Obama has been a disaster for Unions

The NEW union numbers are out and it is clear that President Obama has been a disaster for Unions and the Unions need to rethink their behavior or become extinct much sooner than anyone thought.

The “Numbers” are real.  TOTAL unionization of both public and private is down to the lowest level recorded.  And since the passage of the National Labor Relations Act in the 1930’s, the unionization of the private sector is BELOW what it was BEFORE this statute was passed.  This statute was passed to HELP unions organize the private sector.  The workforce percentage in the private sector has dropped under Obama to the lowest level ever from 7.7 percent to 6.6 percent in his first term.  Another four years like the last four and the Union will be at 5,5 percent of the total private sector.

Obama has not done the Unions any favors.  In January of 2012, Obama unconstitutionally appointed three NLRB Board members.

The NLRB appointments are now declared by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to be unlawfully appointed.  Obama had the opportunity to lawfully appoint a majority of the NLRB Board.   As a result of Obama’s unlawful acts, every “pro-union” decision this unconstitutional Board decides will in a couple of years be ruled null and void and every pro-union decision will be reversed.  It will be over a year before the US Supreme Court at a minimum rules against Obama on this issue.

In the meantime, case after case will have built into each and every one an automatic appeal and reversal.  No company should “stipulate” to an election.  If you do and you lose the election, you have lost a tool to reverse whatever the NLRB rules by filing an appeal.  This alone is a disaster for unions.  Elections held in 2013 can all be appealed and reversed and the litigation can take three years.  By the time the NLRB decision is reversed three years later, many or most of the union supporters will be long gone.

On the Employee Free Choice Act, after receiving @ $500,000,000.00 in campaign contributions from Unions in 2008 that resulted in a Democrat filibuster proof majority in the Senate and a large majority in the House, instead of PASSING EFCA and allowing Unions to quickly recover and organize new employers, Obama opted for Obama care and lost the filibuster proof majority in the Senate with the election of Scott Brown.  As a result, EFCA was dead and the Union’s under Obama lost the ONE CHANCE they had in over 30 years to bend the National Labor Relations Act into a sword on behalf of unions.

Thus, it is in fact President Obama that has sealed the fate of the Unions in this Country to a slow  but sure death.

NLRB Could be Stopped Tomorrow

That is correct. The United States Supreme Court has held that the NLRB can make no decisions on any cases if there is not a minimum of three Board members.

Obama made the mistake of fighting the Republicans on appointments to the Board and insisted upon “stacking” the NLRB with extremely pro-union appointees such as Craig Becker. I am sure he did this at the request of people like Andy Stern of the SEIU.

However, that strategy is about to backfire on the Unions.

There is no way Obama is going to get any further appointments to the NLRB.

Further, and most important, the one Republican appointment holds in his hands the ability to stop the NLRB in its tracks. He can prevent the Boeing case from being decided by an Obama NLRB. He can stop the new rules for “quickie elections” from ever being implemented. He can stop NLRB injunction cases being filed against companies. Yes, this ONE person can stop all this.

How you might ask – by resigning his seat on the NLRB.

That one action brings the NLRB down to just two members. And as we know from the U.S. Supreme Court, two members have no authority to act.

Therefore, tomorrow, this agency can be brought to its knees with the stroke of a pen from one person.

Brian Hayes is the one Republican appointee who has it within his power to shut down the NLRB until next November’s election.

Obtaining an appointment to the NLRB is not easy to do and it will be extremely difficult for Mr. Hayes to walk away from a position he has arguably worked his whole life to obtain.

Lets us all hope that Mr. Hayes is willing to sacrifice his appointment in the hope that his actions will get him reappointed during a time period when the NLRB no longer has such an obvious pro-union tilt.

Union Violence (Again!)

The story is always the same: “They overwhelmed guards, smashed windows in the guard shack and dumped grain. Six guards were trapped for a couple of hours, Longview Police Chief Jim Duscha said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/09/nlrb-investigates-longshoremen-union-for-strike-gone-wrong/#ixzz1XaJ316Bn

Do we wonder why the Unions have lost the support of the American public and why they now only represent 7% of the private sector work force?

Instead of working for companies with union contracts that can compete for the work, these union thugs think that the State of Washington should force a contact for union labor that costs more than other union labor!

Yes, you read correctly, the Longshoreman’s union is commiting voilence in protest of the Operating Engineers union getting the work!

The owner of the grain terminal EGT should just do the work non-union and say a pox on both your houses.

