While anti-worker bills in state capitols across the country still threaten middle-class families, Republican state legislatures are beginning to second guess whether to continue pursuing their extreme agenda attacking working families.

Yesterday morning, the Republican-controlled New Hampshire Senate tabled HB 1677, the so-called “right to work” bill. This bill is the pet of Speaker Bill O’Brien, dubbed by a recent Concord Monitor editorial as a “self-drawn caricature of vindictiveness and power run [amok].” “Right to work” failed last year, and so far this year it has failed to muster a veto-proof majority.

Although the bill is still alive, this is a symbolic victory that makes it clear that Senate Republicans are tired of Speaker O’Brien’s antics and his extreme agenda. New Hampshire AFL-CIO President Mark MacKenzie said of the vote:

The Senate took a step in the right direction today in voting to indefinitely table HB 1677….Their vote confirms what we hear each and every day: People are tired of right to work for less dominating the discussion in Concord.

And last night in Maine, the public employee “right to work” bill, LD 309, was tabled on the floor of the House, after working families–from both the public and private sectors–urged a bipartisan coalition of senators to preserve safe communities and working conditions. (more…)

And so, the proverbial ‘heads of the five families’ of the right wing are still fully engaged in all-out war of right-on-right character assassination. Last week, politico-playboy Newt Gingrich called in a hit. And you know he didn’t use American muscle for the job! He outsourced (in true Republican fashion) and flew in a Sicilian for the job.

His ‘Luca Brasi’ of choice was calling Rick Santorum a “big labor Republican.” Newt is just sick over the fact that Santorum (or Ricky “The Saint,” as he’s known within the right wing Cosa Nostra) supposedly sided with the unions. Newt was alluding to a 1996 shoot-out in the U.S. Senate where Santorum was supposedly in favor of Fed-Ex drivers remaining protected by the Railway Labor Act, a piece of legislation that,, among other things, gives workers the right to organize in their units. Unknowingly, however, Newt’s guy bungled the hit. His Luca Brasi was really more of a Fredo Corleone.  

The real story is that in the early stages of this act, Santorum only voted in favor of continuing the debate, probably knowing full well that often bills don’t even get voted on if enough members of the caporegime insist on continuing to debate over them. This Santorum must have some consigliere! Either that or he’s ripping pages right out of Machiavelli.

Later, Santorum voted in favor of the ruling chair, stealthily against Fed-Ex worker interests, under the argument that the provisions in Sect. 1223 of the act were beyond the authority of that committee. Buying more time on the taxpayers’ dime, he once again voted  nay and lost.

He did vote in favor of the bill when it finally came up with the Fed-Ex provisions untouched, but don’t let that fool you. He played that one beautifully in true Hyman Roth fashion.

Don’t forget the fact that six years ago, the Teamsters ‘went to the mattresses’ (went to war) with this guy and won! Santorum is crazy… like a fox, avoiding setting off traps. Having that ‘yes’ vote in his track record could confuse a lot of working class people, particularly those who are sitting on the fence. It could trick them into thinking that he is sympathetic to their plight.

In reality, if he takes the big seat, if he gets crowned the capo di tutti capi, workers’ right to organize and possibly even the very existence of a labor movement will “probably swim with the fishes.” If he is as crafty as he appears to be, he knows that siding with labor will displease his neo-con henchmen to no end. That could potentially be the spark to set off some serious unrest on the right side of the aisle (or even a coup d’etat, in the most extreme scenario), and as sly, old Hyman Roth said, “No one wants another war,” more specifically, one that will put a strain on Santorum’s political alliances because any seasoned mafiosi will tell you, “When guys are on the mattresses, they’re not out earning.” When there is too much back and forth in the Senate, it diverts attention from the more important issues as they find new ways to make a buck at the expense of the working class and taxpayers as a whole. (more…)

I’m a big fan of Hardball host Chris Matthews and his frequent guest, David Corn of Mother Jones magazine.

