03 November 2008

Why I Think People Should Vote No On Measure 64

1843.


Because if you do, it's the same as going to the home of a public employee, sitting down, and telling them that you have more of a right to tell them where their political dollars go than they do.


Would you take that from some stranger (are you goofy enough to answer that one yes)? Anyone who tried that with me would get a swift kick out the door.


The ten-dollar-word-of-the-day from these mobsters who are running the slick ads telling you to vote for it is "co-mingling". And, in typical Frank Luntz-inspired cynicism, they hang thier hat on that like you wouldn't believe.


But it's the wrong word, of course. The concept you should be fixating on is "payroll deduction". As in "I choose to support something, so, please, take something out of my paycheck ... my own money I got paid for work I did for someone else, and it's my money to do with as I please, thank you very much".


There's already mechanisms in place, I'm told, that allow state employees who don't like the employee unions' politics, to to contribute to those political causes. So state employees can already opt out.


And thats why you see those commercials saying how you'll silence the political voices of nurses, firefighters, and police. Because that's what you'll be doing. And political voices are something all of us deserve to have – whether you like it or not. And the money they're doing it with is thier pay. Certainly they get paid with "our tax dollars" – another concept that gets beat to a bloody pulp in the service of cynical people. But once that money gets paid to them, that's their pay, and if they want to support thier union with it, to be blunt – that's none of our say.


How about if I came to your house and told you you don't get to donate to a Democrat or a republican just because I didn't like them?


Now imagine you're going up to a policeman, firefighter, or nurse and telling them the same thing.


Good luck with that.


Measure 64 is an insult. Don't vote for it.


Tags: , , ,


Powered by Qumana


4 comments:

Dale said...

I voted No, but only because "hell no" wasn't available. I took my time to blacken the oval, keeping carefully within the line. I want the optical counting machine thingy to see that no.

The following is not original, but it's an important point for me, so here goes: under current law, both labor unions and corporations are limited in how much money they can contribute toward political advocacy (especially campaigns and candidates). Like it or lump it, that cap is in place.

Measure 64 seeks to put a second cap on labor unions at the front end, at the level of individual participants. It doesn't apply this new cap to corporations. Unfair!

The exact equivalent for corporations would be to outlaw "mingling" of shareholder funds -- when I buy a share of a company, I don't get to "opt out" of letting that money go to its political advocacy efforts. Nor is the company barred from using proceeds of sales of shares for political advocacy. It can mingle all it wants, subject to the back-end limits on campaign contributions.

Union dues are, in effect, "shares" of the union. If it's terrible and unjust "mingling" in one case, then it's terrible and unjust "mingling" in the other.

Besides all of which, Sizemore is a complete ass.

Samuel John Klein Portlandiensis said...

Measure 64 seeks to put a second cap on labor unions at the front end, at the level of individual participants. It doesn't apply this new cap to corporations. Unfair!

That must be the loophole one of those commercials metioned. Nifty! If you like a world where big business is the only voice you hear, this measure's the one for you.

Actually, I've become convinced that Sizemore doesn't care what goes into those measures anymore except in so far as they please the people who write his paycheck. And it's been very profitable for him to hurt working people.

Besides all of which, Sizemore is a complete ass.

Well you know someone said he wasn't fit to lick your shoes, but I stuck up for him; I said he certainly was!

And people say I have no heart.

Dale said...

And did you see? It looks like measure 64 is going down! Yes!!

Or I should say, going down *again.* Sizemore has put it out there three times now? Four?

No doubt we'll see it again in 2010. Sigh.

Samuel John Klein Portlandiensis said...

Sigh indeed.

I just heard that William U'Ren was found spinning in his grave when you expressed that thought