'Employee Free Choice Act' is anything but.........

America went to the polls on November 4th. We voted using a secret ballot. That is a way to allow us to exercise our right to enfranchisement as citizens. We are able to vote according to our own conscience, without sharing our choice, if we so choose.

The Unions and Democrats are pushing to remove the secret ballot as an means for those deciding whether to form a union. They have come up with the 'Employee Free Choice Act'. It is a misleading name at best. At worst it is downright cynical.

Currently, once 30% of a company's workers sign union authorization cards, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) administers a confidential vote, typically 39 days after it receives the cards. The union and employer campaign for votes.

Under the 'Employee Free Choice Act' being promoted by unions, when more than 50% of employees sign authorization cards, the NLRB would have to recognize the new union. No campaign. No secret ballot...........just a "friendly" union representative.

The measure passed the US House in 2007 after the Democrats took control. The Democrats now have the votes to pass it in the Senate. They now have a President who will sign it. Even former Democratic nominee George McGovern has come out against it.

The proposed change would give unions and pro-union employees more incentive to use peer pressure, or worse, to persuade reluctant workers to sign their cards. And without elections, workers who weren't contacted by union organizers would have no say in the final outcome. Who wants a union organizer standing at their work space with a card and pen in hand, asking them to sign; while their coworkers all stare?

Labor leaders, such as AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, argue's that the proposed law wouldn't prohibit private balloting. This is accurate but misleading. Union organizers would have no reason to seek an election if they had union cards signed by more than 50% of workers. And if they had less than a majority, they'd be unlikely to call for a vote they'd probably lose.

The legislation has other questionable provisions as well. For example, once a union is formed, if labor and management can't agree on a contract, a federal arbitration board would be called on to go beyond the normal role of facilitating talks and actually dictate terms.

Labor has seen its role decline since the 1950s, when about a third of all private sector employees belonged to unions, compared with about 7.5% today. So it's understandably eager to find ways to expand membership, particularly at a time when workers are feeling economically vulnerable. More members, more members dues.

The Democrats have a vested interest in ensuring passage. The unions have long been big donors to Democratic candidates. If the unions have declining membership and related dues, then there is less to give to the Democrats. If the Democrats get this passed and signed into law, the union officials and Democrats win. Unfortunately, the workers lose. This undermining of Democratic ideals is a poor deal for America's workers.

WHILE ROME BURNS

Our 'Stimulus Bill' that Obama and Pelosi hoisted on the US. to create jobs is misleading. It will create some jobs, but not necessarily for Americans.

According to the USAToday, Tens of thousands of jobs created by the economic stimulus law could end up filled by illegal immigrants, particularly in big states such as California where undocumented workers are heavily represented in construction, experts on both sides of the issue say.

They fault Congress for failing to require that employers certify legal immigration status of workers before hiring by using a Department of Homeland Security program called E-Verify. The program allows employers to check the validity of Social Security numbers provided by new hires. It is available to employers on a voluntary basis. Obama and Pelosi both rebuked the inclusion of the common sense measure.

"They could have deterred this, but they chose not to," said Steven Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies.

The version of the stimulus bill passed by the House of Representatives included a provision requiring employers to check immigration status with the E-Verify system before hiring. The Senate did not include such a provision, and it was not in the version sent to President Obama. The Obama administration has delayed until at least May 21 a Bush administration executive order requiring federal contractors to use the E-Verify system in hiring. It had been scheduled to take effect in January. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed suit seeking to block the requirement, joined by the Associated Builders and Contractors and other business organizations.

So not only will many Americans be passed over for these jobs taken by Illegal Aliens, American tax dollars will pay their salaries.

Not willing to tolerate criticism, the Democrats are dredging up the 'Fairness Doctrine' in an attempt to quelch opposition to their socialist policies. It seems they are not satisfied with merely controlling the print and television media (exception FOX News), they want to silence talk radio. They are gunning for Limbaugh and Hannity. They make no mention of fervent Obama supporters, MSNBC's Chris Mathews, Keith Olberman or Rachel Maddow.

On a more personal front. While Washington and the rest of America's cities burn economically, the recession is not being felt at the White House. The Obama's have been enjoying a fun-filled succession of parties at the White House.

These parties are purely for socializing, with talk of politics discouraged. Sort of reminds me of another First Lady whose first name began with an "M". When told their fellow countrymen were suffering she is said to have replied, "let them eat cake".