In the Federalist No. 42, James Madison wrote about the regulation of commerce.
“To the proofs and remarks which former papers have brought into view on this subject, it may be added that without this supplemental provision, the great and essential power of regulating foreign commerce would have been incomplete and ineffectual. A very material object of this power was the relief of the States which import and export through other States, from the improper contributions levied on them by the latter. Were these at liberty to regulate the trade between State and State, it must be foreseen that ways would be found out to load the articles of import and export, during the passage through their jurisdiction, with duties which would fall on the makers of the latter and the consumers of the former.”The regulation was about the transportation of commerce between the states so that one or several states could not interfere with the foreign or domestic commerce of another. Clearly, this was about transportation and internal tariffs, and not about regulation of commerce directly. Alexander Hamilton echoed this same opinion in Federalist No. 22. Clearly, commerce itself was not to be regulated directly by Congress, but the Congress was to protect commerce from one state assuring that it not be restricted by any other state. Surely this covered the formation of labor unions, too.
According to Morgan Reynolds, emeritus professor of economics at Texas A&M University and former chief economist at the US Department of Labor 2001–2002, from Mises Daily, Friday, July 17, 2009,
“The courts struggled with the legal status of labor unions from the beginning: were such combinations or labor cartels lawful or not? According to some legal doctrines, unions were "criminal conspiracies in restraint of trade" and illegal combinations to fix prices (for labor services).
“In the early 20th century, union membership rose to 6% of the labor force. There were 2.7 million members by 1913, and the share stayed around 6–7% until 1917.World War I saw an increase in union membership, but after the war, membership declined. Reynolds continues:
“In 1912, Congress supplied new assistance with the Lloyd-LaFollette Act to compel collective bargaining by the US Post Office and encourage postal-union membership.”
“The end of the war ended prounion interventions. By 1924, the union share of the labor force had slipped to 8%, and by 1933 had eroded to the same 6% as thirty years before.”Using the congressional power to regulate interstate commerce, Reynolds reports:
“A sequence of federal laws beginning in 1888 regulated railway labor matters, and Congress passed the 1926 law in almost the identical form agreed on by the major railroads and unions. The act, amended in 1934, essentially dictated collective bargaining for all interstate railroads and set up machinery for governmental intervention in labor disputes.”Federal laws over the next several years continued to vacillate between pro and con, and then in from 1931 to 1936 several laws were enacted establishing labor standards and finally a minimum wage in 1938. All of this was considered to be legal under the right of Congress to regulate commerce. In 2008, according to Reynolds, private companies employed about 8.3 million workers, 7.6% of the total. But government-employed wage and salary workers now numbered 7.8 million or 36.8% of that work force. Public sector unions were now firmly established.
President Kennedy issued Executive Order 10988 in 1962, which promoted unionism in the federal bureaucracy. His reasoning was sound – labor unions had been significant contributors to his campaign fund. Here was a clear example of unions buying federal favorable influence and being rewarded by government, which in turn created more union jobs and consequently more money for campaign donations and influence buying.
Influence buying is not the only danger for Public Sector Unions. Unionized government workers have abandoned their jobs during labor disputes. On Aug. 3, 1981, more than 12,000 members of the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization struck and walked off their jobs. President Ronald Reagan was put in the unenviable position of ordering the strikers back to work. They had taken an oath not to strike, it was against the law for them to strike and their job abandonment left a large portion of the population at risk due to safety issues. Reagan fired most of them after they ignored his order, but that left our nation having to replace and train a large workforce. Today H.R. 413/S. 3194, the Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill is making its way through Congress. This would eventually put all police, firefighters and EMT into public-sector unions. What happens if they walk off the job? How beholden will these unions be to the federal government representatives who passed this bill? How much money will be collected through dues to provide the campaign funds needed by those representatives? How much will the citizens of each government entity have their tax rates increased to pay for these “donations”?
Who are these unions influencing governments and how much are they donating? (The Public-Sector unions are highlighted.) From OpenSecrets.org, Top All-Time Donors, 1989-2010
American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees $42,766,111
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $32,287,595
National Education Association $30,605,430
Laborers Union $29,614,800
Teamsters Union $28,515,934
Service Employees International Union $28,474,182
Carpenters and Joiners Union $28,386,933
American Federation of Teachers $27,713,391
Communications Workers of America $27,558,796
United Auto Workers $26,241,902
Machinists & Aerospace Workers Union $25,717,777
United Food & Commercial Workers Union $24,655,133
National Association of Letter Carriers $19,909,784
AFL-CIO $18,369,496
Sheet Metal Workers Union $17,257,813
Plumbers and Pipefitters Union $17,012,851
International Association of Fire Fighters $16,830,243
Operating Engineers Union $16,457,265
Air Line Pilots Association $16,124,777
United Steelworkers $14,096,151
United Transportation Union $14,010,510
Ironworkers Union $13,743,475
American Postal Workers Union $12,285,973
National Air Traffic Controllers Association $11,014,938
National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association $10,558,000
Seafarers International Union $ 8,487,644
Marine Engineers Beneficial Association $ 7,484,377
What makes this worse is that these “donations” are taken from employee dues without their having a voice in where they will be donated or even if they are willing to donate at all. The workers are effectively held hostage by the unions. What makes it worse yet is that government employees do not create wealth. Private employees create wealth, and it is the private employees who are paying the taxes set by lawmakers that are funneled back to the unions, including the public-sector unions, and then passed back to the lawmakers as campaign funds.
In times past, private company employees have been rewarded based on the amount of wealth being created by the company. They lead the government employees in pay and benefits, as it should be. But no more. On March 8, 2010, Dennis Cauchon reported in USATODAY that federal pay has surpassed private sector pay in eight out of ten jobs where the federal government has the same classification of worker as the private sector. The average federal pay was $67,691 as compared to $60,046 in the private sector. Furthermore, this does not include the value of health, pension and other benefits. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, federal employees received $40,785 each vs. $9,882 per private worker, $30,903 more than their private sector counterparts who produce the wealth that pays the taxes that pay the government employees.
As President Obama and the liberal democrats in Congress continue to use federal contracts to drive more workers into unions, especially the SEIU, we have to demand different actions from our Congressional representatives. We should demand that they not fund legislation or executive orders that increase or support public-sector unions. We should also demand that they pass new laws that
1. End all government unions at all levels of government,
2. Outlaw any further unionization of public-sector employees,
3. Forbid any unions from using any portion of dues for political contributions and
4. Put an end to using the commerce clause in the Constitution as an excuse to meddle in private commerce.
Citizen 2010
Why shouldn't government employees have the same rights as private sector employees? I believe that unions are already forbidden from using dues for political contributions, that's why PACs were created.
ReplyDeleteUnions are using dues for political contributions. See the list of donations above. I believe that PACs are offsetting what unions were doing. Search for information on SEIU and California to see what the unions have done to that state.
ReplyDeleteTell me again why government employees needed unions...sweat shops, unsafe working conditions, employer collusion to hold down wages and blackball employees that make waves?
ReplyDeleteI once served in the reserves with a man whose job it was to keep unions out of his employers textile company. He said industries that get unions today deserve them. He kept the unions out by insuring that the employees were fairly paid, fairly treated and well informed about the realities in the business and industry. In other words a well managed responsible enterprize's employees would rather control all their paycheck given a choice.