election Archives | Page 4 of 6

I Voted for Joe Miller, and I Support Mike Dunleavy

July 26, 2018/0 Comments/in Alaska News, Featured /by G. Scott Campbell

I am a retired state trooper and chief of police in the state of Alaska. I’ve been a resident for about 48 years. Before that, I was a United States Marine and served 2 tours of duty in Vietnam. I have worked many years in rural Alaska in law enforcement, from Barrow to Wrangell and Petersburg, as well as Fairbanks and Anchorage. I’ve been in private sector security, heading operations for several of the largest private security firms in the state, guarding military bases and oil fields. I love my country and I love my state. I support conservative platforms and conservative candidates.

During Joe Miller’s run for Senator, on both occasions, I was a strong supporter. This was because, from my point of view, Alaska needs to elect conservatives to political positions in our state government. We are fighting a battle with the far left, but also with the establishment in our own party. Both groups want to take our dividend and both groups believe Alaskans work for them, and not the other way around.

On August 21st, our Republican primary will be held. It is my hope, that we will select a real conservative as our candidate for governor for the state of Alaska. One who actually believes in the conservative principles they espouse, and one who will stand up, for Alaskans.

Currently, there are two main candidates in our primary; former Lt Gov Mead Treadwell and former state Senator Mike Dunleavy. I have nothing to say against Mr Treadwell personally, and from everything I’ve heard and read, on a personal level, he’s a fine man. My worry is that I don’t believe he is a true conservative, or that he can stand up for Alaskans against the influence of special interest and party elites. Quite simply, I think he goes along to get along, and that is not what we need.

Here are a few, significant illustrations:

• He’s a longtime supporter of our senior senator Lisa Murkowski, who does not in any way, hold a pro life position.

• Mead himself, was not endorsed by Alaska Right to Life in his previous race for senate (in which he came in a distant third behind Joe Miller).

• Mead supported Murkowski, over the duly elected Republican candidate in 2010 primary, Joe Miller, joining with Democrats to elect her as a write in candidate.

The fact he would support Murkowski, who did not win the primary, and who lied (having said she would support the nominee) says alot about his political leanings. Joe Miller had run and won the Republican primary fair and square, and Mead abandoned him, and the principles of the primary voters who elected him. This was one of the darkest times for Alaskan conservatives…and Mead was at the center of it, having chosen the political class again, over the will of the conservative voters he purports to represent.

Mead touts his experience, having served as lieutenant governor under Governor Sean Parnell, and yet Governor Parnell has endorsed Senator Dunleavy. I think that speaks volumes as well.

As Lt Gov he made one of the most fateful decisions, in Alaska’s history, by approving the unity ticket of Walker/Mallot, against the disapproval of his own party and a subsequent lawsuit to try and stop it, giving us the past four years of the current administration. In a very real sense, Mead gave Alaska the current administration. This alone should give conservatives pause.

Mead also talks about his private sector experience, citing his work with Alice Roghoff, the former far left owner of the ADN. In the minds of most Republican primary voters I would say this is not something to be particularly proud of.

On the other hand, Mike Dunleavy is a real conservative. He’s spent close to 35 years in Alaska, a lot of that time in rural Alaska as a teacher. When he entered politics, he lead by example and stood with Alaskans over the political class, choosing principle, even in the face of bitter political retribution. He’s proven his fidelity to Conservative ideals and to Alaskans, with the principled stands he has made as a state senator… and he has paid for those stands every time.

On the positions, Mike is adamantly opposed to the unilateral Takeaway of half the PFD of all Alaskan’s by the current governor and could not support the bloated budget of the legislature. Again, he stood for his principles and was punished severely by others in the party for doing so.

Mike voted against SB 91 and has made Law Enforcement, public safety, and the protection of individual Alaskans his number one priority.

On the fiscal side, Mike has put forth a plan to balance the budget of the state of Alaska, without imposing an onerous income tax or taking away half of every Alaska permanent fund dividend check.

