By David Woodward
D-34th District
Michigan House

As you may know, the Republican-controlled legislature in Michigan has been making strong policy statements about its dislike of unions and their role in our society. There have been jabs and picks at unions for years as the GOP has tried to dismantle them piece by piece and eliminate their role in protecting workers, their families, and a democratic approach to government.

Among the latest of these attempts is a bill which would require a union to receive the annual signature of every member before it expends any portion of the member's union dues for "political, social, charitable or other activities not related to collective bargaining, contract administration or the grievance process.

Translation: tie the hands of unions in supporting political causes through monetary donations. Currently, union members can prevent, by their signatures, the spending of their dues on the above, thereby already giving them full authority to exercise the rights granted to them in the Beck case.

However, Senate Bill 32 would turn the tables and put the burden on the unions to get each and every signature before any action could be taken. And burden it would be. There are hundreds of thousands of union members in this state. No matter how organized a system might be developed, it would be logistically impossible to collect all of these signatures.

What is the motive behind this legislation, if union members already have the ability to restrict their dues from going to nonunion activities? Many of us have asked the same question.

I think Republicans are touting this as campaign finance reform, but if that were truly the case, they would be willing to support some changes which would have a significant impact.

For example, during a heated debate on the House floor a few weeks ago regarding legislation that would require the reporting of every $1 contributed by an individual to a campaign (the current threshold is $20), the GOP was unwilling to buy into requiring the reporting of contributions to political foundations by corporations. Now why do you think that was the case?

Could it be because the small, $1 contributions are usually made to the Democrats and the large dollar sums that are made by corporations are usually made to Republicans?

Perhaps the answer us that Senate Bill 32 is clearly about union busting. The Republicans have lumped this bill under the misnomer of "paycheck protection" in the package they have deceptively called the "Union Worker's Bill of Rights."

This package would require union members to sign cards every year before dues money could be used for anything other than collective bargaining. Such activities include organizing new members, communicating with you, or lobbying the legislature on labor issues important to you. In addition, the package would also dramatically change various laws which have helped form the foundation of unions in this state.

While at first glance some workers might find the package appealing, we must look at the critical concerns facing working people of this state and the Republicans' history on such issues. Until they are willing to look at concerns like prevailing wage, minimum wage, stronger workplace safety measures, quality education and job training, decent health and child care - which are the things that are important to workers - I question the credibility they have with unions and their claim to be promoting a pro-worker agenda.

Republicans never have been about the business of supporting unions, the rights of workers and organized labor in general, and they aren't about to change their tune now. Although the legislation is in the early stages of the process, I urge you to keep close tabs on its progress.

And be assured that we, as Democrats in the Michigan House, will continue to fight on your behalf.

Advocating on behalf of the working men and women of this state, and their families, will always be a top priority for House Democrats.

Mr. Woodward's district includes southern Oakland County.