NLRB Changes Needed

  • Below is Washington Times in article and my thoughts as to what is needed:


  • As a labor lawyer who practices before the NLRB on a regular basis I can tell you that this is one of the most bias government agencies that exist.  From the unreviewable discretion of the General Counsel to prosecute cases, to the Administrative Law Judges who hear these cases and consistently rule in favor of the General Counsel, to the employees who work for the agency some of whom have in the past referred to lawyers like myself as “management pigs” makes this agency a VERY pro-union operation.  But you cannot blame the agency, the General Counsel and his Regional Directors or the employees who work there.Congress in the 1930’s passed the National Labor Relations Act with the specific agenda of helping unions organize companies.  Although the statute was amended in 1948 to make it “more balanced” under the Taft-Hartley amendments, the simple fact is that Congress did not go far enough.

    Repeal of the statute is what should happen.  Assuming that this is not possible, then MAJOR changes need to be made.  Here is MY LIST for Congress to consider:

  • First is to abolish the trials by the Administrative Law Judges.  All trials should be before Federal Magistrates in Federal Court.  Appeals of these decisions could then go to the NLRB Board for review to determine if the decisions comport with Federal Labor Policy set by the NLRB.  This one change would remove the bias out of the legal trials and be a real deterrent to the POWER of the General Counsel to issue Complaints knowing they have a 90% chance of winning “credibility” issues before these Administrative Law Judges and, therefore, winning the case.
  • Second is that decertification elections (elections to throw the union out filed by the employees who work there) should not be allowed to be “blocked” by a simple unfair labor practice charge being filed by a Union that costs the Union a total of a postage stamp.  I have seen decertification petitions delayed for YEARS as the Union filed one unfair labor practice charge after another, each requiring an investigation, and each “blocking” the election to decertify the Union.
  • Third is that Unions should not be allowed to use “Requests for Information” during negotiations to harass the Company.  I have seen small companies in negotiations have to produce over 10 THOUSAND documents in response to one union request after another being used by the Union as nothing but pure harassment.  The design on the Union’s part is to cost the Company MONEY.  There should be a rule that Companies must only turn over documents to the Union where the Union can establish by CLEAR and CONVINCING evidence that without the information the Union cannot make any proposals to the Company on the matter.  There should be a limit as to the number of document requests the Union can make and if the Union goes over that number, the Company is not required to respond. 
  • Fourth is that there should be a rule that the negotiations go for no longer than 6 months and after 6 months, if there is no agreement, then the Company is free to unilaterally implement its last and final offer made no later than 5 months after negotiations start.  I have seen negotiations go on for YEARS as the Union trying to avoid “impasse” making one proposal after another as small as one penny changes.

    These are just a handful of needed reforms.

    Ron Mason, Mason Law Firm, Dublin Ohio

Wisconsin Defeat is Huge

This election was a severe blow to the Unions. Earlier they tried to rig the Wisconsin Supreme Court, they lost the election and they lost the case before the Supreme Court that could have over-turned the law.

Now they have lost the recall. Why this is important is two fold. First, the Republicans in other states are much more likely to understand the diminished power of the Unions and be willing to pass legislation such as Right-to Work that they never would have dreamed of doing until now.  Second, and more importantly, the BIG win is reapportionment.

If for any reason the reapportionment legislation that was just passed had gone wrong in the Courts, then it would come back to the legislature for changes.  Had the Union’s won control of the Senate, then the Democrats would be able to have forced better districts for the Democrats to run in for 2010 and the entire decade to follow.

This means that Republicans will now probably control both the House and the Senate in Wisconsin for the next decade.

Make no mistake about it, this defeat of the Unions was huge and the Unions know it.

The Battle Lines Are Being Drawn

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, “The battle for the private sector is over, the battle for the public sector is about to begin.”

Make no mistake about it; the Unions have lost the private sector.  Their total membership as a percentage of the private sector workforce in 1960’s was at 30% of the workforce.  Today the unionized private sector is down to less than 7% of the private sector employees.  We look at the Federal Mediation and Conciliation (“FMCS”) records all the time in Ohio.  They report the number of unionized companies and break it down by state.  What we have found is that from 20 to 25 percent of union companies go out of business every three years!  In a twelve year time span, that means that statically there is a 100% failure rate of union companies.  The question is no longer will there be a private sector of unionized companies but only when the last unionized company will turn out the lights?

Will some private sector employers be unionized?  Sure.  But those will be the largest employers who will have contracts in public utilities and the like.  Companies like Yellow Freight that merged with Roadway are hanging on by their finger nails.  The odds that they will over time survive are unlikely.  I for one would not buy stock in that company.  There is not going to be any more “bail-outs” for large private sector union companies. 

The Democrats are in fact now the focal point of union fury (and rightfully so), because of their inability to pass the Employee Free Choice Act (“EFCA”).  That failure will be looked upon as the final turning point of the decline in the private sector unionized workforce.  Not even the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) can save the unions.  All the NLRB can do is speed up the demise of union companies as it costs these companies tons of money to fight that government agency.  In the end, the NLRB does not care about what happens to individual companies.  Thus, the future in this Country is in the non-union sector.  The demise of the union private sector is a given, the only question is when?

Therefore, the battle for the private sector is over, the battle for the public sector is about to begin.

