Minnesota to become a right to work state? (Dayton: houses, wages)

[my54ford]

Whats the chances this will pass?
http://www.mndaily.com/2011/02/28/minnesota-‘right-work’-bill-stalls-legislature (broken link)

Poll: Minnesota voters support right to work referendum … 55/24 « Hot Air


Minnesota Mulls Right-to-Work Bill - WSJ.com

[xandrex]

If it actually makes it to a vote, I'd put it pretty split. But I think there's a decent chance it won't make it out of the legislature.

I'm a little concerned with the number of proposals we're getting for rule by constitutional amendment. Changing the constitution is literally changing the framework of how you want government to function, which is a big step. I'd prefer not to be California, which is definitely one of the most dysfunctional states in the union and decides everything by popular vote.

[audadvnc]

"Right to work" is a euphemism for union busting. Wake up folks: the plutocrats have been doing this dance for 30 years, and are going to keep squeezing you and creating lies such as the above until you do something to stop them. Otherwise your children will all be working as slaves.

[sholomar]

even in states like WI wages have been going down. Being a 'union state' doesn't help much, the company will just leave if they don't get what they want. Too bad the middle class is being so squeezed and medical costs are so high. We need a weak dollar and regulation on the medical industry to reduce drug costs, unnecessary prescriptions, medical care for illegals, etc. The border must be sealed tight to maintain our standard of living, we can't just give free everything away to anyone who wants it. Also, these people work for dirt cheap and have displaced work that regular people could be doing for higher wages.

[audadvnc]

We need honest people running the country rather than the self-serving parasites that infest the halls of power. All the rest is a smoke screen thrown up by them to muddle the issues.

[sholomar]

they really are. The system is designed to keep funneling more money to the top. Though for what it's worth, the standard of living for the lower classes in our country is still not bad. Things could be better but they sure could be worse. My main beef is they seem to be worsening over time due to greed, and nothing is being done and I don't see any solution from either side, though the republicans have left a bad taste in my mouth, having used to have been one.

[my54ford]

Don't you guys support freedom of choice?

[Drewcifer]

Originally Posted by xandrex

If it actually makes it to a vote, I'd put it pretty split. But I think there's a decent chance it won't make it out of the legislature.

I'm a little concerned with the number of proposals we're getting for rule by constitutional amendment. Changing the constitution is literally changing the framework of how you want government to function, which is a big step. I'd prefer not to be California, which is definitely one of the most dysfunctional states in the union and decides everything by popular vote.

The governor can't veto constitutional amendments. That is what this is all about.

I think the Republicans know that it is unlikely that they will hold both houses of the legislature for a long period of time so the amendments are a way for them to go around the governor and institutionalize their agenda.

In essence they are using this moment of contolling the legistature to try to ram through their entire wish list in the form of constitutional amendments voted by the public as referendums. It is a terrible way to govern in my opinion.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by my54ford

Don't you guys support freedom of choice?

You can choose not to take a union position now. It's not like positions which require joining a union make that fact a secret. In many cases, it's a strong selling point.

[xandrex]

Originally Posted by Drewcifer

The governor can't veto constitutional amendments. That is what this is all about.

I think the Republicans know that it is unlikely that they will hold both houses of the legislature for a long period of time so the amendments are a way for them to go around the governor and institutionalize their agenda.

In essence they are using this moment of contolling the legistature to try to ram through their entire wish list in the form of constitutional amendments voted by the public as referendums. It is a terrible way to govern in my opinion.

That's exactly the problem. The GOP essentially knows that Dayton will veto any bill like this, so they want to go around him completely. The problem is that ruling by amendment is a messy process. I don't want to be California, as I said before. People are fickle and vote on their emotions. Politicians, for all the horrible things they do, at least tend to temper bills down a bit, knowing full well their accountable to people who know their voting record.