The 2008 general election is over, with Barack Obama winning the race for president and Susan Collins easily being re-elected over challenger Tom Allen to represent Maine in the U.S. Senate.
But Mainers are still seeing issue ads similar to those broadcast frequently in the months, weeks and days leading up to the election. The Employee Free Choice Act, a bill that received substantial attention in the Senate race between Collins and Allen, is the subject of new ads getting airtime weeks after the election ended.
Opponents of the bill say it is undemocratic because it would deny workers the right to a private ballot and lead to intimidation of workers by labor organizers.
Supporters say employers already intimidate workers when it comes to union votes and that the bill simply would shift control of unionization votes from employers to workers.
A group calling itself Americans for Job Security began running a television ad in Maine last week that accuses Democratic leaders in Congress of wanting “to deny workers the right to a secret ballot in union organizing elections.” The ad shows grainy footage of Sens. Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi but does not refer to them by their names.
“Maybe it’s a payoff to the union bosses. Or maybe it’s just another Washington double standard,” the narrator says.
American Rights at Work, a group that supports the bill, has been running a different ad that shows executives in a conference room offering a worker health benefits, a pension and a raise.
“If you think this is going to happen by itself, you’re dreaming,” the narrator says.
But why now, after the election? Aren’t voters burned out on political ads? Hasn’t the vote — which has given Democrats a larger hold on the House and a clearly defined majority in the Senate — already determined how much support the proposal will get in the new Congress?
“I have no idea,” Chris Potholm, a government and political science professor at Bowdoin College in Brunswick, said last week about the timing of the ads. “They might as well throw their money in the Androscoggin River.”
Potholm acknowledged that the ads could be attempts to drum up public sentiment about the bill, but that it is not likely to rise to the top of the public’s concerns.
“When you think of the 200 other things voters should be worried about, this must be number 196,” he said.
The public’s more likely concerns, Potholm added, are “‘my retirement is gone [and] my mortgage is blown up.’”
But Josh Goldstein, spokesman for American Rights at Work, said Monday that the aim of his group’s ad is to educate the public about the bill. Opponents of the proposal have attempted to paint it as an attempt to deny workers the right to a private ballot, he said, but that is not accurate.
What the Employee Free Choice Act would do, according to Goldstein, is let workers control the process of deciding whether to join a union.
As it is now, it is up to employers to decide whether their employees have to hold a vote about joining a union and when that vote will occur, Goldstein said. EFCA would let workers determine whether and when to hold a ballot vote, he said. It would establish penalties for employers that illegally resist unionization efforts and would set a timeline by which employers and workers must reach a contract if workers favor joining a union.
“There’s still a fight to be had because the fight isn’t over until the bill is decided,” Goldstein said of airing the ad. “We’re into the next phase.”
He said that after the new Congress is sworn in on Jan. 5, the House and Senate each are expected to reconsider the bill. The House, which now has a larger Democratic majority, is expected to approve the bill again. It previously approved the bill in March 2007 when Maine’s congressmen, U.S. Reps. Tom Allen and Michael Michaud, voted in favor of it.
Goldstein said the main battle over the bill, if there is one, likely will be in the Senate. The bill should be part of any new economic stimulus package Congress looks to approve, he said.
“I think it’s going to be a top priority,” Goldstein said. “It’s long overdue.”
The American Rights at Work ad is scheduled to air nationwide for three weeks, according to Goldstein.
Stephen DeMaura, president of Americans for Job Security, said Tuesday that his group's ad started airing nationwide a little over a week ago. It is running for 10 days over a full two-week period.
The purpose of the ad is to draw attention to the issue as it comes up for debate again in Congress, he said.
“This is an ongoing piece of legislation and likely will be considered by Congress in the first 100 days of the new administration,” DeMaura said. “We feel it is important to maintain a presence on the air.”
DeMaura said his group opposes the bill because would it effectively eliminate the secret ballot from workplace union votes. Enabling workers to decide whether to join a union simply by publicly signing a card could lead to coercion of workers, either for or against the unionization effort, by labor organizers and by businesses, he said.
DeMaura said such coercion could harm businesses and workers who are struggling to get by.
“It is the last thing we need in these economic times,” he said. “We are trying to maintain pressure on the Senate to defeat this legislation.”
Sandy Maisel, government professor and director of the Goldfarb Center at Colby College in Waterville, was skeptical that either ad would have much of an effect on public opinion. He indicated last week in an e-mail that he also finds the ads’ appearances after the election “unusual.”
The ads may be aimed at people who have donated money to the groups “to show that they are still working,” Maisel speculated. All four members of Maine’s congressional delegation — Collins, Sen. Olympia Snowe, Michaud and U.S. Rep.-elect Chellie Pingree — have made their positions on the Employee Free Choice Act known, he said. Michaud and Pingree each have expressed support for the bill, while Collins and Snowe have said they oppose it.
“I cannot see how any of them would be responding to any constituent views stimulated by [these ads],” Maisel wrote.
