SEIUrsly

Forcing non-members to pay for unions’ political advocacy

“ Early next year the Supreme Court will hear Knox v. SEIU Local 1000, an important case about union power and individual conscience. The Cato Institute has joined several other organizations in filing an amicus brief (PDF), as my colleague Ilya Shapiro explains here (snippage below) In 2005, the SEIU initiated a mid-year campaign against two California ballot measures, one that would cap state spending and another that would restrict the use of union dues for political purposes. In states such as California that do not have “right to work” laws, unions are allowed to take dues from non-union workers to finance collective-bargaining activities that, arguably, benefit all employees.  Since 1977, however, unions have not been allowed to take dues from non-union members to pay for pure political advocacy without adequate protections for possible dissenters. To distinguish political money from collective-bargaining money, the Supreme Court requires that a “Hudson notice” be given to all non-union workers. This notice gives non-members the opportunity to challenge political expenditures. But when the SEIU began garnishing 25-33% more wages to fight the California ballot initiatives, it issued no new Hudson notice, effectively forcing 28,000 non-member employees to finance its political speech. ” Obama's Private Army? Related Obama’s 2012 Campaign Strategy — Incite Civil Unrest One of our most read articles published in 2010 (EXTRA: Obama Suspends Civil Liberties ) , dealt with a hypothetical scenario where Obama inflamed civil disorder in order to institute Martial Law and in doing so, suspended the 2012 election. Obama Team to Incite Race Riots; Use White Guilt in 2012 Election Since riots and uprisings are now en vogue the world over and with signs that they will soon reach the shores of America, would it be that much of a stretch to suggest President Obama’s election campaign would be willing to incite race riots in the hopes of guilting white Americans into casting a vote for a President who is progressively losing popularity and support at an ever accelerating rate?