The first thing to understand is that in the public sector, for many years, unions grew, their power grew and the costs to the public taxpayer became greater and greater.  How and why did this happen?

The answer is really quite simple.  The politicians in office were NOT paying the bill.  The taxpayers were paying the bill.  It is easy to allow salary and retirement benefits to grow because there is nobody there politically to stop it.  The “politicians” only cared about getting re-elected.  There was no “voter group” saying to them that if you keep giving these raises and benefits, one day the state or county or city will be broke and cannot afford to pay these benefits.  Think of it as nothing more than a giant PONZI scheme.  These politicians make promises they know the government can’t keep.  They take the current money from the tax payer and pay the “old” promises, and expect to keep getting more money from new taxpayers to keep paying off these old promises.  Meanwhile all the future debt they keep giving away simply becomes more and more unfunded liability.  The states of California and Illinois have just about wrecked their economies over this debt.

But just like Bernie Madoff, when the economy crashed, when all the old promises came due, there was suddenly no “new” money from the taxpayers coming in to pay the bills.  It is estimated that the state and local governments owe somewhere between one and three TRILLION dollars in unfunded health and pension benefits.  Just like General Motors, these public employers gave away the moon to the unions in the hope to buy off the present problem and push the issue down the road.  Unfortunately, the road is now at a dead end.  The state and local governments must now pay the bill charged by past politicians who bought their way into office and re-election on the backs of the taxpayers.

So now the battle to control the “public unions” begins and it starts in the Midwest.  States like Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan and Indiana will be for the first time confronting the old system and saying “no-more!”

The unionized public sector was about 40% of the workforce in the 1960’s.  Today the numbers are about the same.  However, this could soon change.  Simple items like “Right to Work” where employees are no longer REQUIRED to give money to a union should be passed by every state and applied to state workers in particular.  Requiring the public  unions to establish on a periodic basis that they actually represent a majority of the public employees is an excellent idea whose time has come.  Imagine if you would a future world where the public employees decide for themselves if they want to pay union dues, and decide for themselves if they still want the union to represent them.  The simple fact is that the numbers of people being members in public unions will drop like a rock.  This is the reason why in Wisconsin the unions are putting up such a pitched battle.  They see this for exactly what it is – the gravy train is about to come to an end.

I sincerely believe that if employees, public or private) are given the choice, a large percentage of them will decide that they do not want to pay the union money.  I also believe that as these people stop giving the union money, that they will decide that they do not need a union to speak for them and that they can negotiate their own wages and benefits directly with their employer.

It is my prediction that we are now going to see this decade as the high point of public union membership.  Just like we look back at 1960 as we do in the private sector, we will look back to 2010 as the high point to the continual drop in public employee membership in unions.  It is my sincere hope that maybe for the first time, politicians will be representing the TAXPAYERS in negotiations with the public unions.  Requiring these contracts to be ratified by the taxpayers is an excellent start. 

Of course to keep this going, Democrats must not be allowed to run the state and local governments or else the cycle will in all liklihood start over.

NLRB Power Grab

What does a government agency do when it is slowly going out of business due to lack of support?  It does a power grab by creating new ways to file lawsuits against employers and it is going to require every private employer to post a notice to all their employees advising them that they can use this ageny.

That is EXACTLY what the National Labor relations Board has decided to do.  Work at the NLRB is way down.  Unions are unable to organize the private sector.  (We have almost a 90% win rate on Union organizing campaigns.)   The numbers are so bad that the NLRB is trying to figure out ways to create more work. 

What the NLRB has come up with are two items; one is a new procedure to go to Federal Court to require employees who were discharged during a Union campaign to be reinstated BEFORE there is a legal determination that they were unlawfully discharged.  In a conference I attended, I asked the Acting General Counsel for the NLRB who created this procedure what happens if the Federal Court puts the employee back to work, and then later it is determined that he was lawfully discharged?  His answer?  They never considered that as a possibility!!  I swear to you it is true.   He actually said that.

The next thing the NLRB is doing is seeking a new Federal Rule to REQUIRE every private employer to post a notice that their employees have a right to organize and form a union.  No kidding, after the law was passed in 1935, some 75 years later, the NLRB has decided that employees are not using the NLRB to organize their employers because they do not know they have this right. 

It is extremely unlikely that the NLRB has a right to actually compel these notices, and you can expect that organizations like the Chamber of Commerce will file a lawsuit to stop this NEW RULE the day the rule is published.  The total absence of any statutory authority to actually make employers post this notice will not stop the NLRB from trying to do this. 

Stay tuned for further developments.


Obama TOTALLY blew EFCA.  The Unions spent almost 500 MILLION dollars to elect Democrats to Congress and Obama in order to pass EFCA.  Had it passed, union membership would have doubled in 4 years, contributions to Democrats would have doubled in the 2012 election and the Democrats with Union money would have achieved power that they had not seen since the 1940’s. 

