Right-to-work advocates gird for resistance
By The Washington Post
Published: Thursday, Dec. 13, 2012, 7:38 p.m.
LANSING, Mich. — The conservative groups that supported Michigan's new “right to work” law — winning a stunning victory over unions, even in the heart of American labor — have vowed to replicate that success elsewhere.
The search for the next Michigan could be difficult, however.
National unions, caught flat-footed in the Wolverine State, pledge to offer fierce opposition wherever right-to-work efforts crop up next. They consider the laws a direct attack on their finances and political clout at a time when labor influence is greatly diminished.
In addition, only a few Republican governors who could enact such legislation seem eager to bring the fight to their states.
“There is not much of a movement to do it,” Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett, of Shaler, told a Philadelphia radio station this week.
Corbett's lack of enthusiasm is shared by two other governors who have battled with unions — McKees Rocks native John Kasich in Ohio and Scott Walker in Wisconsin.
Right-to-work measures such as the one that Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder, a Republican, signed Tuesday allow workers to opt out of paying union dues. Advocates say the laws, now in force in 24 states, offer employees greater freedom and make states more competitive in attracting jobs.
“If Michigan can do it, then I think everybody ought to think about it,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
Mix said he believes at least one more state will adopt such a law before the end of 2013 — Pennsylvania, Alaska, Missouri and Montana among the top contenders.
The boisterous protesters who stormed Michigan's State Capitol in Lansing on Tuesday were gone on Wednesday, dispersed after Snyder signed the legislation.
Only about 30 demonstrators stood in front of the building on Wednesday, their mouths covered in duct tape that read: “$1,500 Less.” The figure represents the difference in the average annual salary of workers in right-to-work states versus states without such laws, say protest organizers.
Andy Schor, a Democratic state representative-elect, said the push for right-to-work is part of “a national effort” by conservative groups to undercut unions.
Opponents of the law said they are considering their options, including a possible legal challenge and stepped-up campaigning against Snyder, who faces re-election in 2014.
In a telephone interview, Snyder — who repeatedly said he would not sign a right-to-work measure — sought to explain how he had changed his mind. The first-term governor, elected during the GOP wave of 2010, said he was encouraged by the example of Indiana, which passed a right-to-work bill this year.
Labor expert Richard Hurd of Cornell University said unions in Michigan might expect to lose 20 percent to 30 percent of their revenue, although precise figures are difficult to gauge. Before Indiana, the last state to pass right-to-work was Oklahoma in 2001.
National labor officials say they are confident that no other states will follow Michigan's lead soon.
“In terms of bigger, bluer, more-union states, we're not worried that this is going to lead to a new anti-union push in those states,” said Eddie Vale of Workers' Voice, a super PAC associated with the AFL-CIO. “There still will be state battles, but I think that we're getting to the end of the 2010 Tea Party wave rather than a resurgence of them.”
On Wednesday, a survey of state leaders found that a law like Michigan's would still face significant obstacles in many places.
In some cases, the roadblock is a Democratic governor. Conservatives have hopes for a right-to-work law in Montana, but Gov.-elect Steve Bullock, a Democrat, said he would oppose one: “I don't think that's what we need to build our economy.”
The situation is similar in New Hampshire. “I would veto it if it came to my desk,” Gov.-elect Maggie Hassan, a Democrat, said in a telephone interview on Wednesday. In both Kentucky and Missouri, Democratic governors also have spoken against such laws.
In Maine, Paul LePage, a Republican, has said that he supports right-to-work legislation but is likely to run into opposition in the soon-to-be-Democratic state legislature.
Said Republican state Rep. Tom Winsor:, a longtime supporter of right-to-work legislation: “I'm not the brightest bulb, but I can count noses.”
Even GOP-controlled states were leery on Wednesday.
“If I could wave a magic wand, I would do it tomorrow. But in terms of trying to get it through our legislative process, it is a very heavy lift,” said David Patti, president of the Pennsylvania Business Council. Would a right-to-work bill pass there? “No,” Patti said flatly.
In Ohio, a state with a Republican governor and Republican legislature, citizen activists have reached the same conclusion. An effort is underway to go around the state's politicians and put a right-to-work measure on the ballot next year.
“When we didn't see any interest necessarily in the statehouse, we said, ‘Hey, we're going to move forward,' “ said Chris Littleton of the group Ohioans for Workplace Freedom. They need 386,000 signatures by next July.
How many do they have? “It's safe to say we're under 100,000,” he said.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Snowy owls travel south
- White House flops: Obama knew uncle
- FBI: Russian diplomats lied to get U.S. benefits
- Illinois overhauls its public pensions, cutting benefits for most workers, retirees
- From prison to presidency, Mandela reformed South Africa, ended apartheid
- 2 inmates of Gitmo sent home amid fears
- Georgia cops suspended for cussing out rowdy bus of schoolkids
- Billboard showing U.S. soldier, Muslim woman splits observers
- ‘Cannibal sandwiches’ of raw ground beef unsafe, CDC reports
- VA fears budget cuts will reverse drop in homelessness
- Sandy Hook 911 calls fuel sensitivity debate