But these guys need to do their homework on Rick Santorum. On a recent show, they talked like Romney’s anti-union and Santorum’s not.

“I don’t think he’s known as anti-labor, though, at all,” Matthews said of Santorum. “No, no, Rick Santorum is not,” Corn added.

Come on guys, check it out. Santorum is as anti-labor as Romney is.

Corn insisted Santorum is not anti-labor because he’s “from Pennsylvania, a good union state” and because he’s “voted against right-to-work laws.”

Santorum did support a few pro-labor measures when he was a senator. He helped block a national right-to-work law, but now wants one.

“A national right-to-work bill is something that I would be supportive of,” Santorum, campaigning in Michigan, recently said on a Detroit radio station, according to the Grand Rapids Press.

“We’re going to have right-to-work where union members decide whether they will belong to the union,” the Detroit News quoted Romney, seeking votes in the Michigan GOP primary.

Santorum has taken some heat from the Romney side for his few pro-union votes. “I’ve been attacked as the ‘big union’ Republican in this race,” he told the Detroit Economic Club. “I went back to look at my AFL-CIO score card, and I had a 13 percent rating. If that’s ‘big union’ in the Republican party, I guess we’ve narrowed the field quite a bit, haven’t we?”

Meanwhile, most Quaker State labor leaders seem to agree that Santorum is anti-union. (more…)

I want to send a warning to working people in Europe: when you let your businesses save money by mistreating workers in other countries, it might teach them to think they can save money by mistreating you, too. Over here in the United States we have learned this the hard way. We entered into “free trade” agreements that enabled our businesses to take advantage of exploited labor in countries like China, and the plutocrats used that as a wedge against us here to drive down our wages, get rid of our benefits and break our unions. Now your own business leaders are taking advantage of eroded labor rights here, and if you let them get away with this they will want to bring these working conditions back to you.

Recently in the post Democracy V. Plutocracy, Unions V. Servitude I described how American companies use China as a wedge to drive down wages and labor rights here,

The threat is in the air: “Shut up and take the wage cuts or we will move your job to China.”

… Workers in countries like China where people have no say have low wages, terrible working conditions, long hours, and are told to shut up and take it or they won’t have any job at all. They are given no choice.

Increasingly workers here have their wages, hours, benefits, dignity cut and are told to shut up and take it or their jobs will be moved to China. Because we are pitted against exploited workers in countries where people have no say, we have no choice.

The unions are weakened, the government doesn’t enforce or weakly enforces labor laws and regulations, age, gender or race discrimination laws, worker safety laws, so workers are placed in a terrible squeeze. Workers who try to organize unions are isolated, moved, smeared, fired, humiliated, whatever it takes. (more…)

I sit up many of nights during these election years wondering how many of our USW brothers and sisters vote for candidates who are openly anti-labor.

Are they so blinded by distrust of people who may not look like themselves or who come from a different side of the tracks that they would rather vote against their own self interest?

As a union brother I will never vote for a party or candidate on any elected level who is openly anti-labor. There was a time when these candidates hid in the shadows and only revealed themselves when it was too late to react. However, today they are open about their anti-labor stances and can still win the votes of certain USW members.

IT HAS TO STOP NOW!!

***

To submit a blog to Free Speech Zone, e-mail it to bstack@usw.org. Keep it to 250 words or fewer. You MUST include your full name, hometown, and state. You may attach a photograph of yourself. Please include a phone number. This WILL NOT be published. Posting any given blog is within the discretion of the USW.  No blog using foul language (this is a family site), false information (we don’t want to get sued), or unnecessary personal attacks (again, we don’t want to get sued) will be used. Wait a reasonable period of time, then blog again! This is a Free Speech Zone.

House Republicans have turned a routine complaint by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) against Boeing into a “political and ideological circus,” says AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka.

He says a Republican bill introduced after the NLRB’s complaint, which accuses the aviation giant of retaliating against workers for exercising their legal rights,

is sweeping legislation that would gut the National Labor Relations Act and result in serious harmful changes to jobs and workers’ rights throughout the country.