Instead, through sheer incompetence, the Unions got NOTHING for their money.  Pelosi played chicken with Reid and refused to pass EFCA until Reid acted in the Senate.  Obama just sat on the sidelines trying to pass Obamacare. 

The Unions got NOTHING but the shaft.  How can the Union Leader’s go back to their members and say “We blew 500 MILLION dollars on these clowns?”

No wonder the Unions are upset!  I am surprised they turned out the vote for Reid who did NOTHING for them but take their money!  Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.  Or as P.T. Barnum said, “there is a sucker born every minute.“ 

No matter how you describe it, the Union Leader’s got taken to the cleaners.  The only swindle that was greater was Bernie Madoff. 

Obama made every dirty deal in the book to pass Obamacare.  Name me ONE deal he cut to pass EFCA!!!

We might want to classify the Union Leader’s under Einstein’s definition as insane, since the Union leader’s keep doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result!

The Unions will probably not have another chance to ever pass EFCA again.  Call them suckers, insane or just plain foolish; the bottom line is they keep expecting the Democrats to do something other than just take their money. 

Did I mention the Union Leaders may be insane?

Post Election Analysis

Without question, the big looser in this election is the labor union movement. 

Think about it, in 2008 the Unions had in their hands a Democratic majority with a filibuster proof Senate, and the ONE piece of legislation that would have cemented the resurgence of their power, the Employee Free Choice Act, also known as EFCA, was there for the taking.  They spent $500,000,000 to get this sitting President and Democratic Congress elected.

Yet, they could not get a vote on this bill.  The Obama Administration took the Union money and instead of passing EFCA, turned its attention to healthcare.  Instead of passing EFCA in March of 2009, they got bogged down in Obamacare and as a direct result lost the election.

The simple fact is that it could be 20 years before the Unions will ever have the opportunity to pass EFCA again, if ever.  Over the next 20 years, Unions will continue to lose members and union companies will continue to close resulting in fewer members.  Today less than 7% of the private workforce in unionized.  In 20 years, it could be down to 1 to 2 percent. 

Unions spent almost $400,000,000 in this election cycle and got wiped out.  Except for the left coast and the New York and New England areas, where by the shere number of registered Democrats makes it almost impossible for Democrats to lose, there was a wipeout all across the Country of Democrat office holders. 

In addition, the impact of  reapportionment for Congressional seats as a direct result of this election could make Republicans in charge on the House for 10 years. 

Therefore, as I said at the beginning, the real loser in this election was Big Labor.

Think about this one point, had the Unions spent the $900,000,00 in the past four years on their members and organizing instead of electing Democrats that have done nothing for them, maybe they would not have needed EFCA to increase their membership ranks!

Becker Appointment to NLRB is a Game Changer

As those of you who have followed this blog know, on March 4, 2010, I reported that Obama had cut a deal with the Unions who were very upset at how Obama and the Democrats had so bungled the Employee Free Choice Act (“EFCA”), that he would make a recess appointment of Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”).  One more in the many “back room” deals the Obama administration has cut in just over a year in power.

What I predicted came true over the weekend with Mr. Becker’s appointment. 

In essence, what we now have is a three member NLRB board that will not only go out of its way to reverse President Bush’s NLRB decisions, but this is going to be an activist NLRB and it will be creating new law all the time.

Of most concern to management is the idea that companies can be forced to recognize and bargain with “minority” unions.  What does this mean?  Normally, for a union to be certified as a bargaining agent there must be an election and the Union must win by 50% plus 1 of a secret ballot vote.  If the Union wins, it is certified as the bargaining representative.

The “minority” union concept means that the Union no longer has to have a 50% plus 1 secret ballot vote to have a right to sit down and bargain with the Company.  How many employees will be required in order to force a Company to meet this minority union and bargain for a contract? Nobody knows right now.  However, my best guess is that the NLRB would at least require a 30% showing of interest by the entire bargaining unit.  Thus, the 30% showing could do away with the election all together and just like EFCA, the employer would be required to meet and bargain with the Union and avoid an NLRB election.

From a union standpoint, this would even be better for the Unions than EFCA because EFCA was going to require the 50% plus 1 rule as its showing of interest. 

Here is a short list of what I believe is current case law that the Obama NLRB will soon reverse:

  1. Back pay liability limits for salts.
  2. Burden of Proof on how long a salt would have worked.
  3. Lawsuits against Unions are protected.
  4. Voluntary recognition of a Union does not bar decertification of the Union.
  5. Broad definition of who is a supervisor.
  6. Employees who work in a non-union workplace are not entitled to a representative.
  7. Aw will employment status does not convert a permanent replacement into a temporary employee.

This is just a short list but it is clearly a “hit list” that the Unions believe the Obama NLRB will soon reverse.

