Group forms to lobby for “right to work” for less legislation in Wisconsin

This should surprise absolutely no one….

A longtime conservative activist with ties to national groups has started an organization to promote so-called “right to work” legislation.

Wisconsin Right to Work will seek changes in state law to prohibit businesses and unions from requiring workers to pay union dues as a condition of employment.

Gov. Scott Walker and GOP lawmakers already banned such requirements for most public employees in Wisconsin, but their 2011 law known as Act 10 didn’t affect private-sector unions or police and firefighters.

Advocates say that prohibiting employers and labor groups from making these agreements would give workers more freedom. Opponents of the measure say it dramatically weakens union finances and clout by allowing workers to get any potential benefits from a labor group in their workplace without having to provide anything in return.

“Wisconsin’s public employees have already demonstrated their strong desire for their right to choose as evidenced by the sharp decline in enrollment in the teacher’s unions since the passage of Gov. Walker’s (Act 10),” Lorri Pickens, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Work, said in a statement.

Not only do I believe Scott Walker and rubber-stamp Republicans in the legislature will work to enact “right to work” for less legislation during the next session, but I also expect to see Act 10 expanded to include firefighters and law enforcement.


Related Articles

39 thoughts on “Group forms to lobby for “right to work” for less legislation in Wisconsin

      1. Oh so we are name calling now eh Jake? Very impressive. I am in favor of any advancements toward freedom, even though I am not subjected to any of coercion associated with unionism.

        1. Way to lie Denis. In fact, right-to-work-for-less is a barrier to the constitutional right to freely associate and to use that association to demand you be adequately compensated what you contribute. No different than WMC or any other oligarch group, except it involves people that actually, you know, WORK.

          So again, I repeat the question you gutlessly dodged. WHAT WILL YOU GET OUT OF THIS?

          1. I am all for free association, it is coerced association that I oppose. Thus, I favor the “right to work” without being forced into a union, which I believe to be the essence of the proposed legislation. As for me personally Jake, I don’t expect any immediate benefit beyond the knowledge that we are moving towards a more free country and the anticipation of a better, more wealthy state in the future.

            1. Now I understand. You’re lying and/or ignorant about what “right-to-screw-workers” really does.

              Closed shops requiring union membership for employment have been banned for 70 years. What WisGOP wants to do is allow unions at work to be divided by freeloaders and to reduce the ability of unions and workers to seek redress when bosses screw them over.

              But honesty, thinking and reflection aren’t really your strong suits. Guess that’s why you’re Dead End Denis, who had nothing better to do than envy and denigrate people who believe in standing up for themselves.

              AND WHAT DO YOU GET OUT OF IT?

        2. Denis,

          1. does the nickname hurt your feelings?

          2. Do you want to “share” your feelings?

          3. Do you feel like a victim?

          4. Should we have a special blog just for you? No one could criticize anything you wrote. Only affirmations of you and your writing are allowed.

          You’re the one who claimed to be in favor of “capitalism.” Jake’s excellent nick name just points out that you’re the polar opposite of a free-market guy.

          Capitalism runs on SALES. You, however, want to CRUSH the customers. That’s the DEMAND side of the Supply/Demand equation. That’s how prices get set.

          “Supply and Demand Equilibrium”

          Even though the concepts of supply and demand are introduced separately, it’s the combination of these forces that determine how much of a good or service is produced and consumed in an economy and at what price. These steady-state levels are referred to as the equilibrium price and quantity in a market.

          In the supply and demand model, the equilibrium price and quantity in a market is located at the intersection of the market supply and market demand curves. Note that the equilibrium price is generally referred to as P* and the market quantity is generally referred to as Q*.

            1. Dan, which goes right back to the main demand leakage culprits, (1) income inequality, the elites controlling too much

              See my 6:30pm about the SEVENTY-FIVE TRILLION in WELFARE to Wall Street. That’s just ONE Wall Street Bank. US GDP in a year is only around $16 trillion.

              and (2) the federal government taxing too much.

