June 14, 2007
SCOTUS rules for teachers, EFF

AP:

In a Washington state case, the U.S. Supreme Court said today that states may force public sector labor unions to get consent from workers before using their fees for political activities.
The unanimous decision, authored by Justice Scalia, is here. A statement from the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, which pursued the case against the Washington Education Association on behalf of non-member teachers, is here.

But the AP article reminds us of Mrs. Gregoire' end-run to facilitate the union salary-skimming operation:

the state's Democratic governor and Democratic-controlled Legislature recently changed the law to eliminate the provision that was upheld today, blunting the impact of the court ruling.
Mrs. Gregoire did that for the teachers! and the children!

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at June 14, 2007 08:06 AM | Email This
Comments
1. This one's a good decision. The WEA is nothing more than an arrogan special interest group and needs to be slapped-down a few notches.

Posted by: Libertarian on June 14, 2007 08:14 AM
2. Fraudoire and her goons knew this was coming, so they passed the new law complete with "emergency"
provision. I am sure the fact the WEA is one of her biggest contibutors had nothing to do with it. Let's hope the voters make sure this lady only does one term.

Posted by: Burdabee on June 14, 2007 08:23 AM
3. Just heard the WEA goon on the radio.... "The Bush Supreme Court....blah blah blah blah"

Fuck Unions.

Posted by: eric on June 14, 2007 08:36 AM
4. That was unanimous!!!

I don't think any sane, or even insane, person would call Ruth Vader Ginsburg a Bushie.

Posted by: swatter on June 14, 2007 08:52 AM
5. Do you think it is possible to express opposition to unions without resorting to the "F" bomb? HA has a great venue for that sort of commentary, I think we can do better here.

Posted by: Huh? on June 14, 2007 09:35 AM
6. It is Gregoire's job to pay out to the education unions.

Posted by: Publicbulldog on June 14, 2007 09:40 AM
7. Talk about irony. This is really good news for the other 49 states.

Posted by: TB on June 14, 2007 09:41 AM
8. swatter: and I hope we can use this as a blunt instrument to beat up on the judges that the SCOTUS (unanimously!) smacked down, come election time. Of course, Bobbe won't be on the ballot, but others will be, in time ...

Posted by: pudge on June 14, 2007 09:42 AM
9. When will we see a right to work initiative that ends union slavery in this state? I will volunteer to get signatures.

Posted by: AP on June 14, 2007 10:17 AM
10. This is the grabbassian age.
Union mobsters have controll of the Government here in Washington State.
see..ya .....see.

Posted by: Publicbulldog on June 14, 2007 11:38 AM
11. http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/05-1589_All.pdf

In a nutshell:

(a) It is undeniably unusual for a government agency to give a private entity the power to tax government employees. The notion that §760's modest limitation upon that extraordinary benefit violates the First Amendment is counterintuitive, because it is undisputed that Washington could have restricted public-sector agency fees to the portion of union dues devoted to collective bargaining, or even eliminated them entirely. Washington's far less restrictive limitation on respondent's authorization to exact money from government employees is of no greater constitutional concern."

The law that would make sense would be one which (as suggested by the Court) limits mandatory fees to only the portion calculated as being related to bargaining.

Take a look at "the public employees bill of rights" from 2005:

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=2256&year=2005

It doesn't limit the fee to only the amount to cover true workplace representation, but it adds some accountability to a the private entity granted "the power to tax government employees." If they don't like the accountability, they don't have to charge the fee.

For strong worker-right protections, check out some amendments to the "quick fix & payback" bill on this lawsuit issue, HB 2079:

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=2079&year=2007

Particularly amendment #206. Ooh, and 193 is nice too.

It costs a small amount to file an initiative.
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/initiatives_faq.aspx

Posted by: anon on June 14, 2007 11:40 AM
12. Is there some way to remove the new law that the Legislature passed with the emergency clause to circumvent the SCOTUS? Would it take another initiative?

I agree with the poster that Gregoire should be removed at the next election for the good of the state but the question is how to do it, when the leftist-side of the state is so liberal & will no doubt give her another term? Where's the strong Republican candidate who can overcome the money that pours into the Democrat coffers from the unions, the Indians, etc.?

