Supreme Court ruling comes down yesterday.
What are the Democrats to do now that their number one financors have to re-group and figure out to funnel them money for the up coming presidential elections?
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-1589.pdf
2007-06-14 17:35:20 · 12 answers · asked by Dina W 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
without consent of the person who's dues they are taking... geesh.
2007-06-14 17:42:40 · update #1
Sorry Ted, you are wrong. This stems from a teacher in Washington State, this happened last presidential cycle.
2007-06-14 17:45:24 · update #2
Organized labor spent some $100 million on get-out-the-vote efforts last year, and reached tens of millions of voters by phone calls, mail and door-to-door canvassing on behalf of labor-backed candidates. Labor political action committees contributed $59.5 million for federal candidates, up 11% from the previous election cycle and higher than any other industry grouping, federal filings show.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/workplace/2007-03-24-unions-politics_N.htm?POE=MONISVA
2007-06-14 18:05:30 · update #3
YES!
As a former member of a union, I am SO happy about this.
Watch for those upset. They think they should be able to force you to join the union, take away your merit pay, incentive pay, anything that makes workers strive to do their best, then use the money for any political purpose they want without your consent.
Their argument that it reduces their power is correct.
GOOD! Enough socialism.
I'm a democrat, not a socialist.
I'm a patriot, not an America-hater.
2007-06-14 17:41:01 · answer #1 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
The leaders of those unions usually use (unwilling) contributors funds to purchase political clout. in many situations it basically buys the contributors extensive advantages for a jiffy. for those that choose it that way, it explains why they get violent interior the streets, for those that don't, it explains why they might desire to no longer have been forced to pass union interior the 1st place. The purpose for the leaders is to no longer have their very own company, that's to stress the hand of the corporate into offering outrageous salaries and advantages, and to purchase choose with politicians who promise to apply taxpayer funds to maintain investment the life of those leaders.
2016-12-08 09:43:55 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That was ten years ago. Since then Unions started a program called To Insure Progress or TIPS where a certain amount of money was given voluntarily each month by the membership to be used strictly for political purposes. Just because we work for a living doesn't make us fools.
I do not know where you get your information little girl but I was there it happened in 1997
2007-06-14 17:43:39 · answer #3 · answered by The real Ed-Mike 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
This is more like bad news for the workers who rely on unions to stand up for them. The Dems can just successfully get money from supporters off the net like they have been since Howard Dean ran.
2007-06-14 18:05:51 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
#1 - Unions are far from the democrats primary financing. Don't tell lies.
#2 - I as a democrat think it's a fair ruling. Financing should be born by those who wish to contribute.
#3 - This ruling will have little practical effect because the vast majority of unions already don't do this.
2007-06-14 17:48:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
what does "without consent" mean?
who's consent? the unions? like they have to hold a vote or something? I'm sure that will stop them... hahahaha
EDIT: but don't they hold votes on everything they do, at least for many? and wouldn't the votes be consent? I mean I really doubt it means without 100 percent of everyone's consent...
"without consent" sounds like a legal gray area...
2007-06-14 17:40:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
unions are pretty powerless now anyway, but the at least protect the average joe from getting ****-canned at his factory job because his boss is a dick. on the other hand they protect joe lazy who does jack ****. corrupt as any political org. what a mess. peace
2007-06-14 17:45:21 · answer #7 · answered by pcosgrove114 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is great news. Unions have become bloated infested carcasses that feed off of their poor workers. I wish there was just one Union that actually put its workers first. Both of my parents are Union and both of them have to "get out the vaseline" when their union decides to do something.
2007-06-14 17:40:11 · answer #8 · answered by Nickoo 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Excellent.
2007-06-14 17:38:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yes I have always hated Union's because of the demoncrates funding.
2007-06-14 17:45:15 · answer #10 · answered by ak6702 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