              “Demand Leakages: The 800 lb Economist in the Room”

              “…Demand leakages are unspent income. For a given currency, if any agent doesn’t spend his income, some other agent has to spend more than his income, or that much output doesn’t get sold. So if the non government sectors collectively don’t spend all of their income, it’s up to government to make sure its income is less than its spending, or that much output doesn’t get sold. This translates into what’s commonly called the ‘output gap,’ which is largely a sanitized way of saying unemployment.

              And with the private sector necessarily pro cyclical, the (whopping) private sector spending gap in this economy can only be filled with by government via either a (whopping) tax cut and/or spending increase (depending on one’s politics).

              So wherefore the ‘demand leakages?’ The lion’s share are due to tax advantages for not spending your income, including pension contributions, IRA’s and all kinds of corporate reserves. Then there’s foreign hoards accumulated to support foreign exporters. And it all should be a very good thing — all of that net unspent income means that for a given size government, and a given non government rate of credit expansion, our taxes can be that much lower. Personally, I’d rather have a tax cut than a policy to get other people to spend their unspent income or borrow more. But that’s just me…


              “(Federal) Taxes For Revenue Are Obsolete”

              Capitalism is about booms and busts. The oil market’s a perfect example. Crude’s been over $100/barrel for a long time. Now people wonder if it could get under $40/barrel.

              From an astute comment in the Wall Street Journal:

              “A lot of independent producers have insured themselves against price drops through derivative contracts. I’ve read that many companies have hedged over 75% of their output for next year.

              Which leads to the question – Who are the counterparties to these contracts? In the wake of Dodd-Frank the financial services industry fought tooth and nail against these contract being traded on open exchanges, which means they are being traded in the dark.”

              To smooth out the “boom and bust” cycle for workers, it makes sense to have a federal job guarantee.

              “…The government could serve as the “employer of last resort” under a job guarantee program modeled on the WPA (the Works Progress Administration, in existence from 1935 to 1943 after being renamed the Work Projects Administration in 1939) and the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps, 1933-1942). The program would offer a job to any American who was ready and willing to work at the federal minimum wage, plus legislated benefits. No time limits. No means testing. No minimum education or skill requirements….”


              Another more aggressive option, per Milton Friedman, Nixon, others, is a negative income tax.

              Others call it a “basic income guarantee.”

              It’s not welfare. With a basic income guarantee, every adult gets a check every month, say $1,000. Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Denis, chris, ex-Officer Wilson, Mike Brown’s parents….

              1. I actually think the biggest culprit is free trade agreements/outsourcing. From a purely economic perspective, companies finding a cheaper labor market overseas effectively shift the demand curve in the US for labor inward (lowering the equilibrium price), while the supply curve remains static or even shifts outward (further lowering the equilibrium price) with a growing population.

                It’s a big problem to fix. I really don’t know what the answer is. Your federal job guarantee idea is interesting. I guess my question about it would be is there enough “stuff to do” (for lack of a better phrase)? That is just a rhetorical question, obviously it would be very difficult to quantify.

                1. W/R/T a federal job guarantee, long term, science, offers an infinite number of experiments that have to be run. There’s always more work than money to pay for it.

                  Short term, we’ve got $3.6 trillion in federal infrastructure projects that desperately need our attention “‘A national embarrassment’: U.S. infrastructure suffers from bipartisan failure”


                  We don’t borrow from China or our grandchildren. The only reason this work isn’t getting done is the failed economic thinking of our leaders.

                  Completely agree about Trans-Pacific Partnership and other outsourcing solutions. GOP will give Obama authority to negotiate. When the deals blow up, like NAFTA did, they’ll blame him. Just like the GOP blames Clinton for NAFTA. Oligarchs control both parties.

