He does not see the secret ballot as a democratic process. He believes that workers should not be allowed the freedom self-determination rather workers should be forced to give an exclusive authority to negotiate working conditions. He believes the U.S. Government should not be neutral during organizing drives, Uncle Sam should help the union.
He's since taken this stance back but that came just in time to be nominated for head of the National Labor Relations Board. The president has attempted to use the EPA to impose his environmental vision. That's had moderate success so far. This would be no different.
EFCA would have absolutely no chance of passing. It is dead on arrival. Yet, Becker doesn't see EFCA as a matter for the legislature. Instead, Becker sees EFCA as a regulatory matter. Regulators often get their power from vaguely defined responsibilities.
The NLRB is just one example. It is the perfect opportunity for the sort of ideological power play that Becker is attempting. That's why his appointment should be opposed. So far, not only the 41 Republicans appear on board with a filibuster but at least Ben Nelson has joined them.
5 comments:
The real question is what will Obama do if the Republicans summarily filibuster anyone he nominates? Its not realistic to think Obama is going to appoint people like Elaine Chao labor policymaking positions. There's only 2 of the 5 NLRB positions filled, so what now?
He is done.. Kaput..
The department should be dismantled IMO.
The existence of the NLRB is completely contrary to private property rights anyhow. Nothing says "you don't own jack," like a bureaucrat telling you that you cannot fire someone from your own business.
Well, Jason, the fact of the matter is that society has spoken. And they have said that if you can't abide by federal labor law, you probably aren't good enough at running a business to have one.
I don't deal too often in hypotheticals. I don't think the Reps would stall all his nominees. I also don't think it was society that wanted this but government.
He is done. He has been blocked and will not be the guy fortunately, and I agree the Republicans will not block all of them.
As to AG's 2nd comment..
HUH?
Under what thought process do you derive that assumption about who might or might not be good enough at running a business? Please spell it out for those of us who missed class that day.
My assertion is that the government presumes to control the way in which one manages his business beyond what is morally correct, and frankly what is stated in the 9th amendment.
As to "good enough," what an incredibly inane assumption that the very government, which cannot manage a budget to a balance EVER, would be a better decider for how one handle his or her private enterprise.
Sadly, if the 'motivated' folks among us fail in real life, they gravitate to a bureaucratic seat where they can assist in the same end for others.. yes.. a generality.. so what? It only takes a motivated few in power to so completely mess things up it drags the rest of us down.
Post a Comment