Minnesota's relatively low unemployment rate.

The measure still has to pass another committee before being taken up by the full Senate. A companion bill in the House has had no movement thus far.

23 states currently have right to work laws on the books. Studies looking into how right to work laws impact economic growth have reached conflicting conclusions, with some finding right to work legislation stimulates economic growth and others finding no correlation.

My Voice Nation Help
24 comments
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Hambone
Hambone

this is just republicans wasting time and money again. dayton will veto this pile of crap.

Joe
Joe

 Unfortunately they're tying to bypass that by making this a state constitutional amendment.

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

Joe you ran out the comment string so I'll post here.Joe, if it wasn't for the undying support of the Republican Party for the blacks and womens rights, they both would still be second class citizens.  

This is gonna hurt your brain a little, but hell, history is history.

September 14, 1874Democrat white supremacists seize Louisiana statehouse in attempt to overthrow racially-integrated administration of Republican Governor William Kellogg; 27 killed.

March 1, 1875Civil Rights Act of 1875, guaranteeing access to public accommodations without regard to race, signed by Republican President U.S. Grant; passed with 92% Republican support over 100% Democrat opposition.

January 10, 1878U.S. Senator Aaron Sargent (R-CA) introduces Susan B. Anthony amendment for women’s suffrage; Democrat-controlled Senate defeated it 4 times before election of Republican House and Senate guaranteed its approval in 1919. Republicans foil Democratic efforts to keep women in the kitchen, where they belong.

February 8, 1894Democrat Congress and Democrat President Grover Cleveland join to repeal Republicans’ Enforcement Act, which had enabled African-Americans to vote.

January 15, 1901Republican Booker T. Washington protests Alabama Democratic Party’s refusal to permit voting by African-Americans.

May 29, 1902Virginia Democrats implement new state constitution, condemned by Republicans as illegal, reducing African-American voter registration by 86%.

February 12, 1909On 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, African-AmericanRepublicans and women’s suffragists Ida Wells and Mary Terrell co-found the NAACP.

May 21, 1919Republican House passes constitutional amendment granting women the vote with 85% of Republicans in favor, but only 54% of Democrats; in Senate, 80% of Republicans would vote yes, but almost half of Democrats no.

that was only 45 years of Democrat oppression in history, would you like to see more?  Some more recent oppression by the Democrat party perhaps?

Joe
Joe

 I don't give a shit which party you're talking about.  Their both criminal.  And neither party then is the party they are today.  Abraham Lincoln would crotch-punch you. 

And you basically made my point.  Had these things been put to a popular vote, they wouldn't have happened.

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

"Unfortunately"????Wait, what?It will go on the ballot and YOU decide what happens.So you would rather have these things decided in a authoritarian way?  Any time the voter gets to chime in on these things is a good thing right?  Well, unless you are in the kook fringe.  A ballot initiative reminds us of why we fought against the rule of kings and queens.  It's symbolizes democracy in it's purest fashion.

And when this goes on the ballot, the VOTERS will decide who has been "wasting time".  

Joe
Joe

 Yes it is unfortunate.  It is unfortunate that politicians have become masters of manipulating the populace, and that a rash emotional choice made at the polls could become cemented into our state's constitution where it will be much harder to fix.

"Mob mentality" is exactly why we have a judicial branch of government.  So we can still enact laws because they are the right thing to do, despite the fact that they would not pass if put to the popular vote.

This is why women can vote and we can't own other people anymore.  Think either of those would have passed if put to the popular vote?

This is why same-sex marriages WILL be legal someday soon.  All the ass-hats currently against it will be remembered by history in the same category as the white-hooded, cross burning ass-hats.

Dave2
Dave2

So the Republicans want to kill unions with RTW, and they want to limit the poor from voting with voter ID, but how many of you working stiffs will still go out and vote Republican because you don't like Obamacare, or the price of gas? Wake up boys, the middle class is in a war with the wealthy aristocracy.Wise up and vote for your bellies, the Republicans are already grossly overfed.

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

 Both of your first two comments are lies.  1. It will not "kill unions".  Membership will be voluntary.  If a union employee receives better pay and benefits than a non-union employee, wouldn't said non-union employee then join the union?  Sounds as if you simply don't like "freedom of choice".