Health Savings Accounts destroyed by “Obamacare”

Health Savings Accounts were designed for people to save money for healthcare costs by allowing people to place into these accounts tax free money.  In 2010, the Federal Government “promised” that you could place for an individual policy $3050.00 and for a family the amount was $6150.00.  Seniors over 55 could add an additional $1000.00 to their plan.  Moreover, because these deductions were based upon a “policy issued” basis people were actually able to place into tax free savings for health care amounts in excess of $9000.00. 

I used the word “promise” because you can never trust the Democrats in office not to change things and figure out a way to “reform” something by taxing it.  I also used the past tense, because as of yesterday, all this great tax benefits for the American worker has disappeared overnight.  Thanks to “Obamacare” this tax deduction just got mostly wiped out.  The total “family” contribution is now down to $2,500.00 for a family. 

And for all those Americans who are working and have paid into these funds and fully funded the accounts in 2010?  OOPS!  Too bad, you just got hit with a hidden tax increase!  In fact, over the next several years, the Democrats are expecting to collect in TAXES from you an additional 13 BILLION dollars by taxing this money.

What the Democrats never understand, is that what they have done is wipe out Health Savings Accounts.  They will NOT get this tax money because people will not pay after tax dollars to save for health insurance.  They will switch to another tax deductible way to pay for healthcare.   

Democrats never seem to learn from past mistakes.  Remember about 15 years ago that the Democrats decided that only “rich” people bought new boats and airplanes and so they could afford a “luxury tax” on them so the Democrats could raise more tax money to spend in Washington?  What happened as a result?  It damn near destroyed the boating and aircraft manufacturing businesses in the United States because the American people REFUSED to buy these products with this tax!

It took years before those taxes were repealed in Washington as a mistake.  Yet, nobody in in the Democratic party in Washington went back to those laid off boat and aircraft workers and apologized to them for destroying their jobs and companies. 

For those of you who have already fully paid into your Health Savings Accounts, do not expect Obama to apologize to you for the fact you will in 2010 be paying taxes on your healthcare.  After all, if you got a job, the Democrats think you are “rich” and if you have paid into a Health Savings Account more than $2500.00 the Democrats think you are “very rich.”

Can Anyone List “ALL” the “Special Deals” that were cut?

We all know that Obama lied to us all when he promised in the election campaign, “These negotiations will be on C-Span, and so the public will be part of the conversation and we’ll see the choices that are being made.”

One of the biggest problems in the Obama Healthcare bill is that all the special deals that were cut behind closed doors.  In an earlier posting, I pointed out that in fact the very first special deal that was cut on this bill was by Obama himself soon after he was elected, and he did it with the DRUG companies!  https://theohiolaborlawyers.wordpress.com/2010/03/15/obama-in-bed-with-drug-companies/

The simple fact is that there are SO MANY special deals cut to get this monster passed, that it has overwhelmed us all.  In fact, I cannot find a single source that lists “ALL” the special deals that were cut.  What we know right now are just the “big ones.” However, some web sites are misleading and they list items such as the following to be all the special deals:

Cornhusker Kickback:  Perhaps the most well known in the Senate bill, the provision, included at the behest of Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), ensures that Nebraska would be the only state to have the full amount of its increased Medicaid costs paid for by the federal government.

The Louisiana Purchase:  The Senate bill provides extra Medicaid funding for any state in which every county has been declared a disaster area.  Because of Hurricane Katrina, Louisiana is the only state that would qualify for the money.  The $300 million provision for Louisiana was slipped in late in the process to persuade Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) to support the health care takeover.

Gator Aid:  At the request of Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fl), the Senate bill includes a formula for protecting certain Medicare Advantage enrollees from billions in cuts.  The formula would only apply to five states, most notably to Florida in which 800,000 of the state’s one million Medicare Advantage users would be exempt from cuts.

New England Handouts:  In addition to the $100 million included in federal Medicaid payments for Nebraska, the bill provides two New England states with even more money Medicaid funding.  According to CBO, the Senate bill now contains about $600 million in extra Medicaid cash to Vermont, and about $500 million in additional money for Medicaid to Massachusetts, making these three states the only to receive such funding.  Despite claims that these cushy extras for a few states would be scaled back, reports indicate that the White House is still making deals so these states can keep the handouts.

The Dodd Clinic:  Section 10502(a) of the bill provides $100 million for construction at an unnamed “health care facility” affiliated with an academic health center at a public research university in a state with only one public academic medical and dental school.  Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) later sent a press release saying that he was securing the money for the University of Connecticut, and then Dodd bragged that, “These provisions will bring millions of dollars to the state so that Connecticut’s residents can receive quality, affordable health care.”

Montana Medicare Earmark:  A provision slipped into the Senate bill by Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus (D-MT), Section 1881A(b)(2), specifically expands Medicare coverage for individuals who reside “in or around the geographic area subject to an emergency declaration made as of June 17, 2009.” The area the bill refers to is an asbestos contaminated area near Libby, Montana, for which Sen. Max Baucus has been trying to secure funding for years.