Posted by: Clean House on June 14, 2007 11:57 AM
13. Gregoire in the past sure has given dumb advice. From the tobacco lobby to the unions, she sure has struck out.

Except, her crowd is sure good at ruining elections.

Posted by: swatter on June 14, 2007 12:23 PM
14. Gee, where's the fringe leftist nutballs when you need 'em?

Posted by: Hinton on June 14, 2007 01:20 PM
15. and June is also the month when I can quit my UW Research Technologist union - and I have put this into motion.

But I'm a little confused now as to whether or not they will be able to use a part of my "fair share" dues (after I quit) for political purposes (I certainly won't be giving them permission to do this)?

Posted by: ajday on June 14, 2007 02:05 PM
16. Yeah, and as a foster parent, I have become a proud member of my local state union.

Posted by: swatter on June 14, 2007 03:32 PM
17. Recall pettion for Governor Gregoire

As Attorney General ,Governor Gregoire did not properly enforce the Washington State medical marijuana law.
As Attorney General, Governor Gregoire allowed 8 or more Washington State Counties,to enforce County laws over State laws.

County laws are subordinate to State General laws.

The Washington State attorney General failed to challenge a declaration of seperate sovereignty by Washington State Counties.
During Governor Gregoire's tenure as Washington State Attorney General,8 Counties of Washington State were able to enforce subordinate laws,without challenging the enforcement of those subordinate laws.
Governor Gregoire, is guilty of Malfeasance in her duties as Washington State Attorney General,for failing to challenge 16 or more Counties enforcement of subordinate County laws over State General laws,and the subsequent declaration of separate Sovereignty by 8 or more counties of Washington State.
As Attorney General of Washington State ,Governor Gregoire was sworn in to uphold Washington State general laws.
As Attorney General of Washington State,Governor Gregoire has incorectly determined that Counties can interpret General laws as they deem fit,and allowed the alteration of General laws on a County by County basis.
This was malfeasance of the most basic sort.
As the Attorney General of Washington State,Governor Gregoire Failed to uphold the general laws of washington State,and not only failed to challange a declaration of separate sovereignty,but encouraged it by promoting,and distributing different altered versions of 69.51A
without any attempts to stop the practice of altering,and enforcing Washington State general laws.

Posted by: Publicbulldog on June 14, 2007 06:18 PM
18. I don't believe for a minute Gregoire did it for the teachers, or the children. I think she did it for the SEIU,which I believe now is the largest union in the state, considering all state employees who were forced to join and the contract employees who, even if they don't join, have their dues deducted anyway. I'd call that a huge conflict of interest, in that SEIU donates overwhelmingly to D's and liberal causes, including illegal immigration activist groups. Kinda, sorta like extorting for chosen politcos?

Posted by: katomar on June 14, 2007 11:13 PM
19. Katomar@18:

Although SEIU represents some government employees it is the Washington Federation of State Employees (WFSE) that is the BIG union. WFSE is the local branch of AFSCME (Association of Federal, State and Municipal Employees) and affilliated with the AFL-CIO.

These guys are huge! SEIU is small potatoes in comparison. AFSCME is reputed to be the second largest union in America.

They spend enormous amounts of money on political campaigns, "social awareness", and "worker education". Only those funds directly paid to candidates or their party is counted in their book-keeping when a member asks (yearly) to have his or her due not go to political causes.

I got a $15 check when I filled out their forms (in triplicate) asking as much. And this took nearly a year and can only be done during certain restricted time periods.

They're Stalinists - and proud of it.

Posted by: deadwood on June 15, 2007 12:28 AM
20. Deadwood: Thanks for the clarification. Looks like it's worse than I thought.

Posted by: katomar on June 15, 2007 11:58 AM
21. Republican campaign alert ! Use this or snooze and lose..

Posted by: KS on June 15, 2007 04:38 PM
22. This will be oe of the Top 3 Campaign Issues in 2008.
Republicans===Pro-Choice re: YOUR dues money.
Democrats===Thieves

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on June 17, 2007 06:37 AM
23. The former Attorney General just snubbed her nose at the Supreme Court by paying back the unions which contributed to her landslide election.

And you were expecting what?

The corruption in this state is obvious. The solutions are not obvious.

Posted by: Snuffy on June 21, 2007 07:54 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?