In front of the obituaries, comics, and the puzzle page are some nice little tidbits today.

First, I see they called off the recall effort in Michigan to oust Gov. Rick Snyder. (reminds me of the AWOL legislators, souldn't stick around for the fight)

For dessert there were the figures on municipal union membership. Since March of last year the teachers union lost 6,000 out of 17,000 members.

The AFSCME lost 34,00 of 62,00 members.

This was simply because their dues were no longer compulsorily deducted from their pay. They now have to voluntarily make their dues payment, like I did for about 40 years. (I would bet that strongarmed political donations through COPE are suffering.)

Looking elsewhere we find that 52 % of union members are government workers.

Trofka, you scum, eat our dust.

HM

Halfmile,

Where in Mich. are you? I'm in Royal Oak and didn't see that info. Which Paper?

Chuck

Green Bay, Wisconsin

The Press-Gazette, your local Gannett rag, almost good enough for wrapping fish guts.

It's on Huffdetroit too, link provided

Article was in the Wall St Journal also..

Same thing happened in Indiana. First thing in office 8 years ago, Mitch Daniels signed an executive order suspending collective bargaining for state employees. Didn't spend any political capital getting it through the legislature, just went and DID IT.

90% of them quit paying dues within one year.

This is how it's done, folks. DE-FUND the LEFT. With this, plus Citizens United and Super Pacs, we will have them licking our boot heels and cleaning our toilets for us within 10 years.

...ha ha, Trappy. Feel that cowboy boot slipping into position on your neck?

Only one possible problem now. With all collective barginning out, the political leaders who control who gets hired can select which jobs are filled by their supporters qualified or not, and at what pay rate. That equals the old political systems that were rampant with graft, bribery and corruption. It's back to the days of Tamany Hall.

The classic example of this now inhabits the White House. The pendulum may swing to the right but the right also has its share of dishonest politicians. Want proof? Look at what RAND Paul now is more than willing to support compared to what his Dad has been pushing for and what Rand has said in the past. His "strongly held beliefs" are about as "solid" as the wind that blows Romney's "beliefs".

pyrdek, ALL collective bargaining was not out in SB11. And public safety employees were excluded.

One interesting fact was the requirement of 51 percent of a bargaining unit necessary to have the uion represent them. IMO, this just makes the public sector more like the rest of us, rather than an elite group.

You can read the whole text of the bill at the above link. I found it very informative, and not at all what the shrill protestors were saying.

Of special interest was the increase in assistance to needy families of 37 Million dollars.

Also the section on "blue flu" type work stoppages was interesting.

These details were never brought out in the Lamestream Media.

Check it out.

HM

halfmile:

I'm confused.

Several months ago I commented on the subject of mandatory political contributions being taken from union members' dues. You politely called 'bullsh!t' explaining that the portion of member dues allocated to union PACs was strictly voluntary.

This morning you think "strongarmed political donations through COPE (Committees on Political Education) are suffering". Your statement raises several questions.

1. How does the idea of "strongarmed" apply to something that's voluntary?

2. Exactly who would be doing the strongarming and who would be on the receiving end?

3. Since virtually every dollar of union PAC money goes to liberal dem candidates, why would 'voluntary' member donations be suffering at all?

Seems to me with horrible guys like Walker in office, union members would be INCREASING their 'voluntary' contributions to support their dem friends.

sissy

PS: Who or what is Trofka?

got the name wrong - Trumka. I never saw it in print, just heard it on the telly. I do not like him at all. Find him on Youtube and make your own judgement.

Strongarmed, yes. Have you ever seen a GOOD vacuum cleaner salesman in action?

When I was in the IAM a long time ago they had a thing called COPE (Commitee On Political Education). This was a 2 dollar a week checkoff that came right off your paycheck and went to Cope. If you didn't go for it they tried to talk you into it anyway. This was in the 60's and with the Eisenhower Recession going on you were lucky to have a job. So they gave the impression that it was necessary.

They did a hell of a hard sell job, and a young guy not into politics was easily persuaded to go for it.

You didn't miss it because it came off your check along with the insurance and taxes. It was included in your dues and not even noted separately. I don't know how they do it these days but that's what it was.

The rules on this have changed several times since then, latest being McCain-Feingold, and Citizens United after that.

I still believe (but I am not sure) that you can control part of your dues if it is given to a political cause. I think you have to do some paperwork.

I noticed that there were virtually no ads in my area of Wisconsin that had the candidate give his approval at the end. One exception is Eric Hovde, running for Kohl's spot.

HM

COPE and PAC are separate funds. Generally COPE funds are used for local and state lobbying and are strictly voluntary though generally solicited mush as HM described.

PAC funds are generally used to support political campaigns. They are voluntary in the sense that members can opt not to have any portion of their dues contributed to PAC but must do so in writing.

Was a Union member for 30yrs. and never contributed to either fund.

Robert

Robert, that's what I was getting at, but I believe you have to do it in writing every year or some such, it's not permanent.

HM