Progress Illinois

Expected to be one of the most brutal congressional fights of Barack Obama’s first term, the battle over card check is already heating up in one Midwestern state. Save Our Secret Ballot, a new coalition backed by business interests and conservative think tanks, is launching a campaign in Missouri and four other states to require all union elections be conducted by what they call “secret ballot.” Their hope is that by amending their state constitutions, these states can exempt themselves from the Employee Free Choice Act if and when Congress approves the law. Here is the 47-word amendment, courtesy of a press release (PDF):

“The right of individuals to vote by secret ballot is fundamental. Where state or federal law requires elections for public office or public votes on initiatives or referenda, or designations or authorizations of employee representation, the right of individuals to vote by secret ballot shall be guaranteed.”

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported last week that state Sen. John Loudon is heading up the effort in the Show Me State.

But as American Rights at Work spokesman Josh Goldstein told the AP, the suggestion that the EFCA would take away the “right of individuals to vote by secret ballot” neglects “the actual facts.” Indeed, the bill would preserve both unionization options -- card check and secret ballot -- but transfer the decisionmaking process from the employers to the workers. Al Franken explained it best:

Right now, there are two ways to form a union: majority sign-up or a secret ballot election. And management gets to decide which is used. The Employee Free Choice Act would protect the same two ways of joining a union, but leave it up to workers to decide which is used.

But like the larger debate that’s evolved around card check, which has been dominated by the unified business community, the specifics of the bill have vastly overshadowed the central aim of the EFCA: crucial labor law reforms. Ezra Klein complained about that dynamic in December:

The Employee Free Choice Act fight is happening backwards. The argument is over the particular characteristics and implications of card check—the proposed solution. But you hear very little about the underlying problem. This is the opposite of how most reform battles go, where there’s a focus on the problem—47 million uninsured, or climatological catastrophe around the corner—and the solutions are left vague. The better to build support and consensus on the need for reform rather than splitting your coalition on details. If you can win the argument for reform, you get some sort of solution. If Labor loses the argument over EFCA, do they get anything?

Already, centrist senators from both side of the aisle seem wary about expending political capital on the EFCA. It also was absent from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's top-10 legislative priorities leaked earlier today.  But if the debate about “workplace democracy” actually focused on the intimidation employees face during organizing campaigns, more lawmakers might be inclined to jump on board. To learn more about how that intimidation manifests itself, read Keith Kelleher’s Progress Illinois column from last November.