For all of these reasons, I’m standing with Mike, but most importantly, I’m standing with him, because he stands with us. Let’s elect a true conservative this August’s primary, and In the general gubernatorial election in November. Let’s elect Mike Dunleavy.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

How to Nullify an Election

July 16, 2018/0 Comments/in Featured, Opinion /by Bart Stinson

Horses are big business in Kentucky, and even schoolboys were aware of the controversy in Louisville 50 years ago. It began with the horse race on the first Saturday in May, so far as we knew.

With Kentucky Gov. Louie Nunn and presidential candidate Richard Nixon watching from the stands, Dancer’s Image came from dead last, 14 lengths back, to pass 13 horses and cross the wire a length and a half ahead of Forward Pass. Nunn chuckled as Nixon dramatically tore his losing ticket in half.

But Nixon may have been a little hasty, depending on which horse he picked. Three days after the race, Churchill Downs stewards ordered Boston car dealer Peter Fuller to return the trophy and winning purse, and named Forward Pass the 1968 Kentucky Derby winner. Post race testing revealed that Dancer’s Image had phenylbutazone in his blood sample.

It’s an anti-inflammatory painkiller, used routinely nowadays when horses suffer swelling in their joints. But in 1968 it was illegal at Kentucky racetracks. Fuller’s veterinarian prescribed it during training, but allowed six days for it to clear from the horse’s bloodstream before the race. Fuller, his veterinarian and the horse’s trainer were at a loss to explain why Dancer’s Image still had phenylbutazone in his system on race day.

I was an odd 8th-grader who read Racing Form past performance charts fluently and had committed a lot of racing trivia to memory. But we were also a politically conscious family. My dad ran for the House of Representatives on “Clean Gene” McCarthy’s antiwar slate in Kentucky’s 1st Congressional District. Bobby Kennedy was campaigning for the presidential nomination across the river in Indiana.

Martin Luther King was shot down exactly one month before the 1968 Derby, but he was in Louisville one year earlier to help local Blacks, led by his brother, A.D. King, protest housing discrimination.

Locals had disrupted a race at Churchill Downs the previous year, and wanted to disrupt the 1967 Derby, but King persuaded them to hold the protests downtown instead, due to the potential for mayhem at the track.

In April 1968, Fuller entered Dancer’s Image in a tune-up for the Derby, the Wood Memorial Stakes at Aqueduct Racetrack in New York City.

When his horse won, Fuller donated the purse to the recently widowed Coretta Scott King. I’ve seen two different numbers – $62,000 and $77,415. Either way, it was a lot of money in 1968 dollars. He didn’t publicize it, but it was common knowledge at the track, and a race announcer mentioned it on television.

The gift made friends and enemies for Fuller. There was hate mail. There were anonymous death threats. There was a mysterious fire at one of his stables. So he asked Churchill Downs management to put on extra security. They refused.

Fuller was a pretty demanding guy. He was an ex-Marine and the son of a Republican ex-governor. His father was one of the wealthiest men in America, and Fuller was no slouch, himself.

After growing up in a household with 11 domestic servants, Fuller was accustomed to having his way. It was customary to provide Derby horse owners with four tickets. He demanded 50.

The brash, hard-charging Yankee may have alienated courtly Southerners he should have tried to charm. Instead, he made condescending remarks about “rednecks.”

The bottom line is that he didn’t get the extra security from Churchill Downs, and he didn’t hire his own. Security at his race barn, he recalled, was “an old fella in a chair and asleep.”

Fuller said later he believed he was “set up,” that some unknown intruder entered his horse’s stall to inject the disqualifying phenylbutazone. Either that or the blood sample was adulterated.

Fuller appealed the track stewards’ decision to the Kentucky Racing Commission, and lost. He took his case to court and won in 1970. Dancer’s Image was once again the 1968 Kentucky Derby winner.