(more…)

In addition to the “Stop the War on the Middle Class signs,” one placard in this video is held by a woman using a walker. It says, “At Least this Walker is Helpful!” It refers, of course, to Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker whose anti-union legislation prompted the rallies in Madison.

This song is by Leonard Cohen.

Hundreds of off-duty police officers and deputies joined protests Saturday against what Gov. Scott Walker calls a “budget repair” bill, which really is anti-union legislation that would strip most collective bargaining rights from about 170,000 public employees – though not from cops and firefighers.

Police, state troopers and firefighters are exempted from the legislation that would also require public workers to pay more for their health and pension benefits. Most of the public employee unions already agreed to pay the higher fees. As off-duty officers marched with the thousands protesting the proposed anti-union legislation, hundreds of on-duty officers from around the state provided security.

Dan Benson of Gannett Wisconsin Media reported that Richard Daley, 62, of Green Bay, who retired from the Madison Police Department after 20 years on the force, returned to  Madison to support “the fact that we all see this as union busting and wage suppression. This is a long-term, downward spiral of wages for working families.”

Benson also reported that Wausau police Detective Cord Buckner, 42, stood in the cold Saturday, his fourth day of protesting. He held a “Cops for Labor” sign and said, “I’m here to support all the unions’ rights.”

By Amy Traub
Research Director Drum Major Institute for Public Policy

It’s a truism on the right these days: firefighters, librarians, sanitation workers, and other public employees are lazy and overpaid. They’ve “turned themselves into a coddled class that lives better than its private sector counterpart,” according to Reason Magazine. They are crushing beleaguered taxpayers with their fancy salaries and lavish benefits.

It would be an alarming story if it were true. But a new study by the Center for State and Local Government Excellence and the National Institute on Retirement Security takes a sober look at the data behind the politicized hype and uncovers a very different picture. When workforce factors such as education and work experience are taken into account, state and local employees make less than their private sector counterparts. Looking at pay alone, those supposedly “coddled” state employees earn 11 percent less than comparable private sector workers. Employees of city and county governments earn 12 percent less than their private sector counterparts.

What about those generous public sector benefits? Analyzing data from the National Compensation Survey, the researchers find that benefits such as pensions and health coverage do make up a slightly greater share of public employees’ overall compensation than for private employees. Yet when the cost of benefits is factored in, state and local employees still wind up with less total compensation. People working for local government earn 7.4 percent less than employees with comparable skills could get in the private sector. State employees are compensated 6.8 percent less. So much for the lavish lifestyle.

The new research offers no clarion call for public employee raises and benefit hikes to catch up with the private sector. Indeed, the study documents how public compensation has lagged private sector for twenty years. But it does throw the resurgent right-wing campaign to demonize public employees and their unions sharply into question. In this recession, public employees have been laid off, furloughed, and seen their wages frozen. At a time when public budgets are strained by falling tax revenue, these are among the difficult choices cities and states have made. But that’s no reason to imagine that “greedy” city workers somehow caused the crisis or deserve to lose their jobs or to see their pay cut any more than private sector employees. Those looking for a “coddled class” should look to the Wall Street bonus pool, not the Parks Department.

***
Follow Amy Traub on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AmyTraubDMI
***
Amy Traub is the author of the book, From Disaster to Diversity: What’s Next for New York City’s Economy. She also wrote a chapter for the book, Thinking Big: Progressive Ideas for a New Era (Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2009). She has authored several influential DMI reports, including “Principles for an Immigration Policy to Strengthen and Expand the American Middle Class.” In 2008, the Jewish Funds for Justice gave her its Cornerstone Award.

In June of 2007, Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter was the only Republican to vote with Democrats to end debate on the Employee Free Choice Act. The motion failed, 51 to 48, because 60 votes are needed in the Senate to end debate.