See, http://www.atr.org/full-list-backroom-health-deals-inbr-a4672

But even though this posting thought it was listing ALL the back room deals on this bill, in fact this is just the low hanging fruit. 

What I find most interesting is that not even the Republicans have posted on their web site ALL the special deals cut on this bill!

The way to defeat the Democrats in November is with the truth.  Just list all the special deals that this bill has in it and will fall under its own weight.

If there is anyone out there in blog world who knows of a list of ALL the special deals cut on this bill, please write me and let me know.

The “Fix” is in

The American public is about to get a lesson on how politics in this Country really works.

For those of you who think this vote is going to be close, you are right.

For those of you who think this vote is going to be unknown to the last vote, you are wrong.

The fix is in and this healthcare bill is going to pass.

Here is what happens, the leadership decides who gets a “pass” on the vote to manipulate the public.  Those who vote “no” would in fact vote “yes” except for the pass they get from the Democratic leadership.  Therefore, the fix is in, the votes are counted, it will be close, but they only need to pass it by one or two votes – everything else is fluff.

Those who are given a pass and allowed to vote “no” are in close districts where a “yes” vote could and probably would cost them their seat in Congress.

So the “fix” is in and the vote is going to pass the House.  How do I know this is true you might ask?  Simple.  The Speaker of the House decides when a vote comes to the floor.  She does not bring a bill up for a vote unless she has enough people who have pledged to her that if she needs them to switch votes from no to yes, they will do it to pass the bill.

Add to that the fact that Obama is now going around telling Democrats that his Presidency is at stake on this vote, and you have a lock on a pass.  Remember when Bill Clinton’s tax increase was going to lose by one vote and John Kerry changed his vote from a “no” to a “yes” just so the bill would pass?  Expect the same thing here.

I’m sorry to report it, but the simple fact is that the Democrats care more about their party loyalty than what the American public wants.

Therefore, it is the responsibility of the American public in November to “Remember this Vote” and defeat every Democrat that runs for office because only with a sea change will people say the next time a Speaker of the House tries to pull this fix, that maybe if the American public does not want it, then it should not pass!

It’s the Economy Stupid!

I am sitting here reading about Obama coming to Ohio pushing healthcare and my thoughts turned to what do the people in Ohio really want? 

Of course, it then came to me, with 10% unemplyment (plus in some areas), those in Ohio want what those in South Carolina want and what those in California want and what pretty much EVERYBODY in this Country wants – a better economy!

Then it occured to me, why have we not seen more of the Bill Clinton response to George Bush when the focus of the election campaign moved away from the recession and slow recovery?  Is not everyone wanting a return to a better economy?

I constatnly read that when it comes to what Americans want, that Obama is “tone deaf.”  I think they are right.

So with over 10% unemployment in Ohio, and people wanting the economy to improve, Obama instead comes to the state wanting us to support a TRILLION dollar new spending program with NO MONEY to pay for it!

Maybe if “someone” who attends one of these photo ops on healthcare stood up and yelled, “It’s the economy stupid!” that maybe Obama would FINALLY get it!

It’s the economy stupid!

Obama in Bed with Drug Companies

Has anyone wondered WHY drug companies and the Unions are spending MILLIONS of dollars in ads for the Obama healthcare bill?  I am sure we know why Unions are doing this, but drug companies?  Why them?

In a great artice I just read it is all laid out.  I am reprinting it here because you need to read this.  I cannot imagine a more important article and it needs to be read by as many Americans as possible.

President has made a mess of health reform

WASHINGTON — A year ago President Obama strolled confidently into the garden of good and evil, bit deeply into the apple and created the mess he and congressional Democrats are in now concerning health insurance reform.

Only a few heady weeks into his presidency, Obama called his first White House health care summit. It was not with those who got him elected, folks from the neighborhoods, the universities, the clinics and officials from hard-pressed state and local health agencies.

Thinking he was still in Chicago, Obama blithely muscled such non-entities aside and settled in with silk-suited brass from the health insurance trade, the hospital conglomerates and the prescription drug business.

With trusted Chicago aides at his elbow, Obama made an amoral deal with the drug manufacturers that has poisoned everything that happened since. He had a debt to pay. The drug makers had donated tens of millions to his Senate and presidential campaigns.

Just after this summit, Obama secretly promised the Rx people that there would be no government jaw-boning with the industry to get lower prices for seniors and others. Obama also promised them there would be no drug importation from Canada and other reliable foreign countries.

This, after then-candidate Sen. Obama promised his administration would enter into talks for lower prices and would bring cheaper but identical products in from Canada. As a U. S. senator and presidential candidate, Obama voted for both.