But then the State of Kentucky took that decision up to a federal appeals court, and won its case against Fuller and Dancer’s Image. That was final. Fuller said he spent $250,000 on his futile lawsuits.

A billboard at his horse farm in New Hampshire boasts stubbornly that it is the home of Dancer’s Image, 1968 Kentucky Derby winner. But that sign is false.

Forward Pass is the 1968 Kentucky Derby winner. The colt was no fluke, either – he went on to win the Preakness, and barely missed a Triple Crown sweep June 1 after leading the Belmont til final sixteenth pole.

Three days later, as 13-year-olds were starting summer vacation, there was another tragedy in the real world, the second in two months. that made horse racing seem awfully frivolous.

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore,” wrote poet Emma Lazarus, addressing the Old World. “Send these, the tempest-tossed to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”

And so Palestinian immigrant Bishara Sirhan brought his family to America. The poet also bade the Old World “keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp.” But when Bishara brought his 12-year-old son Sirhan Sirhan from Jerusalem to California, he imported a monstrous ego and many centuries of ancient hatreds to his American sanctuary.

The younger Sirhan appeared Westernized in his teens, with a pompadour hair style, and even in old age today he looks like a kind gentleman. But he testified in court that he assassinated Bobby Kennedy “with 20 years of malice aforethought.” His diary confirmed that he was seething with resentment against Jews, and against the New York Senator who favored selling fighter jets to Israel.

He cased the Los Angeles hotel where Kennedy would watch primary election results with supporters. Kennedy won the California and South Dakota presidential primaries June 4. Incumbent President Lyndon Johnson had long since bowed out of the race. There was great hopefulness among Americans who had supported the late president John F. Kennedy eight years earlier.

As Bobby Kennedy left the celebration through a hotel kitchen, the angry immigrant intercepted the triumphant candidate and put three bullets in him, one in the head and two in the back. Like phenylbutazone, Sirhan nullified the victory. And in my mind’s eye, I see Richard Nixon piecing the shreds of his Derby ticket back together.

Of course, it’s anybody’s guess how the world might have been different if Bobby Kennedy were elected president that November instead of Richard Nixon. Like his older brother, he had a penchant for adultery. But he was Catholic, under the influence of a prominent Cardinal. Unlike his younger brother Teddy, he didn’t try to harmonize public policy with his personal immorality.

If older brother John’s lone nomination to the Supreme Court is any indication. a Court populated by three Bobby Kennedy nominations might have decided Roe v. Wade differently. Byron White, JFK’s appointment to the Court, not only dissented from Roe, but from all subsequent decisions that applied it as binding precedent.

Nixon, by contrast to JFK, nominated pro-abortion Justices Lewis Powell and Harry Blackmun, and pro-abortion Chief Justice Warren Burger to the Court.

If Bobby Kennedy had filled those Supreme Court vacancies with the same kind of Justices as Byron White, they might have combined with William Rehnquist and White to form a 5-4 majority for the protection of unborn children. Tens of millions of American children might have been spared the abortion holocaust that ensued after Roe v. Wade, and continues today. Thanks to Sirhan Sirhan and the people who welcomed him to our country, we’ll never know for sure.

“1968 was a horrific year,” Fuller said.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Ex-News Anchor Whose Girlfriend Was Killed on Live TV Wins Election

November 7, 2017/0 Comments/in Featured, News /by Fox News

A former Virginia television news anchor whose reporter girlfriend was shot and killed during a broadcast two years ago won election to the state’s House of Delegates Tuesday.

Democrat Chris Hurst defeated Republican incumbent Joseph Yost and will represent Virginia’s 12th House district in Richmond.

