The Democrat's Card Check Vote for Unions

Last Friday's Wall Street Journal contained an editorial by Kim Strassel about the House Democrat's recent assault on the secret ballot in voting for union representation in the workplace. Rather than vote secretly, merely signing a card to request a union vote would become the vote. And it is not hard to see how this would become a way for Big Labor to physically intimidate workers into voting for union shops. The law would give labor

"an unfair advantage in organizing by eliminating the secret ballot in union elections and instead allowing thugs to openly bully workers into joining up. Americans understand and despise this, with polls showing 90% of the public thinks card check is a racket."

As I predicted in earlier posts about Frisco Nan, such as this one, here, regarding her minimum wage legislation, she is fast losing credibility and an ability to keep the Democrat's centrist coalition together.

According to Strassel, Nan and her supporters had hoped for 290 votes, but could only muster 241. Many Democratic Representatives, sitting or running in the last election, agreed to back Big Labor's quest for this law, figuring it wouldn't matter when they were in the minority, anyway. Strassel writes in her piece,

"The problem came when Democrats won, and they had to stand behind their previous support."

Pelosi was forced to ram the vote through. As Strassel further notes,

"And all this, meanwhile, for a vote that was largely symbolic. President Bush has vowed that a card check law is dead on arrival. And that assumes the legislation could even make it through a Senate filibuster- which it can't. As low points go, this was the lowest the new majority has had so far.

The issue for Ms. Pelosi is that this will undoubtedly not be the only low point. The card check is instead the first illustration of the biggest dilemma Democratic leaders will face over the next few years. Savvier party members understand the threat special interests pose to Democrats' ability to commune with more of America. Yet the party is completely dependent upon those left-wing interest groups to finance and man their electoral victories. They want a return on their investment."

So I am not alone in seeing Frisco Nan's future already clouding over. She's now torn between the predictable poles- her own liberal base, and her party's need to be centrist if it is to have any hope of retaining its slim plurality in the House, come 2008.

Sit back, grab some popcorn, and prepare to be entertained with more legistlative antics as Nan and her crew try to navigate between their liberal electoral base, and a more sane and centrist nation.