Romney: Employee Free Choice Act ‘Would Have A Devastating Impact On The Economy’
Romney: Employee Free Choice Act ‘Would Have A Devastating Impact On The Economy’
Today, House conservatives held a hearing to discuss proposals for an economic stimulus package, with testimony from former governor and CEO Mitt Romney, among others. While most of the hearing focused on how to best cut taxes for corporations, Romney used some time during his opening statement to take a swipe at the Employee Free Choice Act:
And there is one very bad idea that is being promoted by a special interest group. It is an idea that would have devastating impact on the economy—short term and long term. It would lead investors to send their funds elsewhere, businesses to expand elsewhere and jobs to relocate elsewhere. It is the plan to virtually impose unions on all small, medium and large businesses by removing the right of workers to vote by secret ballot. Card check is a very bad idea under any circumstances. In these circumstances, it would be calamitous.
As Michael Whitney laid out at the SEIU blog, “Business leaders and CEOs are developing a new strategy to combat the Employee Free Choice Act: threaten to take jobs overseas and divest from America.” Romney’s comment certainly falls into that category.
Fearmongering rhetoric aside, the Employee Free Choice Act would actually make the economy work for everyone, instead of only those at the top. According to estimates by the Economic Policy Institute, if 5 million service workers join unions:
- 5 million workers would get a 22 percent raise on average, or an additional $7,000 a year.
- $34 billion in total new wages would flow into the economy.
- 900,000 jobs would be lifted above the poverty wage for a family of four.
- Between 1.8 million and 3 million dependent children would share in these benefits.
But Employee Free Choice is not only about workers receiving better wages and benefits. Stronger unions and a more secure workforce lead to a more productive economy. For example, one-third of all American workers joined unions between 1947 and the early 1970s, and in those years, “median family income more than doubled, productivity grew 2.9 percent a year, [and] America’s economic output nearly tripled.”
If Romney considers livable wages, higher productivity, and more economic output “devastating,” then maybe some devastation is in order.
10 Responses to “Romney: Employee Free Choice Act ‘Would Have A Devastating Impact On The Economy’”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Wonk RoomContact Us
Donate
Yeah, we should DEFINITELY protect the status quo.
After all, unless we listen to the Republicans and their allies on Wall Street, we’ll see American jobs outsourced, we’ll see wages stagnate, we’ll see middle class people unable to afford healthcare and college, unemployment could jump to the double digits, and god forbid, we might bring this nation to the brink of a fiscal collapse that demanded a $700 billion bailout…
Look how well trickle-down has worked for America and our economy! We definitely need to listen to the people who are telling us more money needs to go to Bain Capital, and less to working families. They are totally credible when they tell us it is the only way to avert disaster.
January 15th, 2009 at 5:53 pmAll that Wall Street innovation imploded the financial sector. The answer from Mitt? Corporate tax cuts!
Sorry Romney, J & J’s Tylenol scare response seems a better answer than tax cuts. Recall the deadly product and don’t sell another pill until it’s safe. Reformulate product, add tamper resistant executive compensation, and decrease leverage.
Greed and leverage already crippled the economy Mitt.
January 15th, 2009 at 9:04 pmI’m in favor of unions, and believe we ought to enforce the current laws, and even add new ones if they will make for fairer, better protection of unionization. However, I cannot understand why we should abandon the secret ballot. I realize the EFCA provides a choice, not a requirement, for card check, but why do that at all? The only argument I’ve heard in favor is to increase unionization. Again, I like the goal, but it’s the means I have a problem with. Unions have historically been all about the secret ballot; now, when it’s convenient, they want to effectively abandon it.
Can anyone please explain to me why we should allow card check, other than to increase unions? Surely, we are doing the expedient thing despite what our principles about democracy should instruct us to do.
January 16th, 2009 at 2:50 amHere’s something to chew on. Suppose America’s corporatocracy wants to dump health isurance costs onto the employee. Democrat Ron Wyden submitted such a bill in the last Congress. Big Three auto shed their retiree health insurance benefit onto the UAW via VEBA’s.