Hurst was in a relationship with Alison Parker when she and cameraman Adam Ward were murdered by a former co-worker while doing a live report for WDBJ-TV on the morning of Aug. 26, 2015. (Read more from “Ex-News Anchor Whose Girlfriend Was Killed on Live TV Wins Election” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Smoking Gun Evidence of Polling Fraud Against Trump

September 21, 2017/0 Comments/in Featured, News, Weekly /by James Simpson

The credibility of mainstream political polls took a serious hit following the 2016 election. Most predicted an easy victory for Hillary Clinton. The entire political class believed she was a shoo-in, and that the election would be a mere formality. But the polls and the pundits were wrong, glaringly so.

It appears they are wrong again, because they persist in making the same mistakes they have been making for years.

Most pollsters and pundits report that President Trump’s approval ratings are in the tank — consistently in the mid- to upper-30 percent range. His disapproval rates average a whopping 57 percent, according to the polls cited below.

The following table reveals why.

In every poll, Democrat respondents outnumbered Republicans by significant amounts. The Economist poll was the worst. Only 24 percent of respondents (360) were Republicans compared to 38 percent (570) Democrats – which means that 58 percent more Democrats were polled than Republicans, as shown in the %D/R column. On average, in these seven widely recognized national polls, only 29 percent (409 people) of the total 1,383 polled were Republicans, while 37 percent (518) were Democrats. Another way of saying it is that, on average, 29 percent more Democrats than Republicans were polled.

This occurs because of the way these polls are constructed. Most use a methodology that queries a random sample of adults. That sounds “fair” and one would expect it to produce roughly equivalent numbers of Republicans and Democrats, but it does not.

All of these polls were taken in August except Gallup, which does not make public the political party composition of its polling samples. Gallup’s May poll — a three-day moving average — was listed instead because Gallup provided political party breakdown. Its latest poll, however, puts Trump’s approval/disapproval rate at 38 percent/56 percent, which isn’t much different from the May poll cited.

Gallup was contacted twice to provide demographic information for its latest poll, but refused to do so. One must question why one of the most widely quoted polling organizations does not allow people to easily discover the political party breakdown of poll respondents.

According to pollster John McLaughlin of McLaughlin Associates, using random samples of adults without further stratification tends to include more young people and females — both groups more likely to be Democrats. Because it is random, it may even include non-citizens. Using this survey methodology, Independents are more likely to poll like Democrats. By using the random sample method, pollsters know they will get a disproportionate number of Democrats and/or people who respond like Democrats, but since few people delve into the weeds to examine polling demographics, the polls are taken to be legitimate.

This is also the least expensive way to poll, providing another reason why so many polls skew the results to the left — independent of any deliberate bias.

Quoted in an article by the Daily Caller, Raghavan Mayur, president of TechnoMetrica, an independent polling organization, said:

I do know inherently there is a Democratic bias in the polls. And most [pollsters] will deny it… Typically, the mainstream media and the major polling companies will never admit their bias to you. This is like an alcoholic not admitting to using alcohol. They are in denial.

Quoted in the same article, independent pollster John Zogby said, “I am a liberal Democrat, but I always felt that other polls over-sampled Democrats and under-sampled Republicans.”

A few polls query registered voters, which may eliminate non-citizens and improve the results somewhat. The Politico poll, for example, queries registered voters. It shows only a 4 percentage point spread between Republicans and Democrats and provides one of the highest Trump approval ratings of all polls listed in the table.

But this is not always a reliable measure, either. For example, the Economist poll claims to query “registered voters,” however, voter registration is not verified by directly questioning poll respondents. It is calculated using Census Bureau estimates of the overall registered voter population. So the veracity of the “registered voters” figure is questionable in this poll. Only 24 percent of respondents were Republicans, while 38 percent were Democrats.

Using registered voters is not the best measure, either, because many registered voters never actually vote. McLaughlin says that polling likely voters, while more expensive and time consuming, produces more accurate and representative poll numbers. Voter turnout in the last four elections averaged 32 percent Republican and 34 percent Democrat.

McLaughlin told me that any poll that departs significantly from those averages will bias the results.

