That changed the law from having a secret ballot elections to form a Union in the work place, to having an OPEN ballot election instead. These are the same group of people that claim that showing identification to vote is a violation of people's civil rights.
2007-03-20 08:58:00 · 6 answers · asked by Dina W 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
civil rights is just one of their excuses to get what they want. according to liberals, it would violate a terrorist's civil rights to search him at an airport.
2007-03-20 09:01:57 · answer #1 · answered by j 1 · 2⤊ 4⤋
You clearly don't understand the legal issues involved.
Voting in public elections for public officials is protected by the Constitution. Preventing people from being able to vote because the people can't afford to get the ID has been ruled as an unconstitutional poll tax in violation of the 24th Amendment. That's been the law for many decades now.
Voting in private groups that have representative authority, such as unions, is an entirely different matter. While membership in the group is protected under the 1st Amendment right to assemble, the legal authority of the union to act as advocates and representatives of the union members arises out of standard contract-agency law.
And in any situation where representative authority is questioned by the members of a represented group (the union members), those members have the right to challenge that representation. Which requires the vote for union leadership be non-secret.
So, one issue involves constitutionally protected participation in the electoral process, while the other involves only standard contract-agency law dealing with collective representation.
The issues may look the same at a glance. But they're not.
2007-03-20 17:15:40 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Very ironic. But sadly predictable.
The legislation creates a situation where individuals can effectively be "pressured" into voting for the union by their peers.
It is predictable due to the Dem's heavy reliance on the Union vote and campaign contributions. With the drastic reduction in union membership, they had to do something in an effort to shore up their base to keep those votes and dollars rolling in.
2007-03-20 16:10:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, they claim requiring a Driver's Licence only from Black people and Hispanics (because obviously their all Mexicans) is a violation of their civil rights. Open unionization votes keep the unions honest.
2007-03-20 16:02:12 · answer #4 · answered by Beardog 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It is payback for the money they got to get re-elected.
It is also how they keep control of the unions.
#36
These guys have been following a script for 40 years.
2007-03-20 16:13:00 · answer #5 · answered by rmagedon 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
CREATING an ID to vote is illegal. We already have voter ID cards. And no, I don't find it ironic. Private businesses with unions, and the PUBLIC government are two totally different things
2007-03-20 16:02:36 · answer #6 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