But James Melcher, associate professor of political science at the University of Maine at Farmington, said the ads could generate public discussion of the issue, which likely would put greater scrutiny on the Senate when it votes on the bill. Each side may be concerned about the other being more vocal, he wrote Friday by e-mail, and so each may be trying to counter the other’s arguments early.
“This is a time, with a new administration coming in, that varying interests are jockeying to make sure their issues will get attention,” Melcher wrote. “Getting on the political agenda early on makes it more likely that it will be dealt with.”
The Senate voted on the bill before the recent election, but the vote essentially stalled after it broke down along party lines to a tie. Now that the Democrats have a clear majority in the Senate and President-elect Obama has voiced support for the bill, the new Senate essentially will have final say over the proposal.
During the recent Senate race, Collins said she is opposed to the bill because it would take away the right to a private vote.
Snowe also opposes the bill, according to an aide.
“She believes workers have a right to vote their conscience in a confidential environment,” John Gentzel, Snowe’s spokesman, wrote recently in an e-mail.
On 12/3/08 at 7:05 AM,
Govt2Big wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
The "employee free choice act" is so misnamed it's laughable. This pro-union push is only about one thing, money for political power. It's 100% anti-American and the union bosses and their politician buddies will see the largest gain if this campaign goes through. Just look at the massive amounts of money these unions donate to various political campaigns, almost all of which goes to democrats and their pet projects. You'll see this proof at the website called "Money in State Politics",
www.followthemoney.org
In addition, if you look at what's happening right here in Maine with the MSEA-SEIU Local 1989, some of these unions have terrible financial records. They have no detailed accountability and have repeatedly said "trust us" when probed about major expenses claimed. It's all about political games within our state and federal governments, but it's time for all of these BS games with our tax dollars to stop!
On 12/3/08 at 7:16 AM,
GeraldWeinand wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Govt2Big:
Have you read the EFCA? Can you explain how it modifies the NLRA? Be specific please.
Do unions donate more or less to political campaigns than major corporations do? You seem to have a problem with union donations - do you have the same problem with corporate?
On 12/3/08 at 7:23 AM,
GeraldWeinand wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Mr. Trotter fails to mention that the anti-EFCA ads ran virtually unchallenged for over two months, beginning in June of this year. One ad even alluded to organized crime, starring Vincent Curatola, who played mobster Johnny Sack on the Sopranos - Curatola is a memeber fo the Screen Actors Guild (SAG) - a union.
On 12/3/08 at 7:25 AM,
safedman wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
For the first time in my life I was called by the union at home and asked who I was voting for!!!!
That takes guts or arogence
On 12/3/08 at 7:42 AM,
kylie00 wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Anyone that wants a union should be allowed that right but don`t force it down the throats of others. In the state of maine once a union has been voted in by sa 33 - 30 those 30 employees will be forced to pay union dues even though they don`t want it. 2years ago , when the company tried to go union, I was chased down in Bangor by a union rep to sign one of these cards, when I refused to and said I didn`t want a union he said you`re going to whether you sign or not and I was in the minority. Well we still don`t have a union. The wheels on the bus DON`T go union here
On 12/3/08 at 7:43 AM,
kylie00 wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Don`t let it be forced down your throat
If they want this then let employees have an open shop
That way they still have the choice
On 12/3/08 at 8:50 AM,
David889327 wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Unions shouldn't be necessary except for the largest of corporations. While they can't be blamed solely for the near elimination of the Maine (and U.S.) manufacturing sector, they played a role. In my opinion, the presence of a union in Maine is likely a sign of poor management.
On 12/3/08 at 8:52 AM,
GeraldWeinand wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
kylie00:
So, using your logic, 48% of Americans should demand that John McCain be their president, and not follow anything that President-elect Obama says? If card check is used to form a union, it does take 50% plus one for that to happen. However, under the EFCA, a petition of just 30% of the shop can demand a secret-ballot vote, which may result in keeping the union.
On 12/3/08 at 9:34 AM,
kylie00 wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Maybe that 48% of americans were right, only time will tell.
But why should these scum sucking unions be able to intimidate workers to sign these cards or promise them things they know they can`t possibly get them.
We just went thru this and they promised the world, but when it come right down to it tried to give us crap, and lord forbid we didn`t accept their contract,
they said take it or we are out of here, we said have a safe ride back where home. They were like a kid who owned the baseball and if they didn`t get there own way I`m going to go home. A vote for this should be held by someome besides the union or the company. Not by a union rep saying we will get you this and that if yoiu sighn here, And why can`t the company do the same thing. If you don`t sighn this card to stop the union then go find a job elsewhere. A union should not be forced upon a company, but if the employees want a union then go find a union shop to work for. with the way the economy is today can a company afford to have a shotgun held to their heads by the unions or employees. There are plenty of other people who wish they had a job.
Post a comment about this story
You must be logged in to post a comment.
click here to log in.