Paycheck Protection is Back
By Lewis K. Uhler - President of the National Tax Limitation Committee
Mon, January 11th, 2010
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical."
This sentiment, written over two centuries ago by Thomas Jefferson, is more applicable than ever today in the case of public -sector unions which collect mandatory dues from their membership to engage in liberal, big-spending, highly partisan politics antipathetical to many of their members who foot the bill.
In 2005 we spearheaded Proposition 75, the "Paycheck Protection Initiative," to require written consent of public employee union members before union dues could be taken from their salaries for political purposes. The unions outspent us 10-1 and only narrowly defeated Proposition 75.
In 2010 the outcome can be different -- for several reasons:
The "Paycheck Protection Initiative" currently gathering signatures is crafted differently. It prohibits the government employer (state or local) from acting as the agent for the public employee union in collecting political dues from public employees. I think it is stronger protection than Proposition 75.
During the intervening years public-employee unions have grown more arrogant and politically demanding and have taken positions on issues and ballot measures with which many of their own members disagree (such as the California Teachers Association's endorsement and funding of opposition to Proposition 8 -- the marriage initiative.)
Polling data reveals that public support for protecting public employees from forced union political dues has grown significantly since the Proposition 75 vote.
READ MORE HERE
in influencing legislation and budgets. I saw how they worked to defeat the budget-balancing initiative in 2005, and funneled millions of state employees’ dollars into attacking the best hope we had to prevent the budget melt down we are now suffering. If state employees want to make political contributions, that’s their right, but their unions should not be able to make that decision for them without their explicit approval." 