I am indebted to reporters Tom Hamburger, who broke the story last year about this amazing turnabout, and Paul Blumenthal, who recently added important details. Obama’s 180-degree switch sent a signal to all legislators with close ties to special interests. Obama had campaigned on transparency and chasing lobbyists out of town. Now, it all moved behind closed doors, just as in the ferment over Hillary Clinton’s failed health care proposals 15 years before. The lessons then and now: Don’t trust the people.

On April 15, 2009, there was a secret meeting at the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee at which the drug industry outlined its advertising campaign for health insurance reform. Another part of the $80 billion deal was filling in some, but not all, of the doughnut hole in Medicare Part D.

Seeing that Obama didn’t believe his own campaign rhetoric about transparency, the Senate Finance Committee began its secret talks on what constituted health insurance reform. Max Baucus, D-Mont., is chairman. Charles E. Schumer, D-N. Y., is a prominent member. Baucus emerged on June 20 and called Obama’s unsavory deal with the drug industry “a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.” It certainly wasn’t for sick people with limited incomes.

Not long afterward, Senate Democrats got all wobbly about the public option that passed the House. This would be a government-supervised and subsidized insurance program. It would have been the best yardstick by which private health insurance costs could be measured and controlled. On Oct. 28, Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Independent, said he would block any bill that contained the public option. Many senators, awash in insurance industry money, shed crocodile tears at the demise of the public option.

Obscured in quarrels over details is the collapse of public trust.

Now, instead of cost control, we are arguing over a symbol: The idea that Democrats need to pass something, even though it won’t produce better health care.

Nothing better symbolizes that special hell into which Obama’s dealings sent health care than a rule being shaped by Rep. Louise M. Slaughter, D-Fairport, and chairwoman of the Rules Committee. She would have the House symbolically approve the Senate bill that would cost New York taxpayers $1 billion a year in added Medicaid costs. Part of the money subsidized payoffs to Vermont, Nebraska and Michigan to buy their senators’ votes last Dec. 24.

Democrats Ready to Jump Off Cliff on Healthcare

  It is widely reported that the Democrats in the House of Representatives are going to hold their noses and vote for the Senate bill in the “hope” that the Senate will agree to “fix it.”

The “wisdom” coming from the Whitehouse is that they already voted for the bill once and so if it fails, then Republicans are already going to hit them with that vote in November, so they might as well vote for the passage of the bill.  WOW!  I have never in my life seen such stupid reasoning before.

Let me get this right.  They should vote for a bill that almost 60% of the American public DOES NOT WANT and the reason is that this will be BETTER than NOT voting for the bill the American public DOES NOT WANT!!!!

If this logic were not so stupid to begin with, it would be funny. 

Do these Whitehouse pundits think the American Public is STUPID?  Do they really believe that when AFTER this bill is passed, and Medicare gets hit with a $500 BILLION dollar cut, and they see their insurance rates INCREASE between now and November, that the American public will not go to the polls in droves to vote these people OUT OF OFFICE?

These people are nuts and those Democrats who vote for this bill with this logic are sure to go the way of the Dodo bird.  Maybe this is good for the Country since under Darwin, if they are so politically stupid as to follow this logic, they should become extinct.

Whatever happened to jobs and the economy that all those in the Whitehouse promised the focus would be on after the Democrats lost to Scott Brown in February?  Like lemmings, the House Democrats are following Obama right off a cliff. 

All I can say is WOW!

Labor going after Democrats in Primary

The news media is finally picking up on what was discussed here a while ago.  That is that Democrats can no longer expect the support of Unions if they in fact do not vote the way Unions want.  The litmus test appears to center around the Employee Free Choice Act a/k/a “EFCA.” 


For the short term, this is going to hurt the Unions more than help them.  Senate seats such as Colorado and Arkansas could flip from Democrat to Republican as a direct result of these primary contests.  Obviously, the more Republicans elected, the less power the Unions will have in Congress.

In the long run, it will probably make the Unions stronger because no Democrat elected to office can be assured that he or she will always have Big Labor’s support – no matter how they vote.

What baffles me is the split support Arlen Specter in PA is getting.  Considering the fact Specter is more than anyone else closest to the the sole cause on why EFCA did not pass last summer, I cannot understand why any Unions are supporting him against his primary opponent Joe Sestak who has promised 100% support of EFCA with no changes. 

Such actions really only dilutes the message Big Labor is trying to send to elected Democrats.  Maybe Tipp O’Neil was right when he said “All politics is local.”   But if Big Labor wants to make a point, it is going to have to speak with one voice, otherwise, what is the message it is sending in the Specter/Sestak race?  It is OK to screw us so long as we like you on other issues? 

If Big Labor’s goal is to nationalize elections, then it needs to get its own house in order first.