Now that Democrats presumptively have 59 votes in the Senate (with Democrat Al Franken the expected winner of the contested seat in Minnesota), Specter has announced he won’t repeat his vote to end debate on the Employee Free Choice Act, legislation which would make forming unions at workplaces less difficult.

What do you think of Specter’s reversal?

Specter’s loyalties lie with Big Business

It’s clear that his first vote to support cloture (to end debate) was simply political calculus.  He did vote against his party, but obviously knowing that the motion would fail and his vote would have no practical effect.  Thus, allowing him to have his cake and eat it too.  Something ALL politicians love to do.  Now that his vote would have the practical effect of making the EFCA law, we can see his true loyalties.  They obviously lie with the Republicans and Big Business and not with working class Americans.

Charles Sellers
San Diego, Calif 

Can’t count on Specter

As a former resident of Pennsylvania, I’m very disappointed to hear that Arlen Specter has changed his mind on the EFCA, but I am not surprised. The guy has always been a weasel and someone you really can’t count on for help with the middle class. I hope he loses his bid for re-election in 2010. Good riddance!

Dan Zurosky
Lexington, S.C.

Specter: always there when you don’t need him

I’m not surprised at all about Specter’s reversal on key labor legislation, in this case EFCA, Employee Free Choice Act.  Senator Specter, like many other so-called moderate members of Congress, who claim to be labor-friendly, is always there when you don’t need him.  Look at his vote in June of 2007.  It was doomed for failure, so the Republican leadership released him to curry favor with labor.  Unfortunately, this is a pattern for many other fair weather friends of labor, as well as Senator Specter.  They vote with labor often enough to earn or keep labor leaders’ support but, when “key” legislation like trade bills, anti-strike breaking laws and labor law reform like EFCA come along, they turn their back on workers.

This practice is not surprising nor is the practice of unions giving these legislators a pass and, in most cases, an endorsement when they run for reelection.  So, no, I’m not surprised by the reversal of Senator Specter on EFCA, and I won’t be surprised when he receives support from many unions in his upcoming reelection bid.  The rationale we will hear is “he’s with us (labor) on many issues.”  And he is.  But try finding him and other “moderates” when it really matters.

Jan D. Pierce
Quaker City, Ohio

Senator Flip Flop

The best way to deal with Senator Flip Flop is to put in his seat a Democrat who will not flip flop.  Is Ed Rendell interested and wouldn’t he be reliable on such issues?

Herbert G. Reid
Emeritus Professor of Politics, University of Kentucky
Lexington, Kentucky

Is this a new, ratty philosophy from Specter?

Anyone who has worked in a non-union shop and tried to organize a union knows the barriers placed before them: the rumor-mongering, the open threats, the veiled threats, the workplace changes that nearly but don’t quite cross NLRB rules and so on. Just getting the minimum number of cards signed means that a great many more support unionization but for various reasons are reluctant to sign. The EFCA is a self-evident no-brainer, and even if the EFCA is passed, the odds are still stacked against the unions. Passing the EFCA would, however, begin to reverse the anti-union tide that was accelerated by Reagan’s destruction of the Air Traffic Controllers union in 1981.

That sharp reversal of union power has led to a wage depression over the last 40 years, and this has a close connection to our current economic crisis. High wage earners don’t need subprime mortgages, tend not to default, and do create a domestic market to sustain a vibrant economy– low wage earners (the result of de-unionization) do not.

Specter is not a fool, and he surely understands all the above. But, did he vote pro-union in 2007 because he could do the math and realize then that he could appear pro-union but with no effect? Or was he sincere then, but now is running scared of a primary challenge within an increasingly right-wing, anti-people, anti-union, marginalized Republican Party? I guess that amounts to asking “was he always a rat or is this something new?”

David Arnow
Brooklyn, New York

Repuglican coward and corporate lapdog

 What do I think of the Republican’s reversal?  Specter rolled over and is a Repuglican coward and corporate lapdog.

