Showing posts with label National Review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label National Review. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

How Would Mark Udall Explain Anti-Secret Ballot Stance to Union Intimidation Victims?

Last week we pointed to Mark Udall's feeble attempt to defend his co-sponsorship (with "serious reservations") of the poorly-named Employee Free Choice Act. The examples of South Carolina materials handler Mike Ivey and Kaiser employee Karen Mayhew demonstrated the destructive consequences of Udall's support for the "card-check" process over the secret ballot in workplace union elections.

A recent National Review piece by John Motley offers more examples:
As [former ultra-liberal Democratic presidential candidate George] McGovern warned with this system: “there are many documented cases where workers have been pressured, harassed, tricked or intimidated into signing cards that have led to mandatory payment of dues.” In hearings in the House of Representatives in 2002, Bruce Esgar, an employee of MGM Grand Hotel in Las Vegas described such a case when he testified that union organizers threatened that workers who did not sign union cards would lose their jobs when the union was recognized. In testimony in 2007, Ricardo Torres, a long-time organizer for the United Steelworkers felt compelled to quit his job, according to his testimony, after “a senior Steelworkers union official asked me to threaten migrant workers by telling them they would be reported to federal immigration officials if they refused to sign check-off cards.” Jen Jason, a former organizer for UNITE-HERE also testified in 2007 to the fact that they “rarely showed workers what an actual union contract looked like because we knew that it wouldn’t necessarily reflect what a worker would want to see. We were trained to avoid topics such as dues increases, strike histories, etc. and to constantly move the worker back to what the organizer identified as his or her “issues” during the first part of the housecall. This technique was commonly referred to as “re-agitation” during organizer training sessions.” [emphases added]
What would Mark Udall have to say to Bruce Esgar? What platitudes would Udall have for Ricardo Torres or the threatened migrant workers? How would Udall defend the tactics Jen Jason described? How would he explain his anti-secret ballot stance to Mike Ivey or Karen Mayhew? Even ultra-liberal George McGovern realizes how out of touch Udall is for holding this position.

But none of it matters that much, because none of these five eyewitnesses to union intimidation have lined Mark Udall's campaign coffers with tens of thousands of dollars like labor leaders have.

Monday, May 5, 2008

Mark Udall and Nancy Pelosi "Shed Crocodile Tears" Over High Gas Prices

Kudos to Boulder liberal Mark Udall for recognizing the federal gas tax holiday is a misguided approach. But, as el presidente pointed out, not only has Udall offered no real viable solution in its place, he also is engaged in his own kind of pandering:
While no doubt worthy of discussion for meeting our long-term energy needs, Udall's plan avoids dealing with the present--playing the "short-sighted Washington game" that caters to environmental special interests that prevent the United States from becoming more energy self-sufficient by drilling for oil here rather than relying on the Middle East and other corrupt regimes.

As the gas prices soar this summer, ask yourself whether or not your elected representatives, including Rep. Mark Udall, are doing everything to alleviate the pain at the pump and not just engaging in more political grandstanding and issuing platitudes about "diverse energy portfolios" while sticking to the "game" he is so quick to criticize. Temporarily ceasing to add to the strategic petroleum reserve or even tapping it briefly provides only limited, ephemeral, calculated relief.
So Mark Udall hasn't brought forward any serious proposals to address rising gasoline prices. But National Review's David Freddoso takes the argument one step further:
...[T]he real problem — and the reason [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi really does deserve blame — is that Democrats’ political goal of reducing carbon emissions continues to trump their populist rhetoric on gasoline prices. The two stances are impossible to reconcile. Try as they might to blame oil companies for the pain Americans feel at the pump, the Democrats want higher prices for gasoline — and for all forms of energy that emit carbon.
Despite all their rhetoric to the contrary, Pelosi Democrats - such as Mark Udall - indeed are glad to see gasoline prices rise. As Freddoso reminds us, Nancy Pelosi and Mark Udall have lied about their concern for the economic health of the nation and individual Coloradans:
High gas prices are bad for the economy, but the point here is not to make moral judgments about the trade-off between high gasoline prices and reduced carbon emissions. The point is that Democrats have taken a dishonest public stance with false promises of lower gasoline prices that they never intended to honor. Democrats are shedding crocodile tears for the end consumer of petroleum. If they say they hate to see you eaten alive by Big Oil, it is only because they would prefer to devour you themselves.
Of course, Nancy Pelosi thinks gasoline costs about $2.56 a gallon right now. Has anyone asked Mark Udall how much it cost him the last time he filled up at the pump?

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Udall Mourns William F. Buckley

Politicker CO has the press release:
"Any American who reveres our constitution and admires intelligence, wit and integrity in public life will mourn the passing of William F. Buckley Jr. Like many others who grew up the 1960s and 1970s, I appreciated the provocative conversation in Mr. Buckley's interviews on his television program "Firing Line" - where he challenged political leaders from across the political spectrum. America's conservative movement obviously owes a great deal to the intellectual foundation of William F. Buckley's writing and philosophy, but his contributions to public life were not just ideological. Mr. Buckley was a grand debater, a great thinker and a brilliant personality. He will be missed."
Yes he will, Mr. Udall, yes he will.

Co-blogger Ben DeGrow also has a tribute to WFB.