For employees to get access to group insurance rates, cheaper than individual plans, they need an overarching purchasing body. Unions qualify. Even SEIU Chief Andy Stern said “employer health insurance is dead and not coming back.”
For this to occur, unions must be ubiquitous. That’s the only reason I can see for unions to give up their cherished secret vote. Unions would love to manage billions more in benefit funds.
It’s only something to chew on. If it tastes bad, spit it out.
January 16th, 2009 at 10:35 amHaving been involved with unions for years, I will tell you the union needs to eliminate the vote. The problem they face is when the company they are organizing begins to tell their employees the facts on union corruption, dues and the union constitution. These facts are devastating to the union while organizing. Companies, by law, can only tell the facts or face an unfair labor practice charge that the UNION WILL FILE along with a rash of others designed to tie the company up in court. This can cost the company money, reputation, lost business and lost jobs. The union can promise everything and anything without consequence.
Picture this; the union organizes tons of small businesses promising higher wages and the government GUARANTEES a contract where “it” dictates the wage and benefit amounts. You bet they will go up and the small business will go down. “So what” you say? Once you begin to eliminate the smaller competition and chase those jobs back to the “already organized” large companies the unions immediately get the benefit of the new employee dues. The union wont care because they get more members one way or the other. If the small business goes down, it is more economical for union – one less contract to negotiate (cheaper). The large company can begin to raise prices on all of us without much worry as the competition fades into the sunset.
Unions are socializm. Amazing how many people sneak into our country to get away from this!
January 16th, 2009 at 10:43 amEmployee Free Choice Now . Org
Educating The World on The EFCA.
Myth vs. Reality: The REALITY is the Employee Free Choice Act Helps American Workers and their Families.
Despite the need for reform, critics of EFCA continue to misinform the public about the bill and hide the serious shortcomings of current labor law. Democrats are committed to setting the record straight and passing this important legislation on behalf of American workers and their families.
MYTH: EFCA will prevent the use of secret-ballot elections.
REALITY: EFCA does not strip workers of their right to choose a secret-ballot election to decide whether to select — or not to select — a union representative. EFCA simply gives workers the additional option of selecting a union representative by majority sign-up.
For More Information on EFCA please visit our website and blog
http://www.employeefreechoiceactnow.org
http://efcanow.blogspot.com/
January 17th, 2009 at 11:44 amYeah, let’s unionize all businesses, I mean look what it’s done for the Big 3! Now the Democrats want to do that to all businesses? They might as well if their end goal is to have the government own EVERYTHING, because the best way to increase the ‘Bail Out Soup Line’ is to demand more unions on small business. Maybe we should guarentee jobs for life like the French; you don’t have to worry about 7% Unemployment when it’s 23%!!!
January 18th, 2009 at 9:26 pmThe Unions had a place in our society. If government is doing there job properly and enforces that laws that are currently on the books there is no need for unions. The unions have caused the closure of many businesses to the detriment of many workers who have skill sets that are easily moved to other nations.
Paying unions dues is just adding another layer of taxation on workers who can least afford the organization. Government just needs to do its job and everyone will be better off.
Allowing unions the ability to know how workers will vote is tantamount to giving the Unions a free ride into the lives of those who do not want the restrictions that the unions will impose to ensure that the proletariat’s voice will be silenced and kill the will of many others.
Currently the economy is bad enough without having unions deciding who works and who does not based on membership in those sudo government organization that do not always have the best interest of the workers at heart.
January 19th, 2009 at 10:16 pmCurrently union organizers put lots of pressure on employees to sign authorization cards. The secret-ballot election allows employees to make a FREE CHOICE as to whether or not they want to be represented by the union. EFCA tilts the balance of fairness towards the union by allowing the union to control the way the representative is selected, in particular by majority sign-up.
January 23rd, 2009 at 7:37 pmUnions are the key to tearing down this Free Market Economy so the Progressives (Communist) can rebuild it in a much more socialist structure. Look at the economies of the Northern (Union) States versus the Right to Work states of the South. EFCA is how the progressives are going to level the playing field and punish the southern states for having tremendously successful right to work economies.
January 24th, 2009 at 11:49 am