The more important question is what do I think, as a resident of Colorado, of our “appointed” new Democratic(?) Senator Michael Bennet? 

I think even less of Bennet after his failure to come out in support of the Employee Free Choice Act than I do of Arlen Specter.  Bennet’s been ducking the issue like a shy prostitute, in other words how oxymoronic of him to be a Democrat(?) who can’t choose between supporting labor or supporting corporate power.

 Mary Ann Meyers
Littleton, Colorado

Specter prefers credit cards over union cards

Specter apparently favors credit cards and payday loans as the preferred “union cards” in this country.  Disgusting!  American workers deserve a living wage, and the only way to that end is unionization. 

Jacqualyne Cody
Rhinelander, Wis. 

Organizing a perceived right, not a real one

Had Senator Specter not reversed his decision, Senators would have been forced to show the vote.  Where I come from, it’s called the Employer Free Choice Act and undoubtedly it’s a perceived “right” not a real one. Been there, Still there. Ready to move forward. Put away the past.

 Kerry Joel Sudberry
Royal, Tenn.

Votes for workers when there’s not gain

It looks like Senator Spector’s big business masters allowed him to vote the way workers in Pennsylvania would prefer as long as he could safely do so without actually achieving gains for workers.  Now that the balance has shifted, he must show his true colors and tow the corporate line.

Karen Grainey
Savannah, Ga.

Time for Specter to be a statesman

The skills of a great politician include a mastery of showmanship, compromise, deal making, fund raising, and most important of all, knowing how to get reelected each and every time.  The skills of a great statesman are the courage and wisdom to dismiss all the potential rewards from those political skills to do something that you know is right and will improve the lives of the greatest number of people.

Senator Arlen Specter has shown his skills as a great politician throughout his entire career and now is the time for him to show his skills as a great statesman by voting to end the debate on the Employee Free Choice Act.

As the senior Senator from the great state of Pennsylvania, Arlen Specter knows better than anyone the damage done to working and middle class Americans by thirty years of union busting, trickle down, voodoo economic policies.  He knows that only a resurgence of strong healthy collective bargaining units across the America workforce will stop the decline in living standards and economic opportunities for all American wage earners across this great country.

The Employee Free Choice Act is a once in a generation piece of legislation that will have such a positive impact on so many lives.  It is time for Senator Specter to rest his laurels as a great politician, and step up to the plate as the great statesman that he is and vote to end the debate on the Employee Free Choice Act.

John O’Connor
North Smithfield, R.I.

Specter seeking both sides

He’s walking both sides of the street.  He knows how poorly Pennsylvanians are doing (and that the state went for Obama in the election), and he doesn’t want to appear to be unsupportive of his constituents.  But on the other side of the street, he worries about his party exacting a political price in the future for his support of Democrats.  He can tell his constituents a half-truth in his next campaign–that he voted for it–knowing most people don’t really know or bother to look up individual votes on various bills.

Gloria Aukland
Mesa, Ariz.

Pressure from RNC

I think Specter was pressured by the RNC and most likely told that he would not receive funds for his upcoming run for re-election.

Bruce Jenkins
Sunnyvale, Calif.

Buckling under pressure of the nasties

Ever since the rise to power of the nasty breed of Republican that seeks to make government a zero-sum political game — I’m thinking Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh, etc. — there have been distinguished, experienced senators quitting the senate while expressing dismay at how the institution had deteriorated.  I have always seen Arlen Specter as one of the old-style, respectable men willing to continue trying to make the legislature something all Americans can be proud of.  But lately, I’m afraid, he has been buckling under the pressure of the nasties. 

It’s very sad.

Bob Persons
Newton, Mass.

Reversal provokes questions about intent

Senator Specter’s “change of heart” with regard to the Employee Free Choice Act makes one wonder.  Was he cynical when he supported it knowing that it would not pass?  After all, he scored some points with working people by his assumed support.