                  Economists love imports. Exporter does all the work, takes all the risk, supplies all the materials and then all they get in return for selling us something, is an electronic marker at the federal reserve. They can buy stuff in dollars.

                  When you have time, the 49 minute video in the link, “Fiscal Space and Financial Instability: A Differential Analysis” is a lot more accessible than the title suggests. The slides really help.

                  Dr. Kelton @stephaniekelton makes the point that what has to balance are the three economic sectors: private (domestic), foreign, and public. When the private sector and the foreign sector are both broke, the public sector has to spend. When spending from private sector and the foreign sector cause demand-pull inflation (too many dollars chasing too few goods), that’s when you raise federal taxes. That’s their purpose, to manage aggregate demand. They are not necessary to fund federal spending.


  1. Action such as this will destroy the last collective voice that labor has in the market place and the economy. Unions have existed to check abuse by management and to insure that workers share in the profits of their labors. In the “robber baron” era of the late 19th century workers were at the mercy of unscrupulous company bosses and wealth was concentrated in the hands of a few corporate giants. They used their money to buy government until Teddy Roosevelt brought them to their knees and gave workers a voice in this country. With workers having no voice and no power only government can serve to balance the impact of raging capitalism for the people of this country. Right to work gives the worker freedom to do nothing as management holds all the cards and in a jobless recovery the worker can be free as a bird to do what. This will continue the pattern of stagnant wages and whatever job growth occurs will be in the low wage big box retail arena as low wages leaves consumers with no discretionary money to buy manufactured products that would create better paying jobs!

  2. Did you see Xoff dug up an old piece showing Pickens’ connection to Wiggy and Block in that A href=”¬if_t=share_reply”>hinky GOTV scheme in the late ’90s?

  3. Hard to argue with the legislature pursuing legislation that a MAJORITY of Wisconsinites want. If this was such an easy step to see, why do you suppose Republicans kicked so much butt in Wisconsin this year? Must mean the regular people of WI want this change? Hmmmm curious.

    1. Wisconsinites also voted in non-binding referendums to raise the minimum wage and expand BadgerCare. It seems like many people haven’t seen that Governor Walker and the Republican Party do not correlate to those viewpoints.

      “Right to work” states have lower standards of living, lower wages, poorer education systems, and less workplace protections. Those are the flat out facts.

      1. “Wisconsinites also voted in non-binding referendums to raise the minimum wage and expand BadgerCare. It seems like many people haven’t seen that Governor Walker and the Republican Party do not correlate to those viewpoints.”

        Nope. In a word: Diebold.

    2. If you had any PROOF that a majority of Wisconsinites want it, then you might be correct. RTW was on what state-wide candidate’s or party platform or special referendum ballot? Link to any public statement, advisory referendum or specific part of a state-wide candidate race and then sift through the statistics.

    3. And that’s why Walker ran openly favoring right-to-work-for-less, right? Just like he was open on the exploding budget deficit and his plans to solve it, along with the $750 million in tax increases for his giveaway to the Road Builders.

      Oh wait, Walker said NONE OF THESE THINGS, because he’s the “Unintimidated” one, right? Or is it because he’s a lying snake that fooled enough rubes to sneak out 52% of the vote in a lower-turnout midterm.

      I bet a whole lot of low-info white folks are regretting their Walker vote these days, because they sure didn’t think they were getting this BS. Maybe that’s their own fault or the fault of our paid-off media, but I sure don’t see people like Chris saying Obama has every right to do what he wants, even though Obama won Wisconsin twice by wider margins and hundreds of thousands more voters than Scott Walker ever has gotten.

      Or maybe Jerry’s right and those Election a Night numbers aren’t so legit. I’m not sayin’, I’m just askin’ (as they say on Fox)

  4. It’s legislation that the majority of mid-term voters wanted – not necessarily Wisconsinites as a whole. Wisconsin turn out in the mid-terms was 54% according to here:

    And of course the voting districts are currently engineered to heavily favor the GOP. So I think that whether or not this is what Wisconsinites really want is still open to question.