Unions, Healthcare and Will Rogers

As most people know, the Senate Democrat’s version of the healthcare bill placed a 40% TAX on healthcare plans that the Senate Democrat’s considered to be too “rich.”  The idea behind this was that people in these healthcare “rich” plans would spend more money on medical care than those who are not in these plans.  Therefore, the Senate Democrats believed a 40% tax on these plans would deter their use and lower costs.

After the Senate Democrats passed their version of the bill, the Unions who supported healthcare reform threatened to withdraw their support unless this 40% tax was changed.  What most people do NOT know was that behind closed doors, AFL-CIO President Trumka met with Whitehouse officials and in another “back-room” deal to get healthcare passed, the Obama administration agreed that everyone who was in a rich plan would have to pay this 40% tax EXCEPT unionized workers and public employees who are also probably – you guessed it – unionized.

Today the Democrats are meeting behind closed doors trying to match all the back-room deals with the sponsors and see just how much they think the public can stomach.  The simple fact is that the healthcare bill that was promised by Obama to be open for all to see on C-Span was born in back-room deals and still today lives on back-room deals.

Instead of meeting behind closed doors, why do not the Democrats do what was promised, open their doors to C-Span and let us all watch to see what they do?  The reason is of course simple.  THEY DO NOT WANT US TO KNOW ABOUT ALL THE NEW DEALS THEY ARE MAKING.

If it were not for the fact that this TRILLION dollar new program will in fact drive the deficit even further into the deep red, this whole thing would be looked upon as a joke.  Just so we know what a TRILLION dollars looks like, here it is:  1,000,000,000,000.00

It is no wonder that Congress has the absolute worst ratings it has ever had.  These people have lost all since of what is right and wrong and all they care about is getting elected.  Therefore, it is the duty of every American that goes to the polls in November to vote AGAINST every person in Congress who votes for this healthcare plan to pass!

Maybe, once their Union exemption from the tax is stripped away, and it hopefully will be, it will be real interesting who the Union members actually vote for in November. 

Right now, Charlie Cook, who makes the famous “Cook Report” is predicting a Republican House majority in the November election because the Democrats just cannot seem to understand that the American public does NOT want this plan to pass.  It is said that President Obama is “tone deaf” and does not hear or want to hear about what Americans are concerned about.  All he wants to see and hear is what HE cares about. 

Even after Scott Brown won the election that broke the Democrat’s 60 vote filibuster proof majority in the Senate, and Obama promised he would turn away from healthcare and concentrate on what the American public DOES care about and that is the economy, here we are, back where we started a year ago dealing with healthcare – NOT THE ECONOMY.

It was Will Rogers who said it best, “The only time this Country is in danger, is when Congress is in session.”  Truer words were never spoken.

Union Corruption (again)

Edward Rodzwicz, former President of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen pleaded guilty to taking bribes.  In this case, he solicited a bribe from a lawyer who was going to be removed from the Union’s referral list for representing employees who are injured under the Federal Employer Liability Act (“FELA”).  To allow the attorney to be placed back on the list, Rodzwicz demanded a payment of $20,000. After he secured a down payment of $10,000 the attorney was placed back on the list and then the final payment of $10,000 was then made.

This one act of corruption places the entire referral system of the Union into question.  Can it really be that this was a “one time only” act by the President of the Union?  Was he so desperate for cash that he traveled to Arkansas to make the bribe offer?  This action places the entire referral system used by the Union into question.

How could the President be able to so easily reinstate a lawyer who for whatever reasons had been removed from the system for referral?

If the Justice Department is doing their job correctly, they now have the top dog who knows where all the bodies are buried. 

Odds are great that with the guilty plea now in hand and before sentencing, that this former President of this Union is singing like a bird.

Sort of makes you wonder who cannot sleep at night?

Stay tuned — more interesting news likely to follow….

Union’s Win First Concession from Obama

Even though Craig Becker, an attorney with the SEIU, was REJECTED to be appointed to the National Labor Relations Board by the Senate in a bi-partisan vote ,  it would appear that the Unions in general, and Andy Stern in particular, are so outraged by the Democrats failure or incompetence to pass the Employee Free Choice Act a/k/a EFCA, that they have demanded, and Obama has agreed, to give Becker a recess appointment to the NLRB anyway.

In earlier posts, we have discussed Mr. Becker and his agenda for labor.

Obviously, the hopes by the Unions are that Becker can do what the Democrats failed to do, and enact EFCA in NLRB cases.  It is what we call legislating from the bench and make no mistake about it, that is EXACTLY what the Unions want him to do and that is EXACTLY what he WILL do.

Why would Becker want a job that he can only hold for less than a year unless in that one year’s time, he intends to wreck havoc on companies and seek revenge for all the slights that labor has suffered under BOTH the Bush and the Obama administrations to date.

While I understand Labor’s frustrations at the Democrats, I just don’t think they ought to atone for this sin by placing on the NLRB an in your face left wing nut who wants to enact the EFCA legislation by NLRB decisions .