And, now, has he had a change of heart, or simply been overwhelmed with pressure from corporations and lobbyist?  Or was he opposed to the EFCA all along?

Mauna Richardson
La Madera, N.M.

Specter clueless about survival today

I wonder if Mr. Specter has ever had to work for his income, do a dirty job, do something he doesn’t want to, but had to, because without doing said job, there would be no food on his children’s table.  I doubt it.  Senators and Congresspeople have absolutely no idea what it is like to survive in this day and age of, at the minimum, two jobs to make ends meet. 

Or maybe they all should be laid off, given their proverbial pink slips, because those buffoons got us into this mess in the first place.  I am referring to the fact that it was Congress, which, when they stripped away the banking controls that had been enacted in the last depression, caused this current depression.  They should have to clean toilets for a while; you know, get a feel for what the rest of us have to suffer through.  

I’d be happy to make six figures to sit on my butt and listen to lobbyists all day, and I don’t want to hear about how hard these government officials work because you and I don’t have an army of staff members doing our job for us.  Don’t get me started.

Vincent Falcone
Biotechnology student, Hocking College
Amesville, Ohio

Specter tows typical GOP anti-union line

I think it is very disappointing to hear that Sen. Specter will not vote as he did in 2007. I am wondering what prompted him to vote for the Employee Free Choice Act in the first place and then change his mind this year. I have respected some decisions/stances he has taken in the past (ie voting for this in 2007) but to hear that he is towing the typical Republican party line of anti-unionism is upsetting. I am disgusted to see time and time again, politicians who are supposed to be “for the people” or the voice of the people, continue to vote for the best interests of the corporation rather than the people, the worker.

Janet Hada
Snohomish, Wash.

Sounds like RNC threats

Sounds like the RNC threatened him, doesn’t it?

Could be just general cussedness; he’s done that before, but my guess is that the party made it known that if  Specter voted against their line, he could lose support.

Again, there’s precedent for that. 

Mary Carter
Endicott, N.Y. 

Senate should change filibuster rules

When will Sen. Reid have the good sense to change the filibuster rules so that a mere majority can pass a bill in the Senate?

Jack McKissen
Grand Coulee, Wash.   

Reversal surprising and disappointing

Sen. Specter: Your reluctance to support this legislation is surprising and disappointing.  In the name of fairness, please reconsider your position.

Rev. Wesley E. Blaha
Monroeville, Pa.

Seek support of others

I think we must leave Senator Arlen Specter to vote his conscientious in peace.  He needs the support of Republicans. Let’s reason instead with the others and seek to develop additional allies among them.

David A. Crosbie
Pittsburgh, Pa.

Specter made a major mistake

Specter has made a major mistake if he is planning to run for re-election.  Several hazards await him: (1) he could be defeated by a strong candidate who is a liberal and pro-labor Democrat, of course; but he could also (2) run into terrible troubles in his party’s primary.  Far-right GOPs like to run a candidate against him, as they did last time, though he managed a narrow victory.  BUT Democrats, possibly faced with a primary in which the choice is obvious or an easy winner, could (temporarily switch parties and) vote in the Republican primary for the far-rightist in order to help insure that Specter goes down.  (There are many ways to skin a fat cat!) 

Gerald L. Houseman,
Spokane, Wash. 

Specter’s weasel votes

A reversal from Specter is no big surprise. He will vote with us whenever he knows the vote won’t matter. He votes with the Republican leadership when it counts. Look at his weasel words on the Clinton impeachment votes. His only saving grace is that any other Republican from Pennsylvania would be worse (or maybe not – integrity is something to value even if it’s in one’s opponents).

Tom Wolfinger
Centreville, Va.   

Specter sell-out

There is no sinister conspiracy behind the EFCA to thwart an employee’s freedom to choose or not to choose union representation as some opponents would have the public believe.  The EFCA is a straightforward attempt to reverse the anti-union bias that has perverted US law for nearly thirty years. Arlen Specter knows that. His refusal to support EFCA this time around is nothing short of a sell-out to political expediency now that his incumbency is challenged by strong right-wing opposition in the forthcoming Pennsylvania Republican primary election. Shame on you Arlen Specter.