  5. Mark, wrong. A majority voted your side lost. Elections have consequences, so said your messiah Obama.

    If this was “not a surprise” it must be the will off the Wisconsin voter.

  6. This is a slight change of subject but isn’t it amazing there has been no concern about the integrity of the last election from any on the Republican side. I thought they said it was absolutely impossible to protect the integrity of the vote without voter I D. NOW THAT THE ELECTION IS OVER AND THEY WON THERE APPEARS TO BE NO NEED TO HAVE A MEANS TO SUPPRESS THE VOTE AT LEAST UNTIL THE NEXT ELECTION.

    1. Way off subject! but since you brought it up you should do research on areas that have passed voter ID there is pretty convincing evidence that voting has actually increased among minorities in those states.

      More way off subject! drunk and drugged black mothers are smothering their babies in Wisconsin at an alarming rate and no one gives a damn about it. more black babies are smothered in a year in Milwaukee alone then all cop related African American deaths in the nation in that same time

      1. Aside from your absolutely not understanding Jerry’s point about Republicans playing up the myth of voter fraud to goose their most witless base membership into action, we’ll leave it at that. What statistics are you quoting on increases in minority voting. You made that claim based on WHAT EVIDENCE?

        Which elected representative or DA or social services agency have you brought this off-topic topic up with? Where are your statistics to the extent and CAUSE of the problem obtained from. Black, female, definitely drunk or drugged and you the PROOF? I suggested you write it up and submit it to Zach as a thread topic and you blew me off and accused me of not caring.

        Could institutional racism related poverty, joblessness and crap voucher school education be playing a role. Neither outcome, cop shootings of blacks or infant deaths are desirable or desired by anyone. One problem dead infants is supposed to excuse cop behavior? You whine on here three times about it as if you actually care or have tried to stem the perceived problem. Do something about it, if you can’t say what you’ve done about it already.

  7. How fast are fire-fighters, police and the we stand by scooter (suckers), operating engineers going to be whining if this gets to be getting to the state legislative floor for a vote. Republican leadership says to their professional base, “everyone under the bus,(morons)!”

    As Walker signs this into law, how much is he going to still be denying that RTW was not his key objective, to thsee bodies under the bus?

  8. Nonquixote: specifically speaking of Georgia:

    Elections data reviewed by the AJC show that participation among black voters rose by 44 percent from 2006 — before the law was implemented — to 2010. For Hispanics, the increase for the same period was 67 percent. Turnout among whites rose 12 percent.

    It was expected that African American turnout would spike in 2008, when Barack Obama became the first person of color to win the presidency. And it did rise to historic highs in Georgia.

    Black participation fell in 2010, as it did for all demographic groups. Still, a far greater share of black voters turned out in 2010 than in 2006, showing that Obama was not the only factor driving turnout.

    “If you look at the numbers, they clearly show that critics of this law were wrong,” Hans von Spakovsky, a former legal counsel to the Justice Department’s civil rights division who now works for the conservative Heritage Foundation. “Their argument has always been it would depress turnout, but it didn’t happen — quite the opposite.”

    AND YES I did understand his point regarding Voter ID. The reason it was fought so hard for was because the libs fought so hard to overturn it AT ELECTION TIME.

    Just like THE BS “war on women” that the libs roll out only at election time. The other times of the year they celebrate Bill Clinton for his various rapes and female conquests. Meanwhile Obama continues to underpay female staffers in his own administration…

    And black babies dying should matter. Unfortunately the black population are more concerned with black thug robbers that die when they confront the police officers that attempt to apprehend them.

    But as you are aware the RACIST THUG MURDERING cop Officer Wilson apparently only wanted to GUN DOWN IN COLD BLOOD one black boy that day. He of course could have killed two black boys but for some reason only killed the black boy that allegedly assaulted him and then charged at him. The other black boy who didn’t allegedly do anything for some reason wasn’t killed in cold blooded murder by the racist pig cop.

