The Fiefdom Of Daniels

Fresh from his national ascension to prominence, kicking Obama ass all over the stage the other night, Mitch Daniels and Indiana is making more hay. Championing the cause of choice, letting workers decide for themselves by what conditions they are bound and by whom they are aligned, Indiana is on the cusp of making right-to-work “G” rated again:

In another blow to organized labor in the traditionally union heavy Midwest, Indiana is poised to become the first right-to-work state in more than a decade after Republican lawmakers cleared the way on Wednesday to ban unions from collecting mandatory fees from workers.

Over the past year, Republicans have pushed for other anti-union laws in battleground Rust Belt states where many of the country’s manufacturing jobs reside, including Wisconsin and Ohio, but they also have faced backlash from Democrats and union supporters. Wisconsin last year stripped public sector unions of collective bargaining rights.

Now here is something the 99% can get behind. Lazy smelly hippies spreading VD all over the place, that is no rallying cry, workers rights, that is where the action is.

I’ve always thought that being a governor of a state that did not suck was probably the best gig going. Naturally you need a compliant legislature to back your plays, and if you are a goofball then bad things will happen as witnessed in my home state. But true, lasting and effectual change can happen at the state level, and other governors pay attention. Nicky Halley got some good ink for her toe to toe with the NLRB (and boy does she need it). Ditto with Jan Brewer and her illegal immigration fight (how satisfying was it for her get her photo wagging her finger at Obama go viral?). Scott Walker is in the fight of his life over tangling with unions, but the fight was necessary and just.

I’ve talked before about unions and their primal/visceral fight to exist. Make no mistake, they will go to war, take no prisoners and go scorched earth. The public tit by which they gain sustenance is being threatened, this is a fight to the death.

But really, what Walker, Kasisch, and now Daniels are doing is not anti union per se, its pro choice, letting the workers decide for themselves. We can argue the benefits and liabilities of unions in general, and this in no way lessens their right to exist. But the folks should decide. In tandem with that, governments (local, state, and federal) should be able to decide for themselves if it is in their best interest to hire union, or not. This government mandate that only union crews get stimulus money, horseshit. If my city goes through the bidding process and decides that a local non union shop can do the job quicker and more cost effective (saving tax dollars) over the fat and bloated union company that normally gets these jobs, they should be able to go that route.

And lastly, what is up with these pussy legislators that skip town in the middle of session to avoid a vote? We saw this both in Wisconsin and Minnesota, and now in Indiana. I think it was Wisconsin where the only reason they returned is because their pay check was threatened. I don’t get it, if a vote on such and such is schedule for Thursday, have the vote on Thursday, whoever is present votes, this would stop that running away nonsense dead in it’s tracks.

My antipathy for unions is two fold, not only do they always support democrats (including my union dues, despite my complaints to my union rep) and the fact that they throw the supply/demand pay someone what he is worth aspect ass over tea kettle. Paying a union backed janitor 3 times what a non union janitor earns (or what he would take to do the job) is the very antithesis of capitalism.

Comments are closed.

  1. Seattle Outcast

    I find it interesting that unions are both pushing for ever more power and influence (hell, they flat-out OWN Obama) and also getting the rug yanked out from under them ever more frequently.

    Thumb up 0

  2. FPrefect89

    And lastly, what is up with these pussy legislators that skip town in the middle of session to avoid a vote?

    It has to do with having a quorum. There were not enough people present to have the vote, so it could not happen.

    Thumb up 0