David A. Blythe
Oxford, Mich.

Specter pressured by Republicans and right

I think it is awful.   Senator Specter has had a lot of pressure put on him by Republicans and the Right in general.  We need to get our folks out there with emails, calls, etc. in support of his progressive votes of late. We also need the same kinds of action to show him how many people are in favor of the Employee Free Choice Act.  Each member must contact family and friends to do the same.  We must get this act through now, at this point in history. Other potential Republicans might be Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe.  We need mass action now!

Judith Richards
Lathrup Village, Mich.

Exigencies of politics

Even as a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat, I have always admired Senator Specter’s honesty. I don’t want to think that he would vote to end debate only when he knew his vote was safe; when his vote would not be the 60th. Yet, I believe he is up for election this year and that his seat is not safe. The exigencies of politics are such that, should his vote be the 60th, he would lose his seat. I’d rather see him hold back this time with the hope that this decent man will be returned to his Senate seat.

Barbara Gunther
Bayport, NY

Tragedy for Employee Free Choice Act

I guess soul-selling is the accepted way to go when you are up for reelection. He finds ways to placate his conscience by pretending he is in the Senate to serve the people. Isn’t this par for the course among too many of our politicians?

What a tragedy when The Employee Free Choice Act hangs in the balance!

Elaine Babian
Far Rockaway, N.Y.  

Senator, you have to go

Hon. Sen. Specter, Sir: Thank you for nothing.  After sending us two identical “‘boiler-plate” letters, one on 12/22/08 and the other on 3/24/08, on your ostensibly supportive position of the EFCA, yesterday you turned around and announced your opposition to it.

Most troubling, was the report from The Patriot-News, by Charles Thompson: “On the Senate floor, Specter said he was troubled by the bill’s proposed elimination of the secret ballot, which he called ‘the cornerstone of how contests are decided in a democratic society’.”

This is troubling because you know “the elimination of the secret ballot” is absolutely false, and not part of the bill.

The article suggests your decision was politically motivated.  This is the political reality:  You have had the support of moderate Democrats in the past because of the moderate positions you have shown.  To stray to the far right would be a mistake.  Should you do that, we would actually welcome the candidacy of far right lunatics like Pat Toomey, so that he would be crushed in November of 2010.  Sorry, but if we can’t rely upon you for non-partisan votes, then you have to go.

Randi & Tom Alba
Ambler, Pa.

Specter kneeling at the alter of big business

Spector is a gutless punk who pandered to labor when there was no chance of the bill passing. Now that we have a real shot at passing this bill, he is showing his true colors. He is kneeling at the altar of big business. Unions and their members in Pennsylvania should not forget this double cross. 

Steven Elliott
Danbury, Conn.

Specter should vote for fairness

Are all Republicans the same?  We had one on our road, who signed a right-of-way for the road to be paved when a Republican was governor, but when it was a Democratic governor, he wouldn’t sign one.  They never vote on the fairness side of any issue.

Without unions our country will not survive as the leader of the free-world.  Education on union backed issues is the key to enlightenment of people who through no fault of their own, stand on the wrong side of issues.

Ronnie Young
Waynesville, N.C.

Vote change inconceivable

I cannot understand how Senator Specter could even consider changing his vote. This bill is a “no-brainer. It is vital for our economy. How could anyone not support it – where are the thoughts of those missing Democrats – amazing that we would elect persons like this to “represent” us in Congress.

Howard Lord
Montezuma, Iowa

Make the Republicans filibuster

 I think it is time to make the Republicans filibuster against the working man if that is their choice.

Robert Hooker
Upper Marlboro, Md.

A jolt

I think somebody needs to kick Arlen upside the head. 