    1. chris, aka ghettosupastar, (“Pras featuring Mya & Ol’ Dirty Bastard “Ghetto Superstar”) , thanks for so carefully populating BB with oligarch talking points.

      Denis will occasionally bring up Islam, but you both evidently want to emphasize white supremacy.

      Times haven’t changed much since the days of Jay Gould: “I can hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half.”

      You’re happy to rip Obama for “being non-white,” but you both absolutely refuse to criticize him for NOT indicting even one Wall Street CEO, or otherwise holding them accountable.

      “Bank Of America Dumps $75 Trillion In Derivatives On U.S. Taxpayers With Federal Approval”

      To put $75 trillion in perspective, US GDP in 2012 was around $16.5 trillion. We blew a lot more than the $6 trillion they’re claiming in Iraq and Afghanistan. Social Security’s Trust Fund is around $2.3 trillion. Bank of America is just one Wall Street bank. They all have derivative exposure. I’ve seen estimates of $700 trillion, but I don’t think anyone knows.

    2. Just as I thought, no links. An acronym and “Heritage Foundation,” couple of quotes out of any context. You still don’t get Jerry’s point on voter ID, figures. You also failed to answer my question about what have YOU done to mitigate black infant mortality, nothing apparently. Your “concern,” breaks my heart. You haven’t even considered buying an appropriate crib and donating it to TRY to save a life.

      Did I ever say I was happy with Obombya about anything? He cut all Fed workers 2 years ago or was it a pay freeze. Gender specific, no. Racial specific no, unless you view the demographics to find out.

      Don’t conflate every white cop killing a black man with the DW incident. DW murdered a black teen for no justifiable reason. You can’t figure that out, you refuse to try, not my problem.

      You are a troll. You can’t even find the Reply button.

  9. Unions had their day, now they are disappearing. Public is happy that they are going from govt as they have used monopoly to grab tons of money right out of our pockets.

    1. Just because Republicans believe Democracy should leave a worker when a worker goes into the work site, does not mean the general public in America has the same train of thought as the Republicans.

      1. And most aren’t like retired suburb trash such as Dumb Dohnal. DD got his and wants to maintain his (mediocre) status by knocking others down the chain. What a winner.

        Good luck selling your oversized home in your dead-end town when no one has money to buy it from you. But hey, you won an election which got you…?

  10. Funny anyone thinks there is a need to lobby for this in a completely Republican controlled state. The Kochs must have cleared out some change from the couch cushions and need to spend it somewhere.

  11. Actually, it’s not clear to me that this policy is as unpopular as Progressives would like to believe. We can’t assume that the average person makes the connection between unions and middle class wages. And we have to re-build the idea that it’s a fine thing deserving of respect and good wages to serve for the public good or work at a trade or care for the dying or disabled, etc.

  12. right in the heading of the article it states this should absolutely surprised no one. Well I can’t end if this action or possible action by the legislature should absolutely surprised no one that in furs everyone recognized and this would happen if the Republicans won. Well the Republicans won and if they pursue this legislation as zack. It out it should absolutely surprised no one there for people that voted were voting for this legislation if it is brought up. the only other possibility is this is a complete surprise to everyone and your voters were too stupid to know that it could be a possibility

    1. Chris, Google Translator’s Troll-to-English seems to be malfunctioning. However, my ability to read troll patois is improving and I think you are of the mind that Wisconsin voters are getting what they in fact chose. Throw in the non-voters who also made a choice on election day and you have a point.

  13. Emma bingo! Clearly this shift to right to work is “absolutely not a surprise” therefore voters knew or shoukd have known that this could be or would be happening. Just like if in an immpossible to believe altered universe Burke woukd have won nobody would be surprised if she Attempted to overturn act 10

Comments are closed.