Taxpayer Protection Pledge
ATR's Congressional Ratings
An American Agenda: Vote for Your Priorities
Invite Grover Norquist to Speak at Your School or Event
INDEX

Why is Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) Still Supporting EFCA?

From Brian M Johnson on Monday, April 6, 2009 4:28 PM
Add to Reddit Add to Stumbleupon Add to Delicious Add to Digg Add to Facebook Add to Twitter

With Sen. Lincoln (D-Ark.) recently announcing that she will vote no on cloture for the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), we are wondering why her colleague Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) is continuing to say that he will support the cloture motion to move this bill forward?

Sen. Lincoln said recently:

"I cannot support that bill," Lincoln said, according to one attendee. "Cannot support that bill in its current form. Cannot support and will not support moving it forward in its current form."

However, her colleague continues to support taking away a workers right to a federally supervised private ballot election when voting on unionization. Correspondence being sent out by Sen. Warner's office reads:

"I believe there is a need for reform in this area, and that EFCA should be debated and voted upon by the Senate.  I intend to evaluate any prevailing proposal to ensure that it allows workers and employers to be adequately informed and that it ultimately provides a fair and level playing field for both management and labor."

 

 

Really? Sen. Warner believes that a bill that will cost 600,000 jobs in 2010 alone and will give unions the right to use intimidation and violence to force workers to sign a card needs to be "debated and voted upon?"

Even Sen. Specter (R-Penn.) who supported the bill in 2007 understands that this is not good for the economy.

With 74% of rank-and-file union members opposing EFCA - why is Sen. Warner still supporting it?

The Alliance for Worker Freedom (www.workerfreedom.org) is encouraging the citizens of Virginia to call or write to Sen. Warner's office and urge him to oppose the mis-named Employee Free Choice Act and protect the right of a private ballot when working Americans vote on unionization.

Contact Sen. Warner and tell him to oppose cloture on EFCA!

The Honorable Mark Warner
Russell Senate Office Building
SR-459A
Washington, DC 20510-4605
Tel: (202) 224-2023
Fax: (202) 224-2530

Permalink | Email | Print | Tags: AWF, CONGRESS, LABOR, Virginia

Related Articles

Urge Gov. McDonnell to Privatize Tax Preparation and Filing - Friday, March 12, 2010 4:20 PM

ATR Urges Governor McDonnell to Sign Bill to Abolish State Run Tax Preparation - Friday, March 12, 2010 4:00 PM

Craig Miller Signs Taxpayer Protection Pledge in FL-24 - Friday, March 12, 2010 2:42 PM

Tell Virginia Legislators: No New Taxes in the Budget - Thursday, March 11, 2010 5:00 PM

Economic Issues Dominate at the Bloggers Briefing - Thursday, March 11, 2010 1:14 PM

Comments

Alliance for Worker Freedom? Oh, you mean Grover Norquist's "Keep Workers on the Plantation" organization. Give me a break.
>> Jim Watts Monday, May 4, 2009 2:22 PM

Jim...really!?! Please explain to me how an organization that supports a workers right to a secret ballot, opposes forced unionization and fights for transparency requirements so that rank and file dues paying members can actually see and monitor how their dues are being spent...explain to me how that has anything to do with your racist "plantation" comment?
>> WorkerFreedom Monday, May 4, 2009 2:30 PM

The kind of transparency I want to see is a listing of the major financial supporters of the ATF/AWF. Then we can see who all these "workers" are that AWF claims to represent.
>> Jim Watts Tuesday, May 5, 2009 6:11 PM

Jim - you're back. That's great...I'm glad to see you love freedom. The people who moderate this site probably love freedom too. Which is why they allow comments to be directly posted - not moderated. That type of free choice is what unions want to take away with EFCA. Do you really support eliminating the secret ballot?
>> WorkerFreedom Tuesday, May 5, 2009 6:23 PM

Did you know that the majority of defined benefit multi-employer union pension funds are UNDERFUNDED, while the officer pensions are usually over funded? If not, then you should read this paper http://tinyurl.com/cu3p63. The actuarial tables indicate that most DB pensions will go bust in 5 years. And the unions knew this 10-15 years ago. But of course...that type of transparency would be silly now wouldn't it :-)
>> WorkerFreedom Tuesday, May 5, 2009 6:29 PM

Hey! Sounds just like most major pension funds, doesn't it? Brought to you by the companies that want to WORK TOGETHER with their employees. (cough) When I see AWF finances, I'll become a believer in transparency.
>> Jim Watts Tuesday, May 5, 2009 8:17 PM

Apparently the AWF believes that stagnant or declining wages will fix themselves all by themselves if we remove ALL bargaining power from employee organizations. Another eight more years of GOP control probably would have cracked the nut, right?
>> Jim Watts Tuesday, May 5, 2009 8:20 PM

When we throw in your penchant for deregulation of everything, including OSHA oversight of worker safety, there will freedom from job security, freedom from retirement benefits, freedom from workplace safety and just about all the freedom management needs to discriminate, retaliate, force uncompensated overtime, reduce worker compensation and generally reduce the workforce to the status of disposable razors.
>> Jim Watts Tuesday, May 5, 2009 8:25 PM

"Sen. Warner believes that a bill that will cost 600,000 jobs in 2010 alone and will give unions the right to use intimidation and violence to force workers to sign a card needs to be 'debated and voted upon?'" Oh, really, now. Authorized imtimidation and violence? We know who paid for that 600,000 number. Just another transparency issue ;-)
>> Jim Watts Tuesday, May 5, 2009 8:30 PM

Jim - I would be MORE THAN HAPPY to facilitate a panel discussion on these issues for you. Look at this video http://tinyurl.com/deqa4s the lies that come out of unions are STAGGERING! S&P funds over reach EVERY union run pension fund there is! Jim Jim Jim...your naivete is cute at his point
>> WorkerFreedom Wednesday, May 6, 2009 10:11 PM

Spare me the condescending remarks, please. You don't think I see misdirection when I see it? Explain the lie about unions getting the right to use intimidation and violence. Tell me who paid for that 600,000 job loss figure and who did the "study". You folk must have to screw your pants on in the morning.
>> Jim Watts Wednesday, May 6, 2009 10:49 PM

If you think anybody outside the Tea Bag Bubble believes the AFW is about anything besides anti-unionism, then you're the naive one. The welfare of the workers doesn't even show up your radar. I don't bandy words with moderators who have been spoon-fed replies to questions that haven't even been asked in order to divert attention from the real issues. The character limitation here is perfect for the sound bites you guys thrive on.
>> Jim Watts Wednesday, May 6, 2009 10:52 PM

Add a Comment


CAPTCHA Image
Add me to the ATR Newsletter list (If you are already on the list, you will not be subscribed a second time.)
Notify me when others comment on this article.