Robert Young
Nashville, Tennessee

Specter feels threatened

I hope that Specter (and others in the GOP) have the courage to vote in good conscience for the interest of working people in Pennsylvania and the country. It’s apparent that he feels threatened by the CFG (Club for Growth) contingent, who are interested in a business agenda that is disconnected from the needs of working people. If only politicians on either side of the aisle would stand up to this anti-worker agenda, people would respond in support.

It’s very disheartening to see the path that Specter and so many others in government are taking while the middle class continues to be undermined across the U.S., by denial of basic union organizing rights and protections granted in most “civilized” nations.

Brent McFarlane
Seattle, Wash.

Specter votes for his own advantage

Arlen Specter has been a successful politician for a very long time.  

Successful politicians, for the most part, do what is in their best interests.  When Specter voted FOR the Employee Free Choice Act, he did so in order to position himself with the Democratic Party, at a time when that party’s fortunes were on the rise.  Now, he is fighting against the EFCA because he has more to gain from his fellow Republicans, and the business interests that support them, by doing so, than can be gained by siding with the Democrats. Politics as usual.

Victoria LoSchiavo
Mentor, Ohio

Specter’s decision all GOP politics

It’s about politics. The Republicans see Barack Obama succeeding beyond their and many others’ (including Democrats) expectations and so now they see themselves circling the wagons lest they help the President succeed. I say the President, because he has expressed strong support for Employee Free Choice, so anything that furthers that success will be opposed by the GOP. Come election time, they’ll come around. We need to remember that, including let’s not forget the biggest traitor of all, Senator Joe Lieberman.

Angel Rodriguez, a former copper miner from Morenci, Ariz.
Glendale, Ariz.

Specter a straw in the wind

I think Senator Specter is still smarting from the beating his fellow Republicans administered after his vote on the stimulus bill, so he is trying to assert his ideological purity with this vote. I can remember when he first ran for the Senate; he was a decent, principled former DA with crime-fighting credentials. Now he seems more like a straw in the wind, hell-bent on keeping his seat, no matter who gets hurt.

I guess we’ll have to get some other help with this….

Barbara Bruce
Mandan, N.D.

Replace Specter with pro-union Democrat

I am not surprised. After all, he is a Republican. The union members of Pennsylvania need to replace Specter with a pro-union Democrat. Unions do have an ally with Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis. We could urge Obama and Biden to resort to the nuclear option. The first step is getting all Democrats to support EFCA.

William Joseph Miller
Los Angeles, Calif.

Specter’s response unfortunate

Senator Specter’s response was unfortunate, and it probably was due to his fear of being defeated in the next Republican primary because of a YES vote.  It may be possible to deal with his concerns and to eventually gain his support, but if not, surely there are other ways to gain a Republican vote. I think the solution is to compromise- make a deal – give up something, to gain something else. Perhaps the key is with President Obama. Maybe he can help put a deal together that satisfies labor and one Republican senator.  Please recall that Specter, Snowe and Collins helped Obama before, for something I am sure each of them wanted.

Bill Weiss
Morgantown, W.Va. 

Votes for middle class when it doesn’t count

Mr. Specter has done this before.  He votes for the middle class so long as his vote won’t count; but when it counts, he always votes for the corporate hierarchy. He is a true Republican, but tries to conceal the fact.  I was surprised when he voted with Collins and Snowe for the stimulus, the only time I have seen him break his rule.

David G. Wagner MD
Portland, Ore.  

Union members must vote their interests

I think Senators are allowed to vote for their constituents when it won’t affect the outcome, but must vote with the party when required to do so or face primary opposition. 

As long as union members–or the 60 million who want to become union members–fail to vote (or vote Republican), the Employee Free Choice Act has an uphill fight. 

My county brags about being one of the “most Republican in the nation” — and 60% of the parents of public school kids are not registered. 

Arlen Specter should have been voted out long ago.  Yet, he can’t have been elected without the votes–or apathy– of labor. 

Judy Ferro
Caldwell, Idaho