2.  The democrats are also proposing their version of voter I.D.  Did you know ALL union elections REQUIRE a photo I.D. to vote in?

Get some facts before you come in here and look like a moron with your decisive comments.

Dave2
Dave2

1. Won't kill em but you watch employers favor the non-union boys. It'll pit the two against each other and guess who'll be the favorite?  RTW is only popular with the cheapskates who want a free ride.2. I voted in a lot of union elections and never had to show an ID. And what does an ID prove anyway? You can put your picture on anything, and a drivers license only says that you're licensed to drive.You ever been in a union, Kirk? Did you pay your dues, or were you one of the cheapskates? ...I hesitate to use the word "scab".

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

 1.  Yes they may favor, but the free market will always fix that.  Good workers will flock to the place where the get paid the most for their quality work.2.  Yes I am a former AFSCME employee, and we had to show our Union ID in order to vote in union elections.  The plumbers union, which I currently work along side of, also have to show an ID.Hey Dave, what union do you work for?   I would like to come and vote in YOUR election next time since you say I can, even though I'm not in your union.  That sound like great fun...

Joe
Joe

 Should point out that gas is a global commodity and there is very little the president can do to affect it's pricing.

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

From CNNMoneyGas price drop: 60 days straightNational average price for gallon of gasoline falls to $2.105. Peak was $4.114 in July.November 16, 2008

 "The national average price for a gallon of regular gasoline fell 2 cents to $2.105 a gallon, according to a survey released Sunday by the American Automobile Association. A gallon of gas has dropped nearly in half since hitting an all-time high of $4.114 on July 17."

Perhaps my numbers were off by 10 cents or so but ...

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

 What happened in late 2008 that caused the gas prices to fall from $4 a gallon in July to $2 by election time?Markets are emotional, and a simple message like "drill baby drill" WILL cause the global market to react.

Joe
Joe

 Where were you paying $4 a gallon for gas in 2008?

And where were you paying $2 a gallon for gas in 2008?

Be specific please.

Joe
Joe

I love how they kicked it over to the judiciary committee so the GOP that need to look moderate to their constituents wouldn't have to take a stand either way.

Joe
Joe

RTW = Rob The Worker

Steelerstwin
Steelerstwin

This is union busting, just as the voter ID proposal is voter suppression.  Even a brief examination of either issue would clearly show that the GOP wants nothing more than to turn Minnesota in to Mississippi.

webcelt
webcelt

This doesn't really explain it. Membership is not mandatory per current federal law. Non-members need only pay "Fair Share" where htey cover their part of collective bargaining expenses. It should be called "right to freeload" since unions are still required to represent all workers, including those who refuse to pay anything. That makes unions financially impossible, which is the point of course. Maybe call it "minority veto" because it lets an anti-union minority outvote a pro-union majority.

How long would businesses last if they weren't allowed to require customers to pay while being required to provide their products? How long would a government last if it had to provide full services but paying taxes was voluntary?

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

A public union "fair share" = 85% Then you forfeit all representation by the union as they continue to steel from your paycheck.  It's great working for a public entity. Private companies yes, but public employees no.  In the public sector, who is the union organizing against?  Themselves? The taxpayer?  A public union employee organizes against no one but the taxpayer.

How about the law that states "all work" done by a private contractor for the governmental bodies of St. Paul, Minneapolis, and Met Council be done by union contractors ONLY.  That's cronyism for ya.  And certainly an assurance that you get as little work done as possible from your tax dollar. 

Jeff
Jeff

You, my friend, are a tool.

Unions are run by legal Mafias.  They do NOT care about you, nor your pay, nor your well being.  They only care about lining their own pockets.  Go ask any Cub Foods employee what their "Union" has done for them..........

 

Dave2
Dave2

 "Go ask any Cub Foods employee what their "Union" has done for them.........."

The strength of any union is only as strong as its individual members. Ask them what they've done for their union.

Chris
Chris

 Have you heard of Saturday and Sunday? Like getting paid overtime when working more than 40 hours a week? Like being able to decide where you live, when you work...Thank the unions.

HotLunch
HotLunch

Kinda like how the GOP doesn't actually care about YOU or YOUR best interests. Rather, they terrorize and trick tools such as yourself into voting AGAINST your own best interests. Kinda sad, but I can't make you think for yourself. The desire to change must come from within.

Now Trending

Minnesota Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...