FROM THE DESK OF

REPRESENTATIVE DE BOEF

February 28, 2007

 

 

 

Give Me Liberty or Give Me, "Fair Share?"

 

 I have a long enough drive home each week to dwell on what is happening at the Capitol,  to try to put some of this year's legislative actions into perspective.

 

We’ve passed a bill that revokes the ban on human cloning in Iowa.

We've ordered businesses large and small to increase the minimum wage by $2.10, much too quickly.  We're about to order local schools to enforce a new anti-bullying bill whose sole effects will be increased costs and paperwork with little chance of achieving its noble purpose.
 
And we're on course to order some free Iowa citizens to, in effect, join labor unions.

 

The Cedar Rapids Gazette is quoted as saying, ‘Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain’ is more than Iowa’s motto; it is a fundamental tenet in a state founded on the rights of individuals.”

 For three generations, Iowans have thrived under the state's right-to-work law.  To me, the most compelling argument for keeping that law is not that it is a powerful tool for creating and keeping jobs.  It is, but there is a vastly larger force at work when we protect the worker's right to join a labor union.  Or to refuse to join.  That force is the bedrock of our values as Iowans and Americans: The personal liberty to decide with whom you will associate, which group you will support.
 
Labor unions in the United States arose four or five generations ago, and if I had been working on a meat processing line in Chicago at the turn of the 19th Century, I would have been among the first to the picket lines.  Some capitalists demonstrated monstrous greed and a complete misunderstanding of how well things can work when businesses value their workers as honored partners.
 
The results are well documented.  Islands of sweatshop conditions and near-starvation wages dotted America, particularly in the large cities.  Benefits -- including the simplest decencies such as supporting laborers hurt on the job -- were all but nonexistent.
 
Along with enlightened leadership from both political parties, the young labor movement succeeded.  Over the course of the 20th Century it helped erase the factory floor as a chamber of horrors by using its muscle to counter the once invincible power of bossism.
 
Consequently, we should honor the union movement, and be respectful of its accomplishments.
 
However, over time the unions themselves became powerful, some of them eventually came to take on the characteristics of the bosses they originally fought.  They achieved huge power and wanted more.  They accumulated war chests from union dues which they used for purposes good and evil.  And they became political animals.
 
The more money they collected, the better they could buy a piece of government; could successfully lobby for federal and state laws whose main effect was to perpetuate the power of the union bosses, the men who lived well, supported by the money of ordinary workers, protected by their allies in Congress and the legislative chambers.
 
Some 60 years ago, Congress gave states the right to deal with the unchecked power of unions.  And the Iowa Legislature responded by saying, "That's enough."  The thinking was based on what we hold most sacred:

Free citizens have the right to join groups.  But that right becomes meaningless unless they have the same right to refuse to join groups.
 
And here is where the issues will be joined in your Iowa Capitol.  Sailing under a deceptive flag called "Fair Share," the big-labor forces seek to compromise your right to refuse forced unionism.  Since an overturning of right to work is politically impossible, they seek to gut the law with something more enticing, their calling it “Fair Share”.
 
Their argument is that workers who decline to join their unions are somehow freeloading since the union bargains for everyone.  It's a false argument.  A decision to decline to join a union is a decision to represent oneself when workplace issues arise.  It is individualism -- liberty in action, a private citizen's right to choose a union, a church, a political party, a circle of friends based strictly on his personal beliefs.
  
Historically, unions have argued for the right to represent everyone in a business, industry or "shop."  Obviously, the larger the number of workers the more powerful the union's position.  However, to fight for the right to represent everyone, including those who don't want union representation, and then claim they are representing freeloaders is extremely disingenuous.

 

House File 324 stipulates that all private sector workers must either join a union or they must pay their “fair share” which could amount to 80% of the union dues.  If they refuse to pay, they will be fired.  Public sector workers would not even have a choice.  Their wages would be garnished and their money will be directly deposited into union political coffers. 

There is nothing fair about a union extracting dues from workers who don't want union representation, who would, for whatever reason, rather represent themselves.
 

 We live in an incredible country and state, in spite of what we hear in the press sometimes.  America is the longest living republic in the history of mankind.  For all of its faults, it has been made up of people passionate about personal freedom.  Freedom of expression and freedom of association are cornerstones in that rich history.  Let us agree they are freedoms worth fighting for

 

Recently, the majority party has suggested that they would be willing to compromise and take private industry out of the bill, having it just apply to public employees.  This is equally unacceptable.  Most of the e-mails I have received have been from teachers who choose not to become members of the ISEA and therefore the NEA, because they find the social agenda those groups promote to be objectionable.  What is more, the ISEA is blatant in promoting their political support of Democrats.  In two election cycles they have endorsed five Republicans.  That is five Republicans out of 600 candidates.

 

Editorial pages of different newspapers in the state have been taking positions on this controversial proposal.  A number of newspapers, including the Sioux City Journal, the Cedar Rapids Gazette and the Des Moines Register have come out against Fair Share. 

This legislative proposal has received national attention.  The Wall Street Journal warns of impending consequences if Iowa changes its Right to Work law.  The Des Moines Register reports that two companies looking to locate in northwest Iowa have changed their minds because of a potential radical change in Iowa’s business climate.  They have chosen to look elsewhere. 

 

The flag of our state makes it very clear how we Iowans stand for the rights of the individual--the right of an individual to choose.  The Right to Work law of this state is built on this principle.  To join a union is an option, not a mandate.  I think that the people of Iowa want to keep it that way.                  
 

 

Visitors to the Capitol

.Pastor John De Boef of What Cheer did the prayer on Tuesday, February 27.  He was accompanied by his wife Pat and two of his grandchildren, Hanna and Sophia Pickard.

 

 

Question of the Week…

This year may be the year to make changes to the bottle bill.  Would you be willing to pay an additional deposit in order to keep the redemption centers open?

 

I would appreciate your input.  My phone number at the Capitol is 515-281-3221, or e-mail me at betty.deboef@legis.state.ia.us.  I would welcome visitors at the Capitol, too!