Amanda Terkel, Senior Politics Reporter at The Huffington Post, appeared Monday on 'The Rachel Maddow Show' to discuss new anti-union measures being proposed by Republicans in Congress.
"They're going right now after air and rail workers. The way it works right now is if you want to form a union, you just need to get a majority of the workers who turn out to vote. But the way that Republicans would like to do it, and the way that it's been for many years, is you need to get a majority of all workers, even ones who don't turn out to vote. So if you don't turn out to vote, essentially your'e voting no," said Terkel. She continued, "I mean imagine if Mitt Romney runs against Barack Obama and under Republican rules if you don't turn out to vote you're essentially voting for Barack Obama. Imagine how hard it would be for Mitt Romney to win."
Terkel also explained that "right now there is more interest and more focus from the media, from Democrats, from Progressive activists on labor issues than I've seen in years."
WATCH (via MSNBC):
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Ohio GOP Revises Bill Curbing Unions - WSJ.com
Americans Oppose Republican Attack on Unions in Poll Divided Over ...
Idaho passes Republican bill to curb union rights | Reuters
In Wisconsin, GOP maneuver pushes anti-union bill forward - Los ...
Republican governors strike hard at unions - Jonathan Martin and ...
Koch-Backed Right-Wing Group Goes After More Professors, Asking for Emails on Unions and ... Rachel Maddow?
http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/542785/koch-backed_right-wing_group_goes_after_more_professors%2C_asking_for_emails_on_unions_and_..._rachel_maddow/
We can also draw parallels between public sector unions and private corporations. Both give money to politicians for political favors. If a monopoly exists, they have the government to thank. Both do what they can to exploit workers, one with union dues for the privilege of working, the other by paying as little as possible.
The point I'm trying to make is that while government may be some people's employer, they must be accountable to the tax-payer first. While I believe that there are far more effective ways to cut cost than squeezing productive working people, I believe some important facts are being overlooked for the sake of partisan politics.
These services need to be funded---is that the difference you are trying to make a point of?
Governments services are always accountable---but I believe the difference is that I would much prefer the government handling these services rather than a profit driven entity whose bottom line is money and clearly not the good of the people.
Almost every claim leveled against unions, the ceos of Corporations are guilty of.
Your bread is buttered because of unions. I'm shocked that people like you still defend the corporations who are DESTROYING THIS COUNTRY AND THE MIDDLECLASS. It's like you have no critical thinking or problem solving skills. Do you want to go back to having no safety regulations, ridiculously low wages with no benefits, working as long as your boss wants you to with no right to overtime, children working basicly as slaves? Big business has no kindness or generosity at it's heart. They will maximise profits at your expense every time.
Did the Union design the cars?
Did the Union Sell the cars?
Did the Union collect the requirements for new designes?
Did the Unions sell hybrid technology to Toyota who created the Prius with the information?
------------------------------------------
Canadians support unions.
They're against the John Galt free-for-all-phony-American-patriot wannabees.
Because walker BROKE THE LAW, the STATE WORKERS UNIONS CAN NOW STRIKE IN WISCONSIN