As McLaughlin explains:

For example, in our recently completed national poll, Republicans approve the job the President is doing 90% to 8% disapprove. In contrast among Democrats only 17% approve of the President while 80% disapprove. So for each point you take away from a poll’s Republican affiliation, you’re taking a point away from the President’s job approval. Conversely, when you add five points more Democrats, you’re adding four points to the President’s disapproval. It’s that simple.

McLaughlin Associates uses likely voters, as does Rasmussen. Using this method, Trump’s approval ratings are significantly better, currently averaging 46 percent, while the disapproval rate is lower. Similarly, the breakdown of Republicans versus Democrats reflects how people would likely vote if an election were held today, as opposed to a random sample or even a sample of registered voters.

The left-wing bias embedded in most national polls also skews poll responses on virtually all partisan issues, giving an inaccurate reading of public sentiment on everything from taxes to school choice, from immigration to national defense.

McLaughlin says:

Not only does it affect [Trump’s] job rating and favorable rating, it also affects the policies and issues these polls purport to measure. Maybe this is why so many Republicans, Independents and Trump voters seem to disregard media polls. It appears the media is once again sacrificing its credibility for its liberal, anti-Trump bias.

The McLaughlin poll had many other results that should get Congress, and congressional leadership in particular, to sit up and take notice:

Only 21 percent believe congressional leadership is helping “drain the swamp.” Forty-nine percent said that congressional leadership supports the swamp.

Sixty-three percent believe House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell should be replaced.

Only 15 percent said they would support the reelection of Speaker Ryan and Majority Leader McConnell.
A majority of those who support Ryan and McConnell are Democrats.

More people (21 percent) support Antifa street thugs than Ryan and McConnell.

Forty-six percent are more likely to vote for their member of Congress if they support Trump’s immigrant vetting policies; 38 percent are more likely to vote for them if they don’t.

Fifty-two percent are more likely to vote for their member of Congress if the lawmaker supports Trump’s ban on transgenders in the military: 28 percent are less likely to vote for their member if the lawmaker supports transgenders in the military.

Fifty-six percent of voters favor repealing and replacing Obamacare; 39 percent oppose.

Fifty percent are less likely to vote for their member of Congress if the lawmaker refuses to repeal Obamacare mandates and taxes, while 36 percent are more likely to vote for their lawmaker.

Fifty-three percent of voters favor less government; only 32 percent want more.Congress recently held a hearing on curtailing free speech. The McLaughlin poll reveals that:

Eighty-five percent believe freedom of speech is a fundamental right. Only 9 percent believe it should be restricted when offensive.

Despite the fallout from Charlottesville, Virginia, 85 percent believe the Constitution supports the rights of everyone to freedom of speech, no matter how offensive. Only 8 percent believe it should be restricted.

Sixty-three percent oppose Antifa efforts to silence people they disagree with.

Forty-three percent oppose Internet companies using the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) “hate list.” This blacklist names many mainstream conservative groups the SPLC disagrees with politically.

Only 32 percent supported using the SPLC’s list.

This poll suggests that many more voters support conservative ideas and policies than mainstream media polls claim. Congress should take a very close look at this poll, because it is a much better indication of those policies and candidates a majority is likely to support. (For more from the author of “Mainstream Political Polls Commit Fraud” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

‘Edge of Constitutional Legality’: Obama White House Oversaw Election Day News Monitoring

August 4, 2017/0 Comments/in Featured, News /by Michael Bastach

Dozens of FBI officials monitored social media on Election Day 2016 looking for “fake news” being spread as part of a Russian disinformation campaign against former candidate Hillary Clinton, multiple sources told CNN.

The FBI knew it was walking a fine legal line by monitoring the media for “fake news,” according to sources. It was part of a larger effort to look for Russian cyber threats to the elections, CNN reported.

“We were right on the edge of Constitutional legality,” a source briefed on the matter told CNN. “We were monitoring news.”

Intelligence officials monitoring social media held conference calls with the White House throughout Election Day. Some minor issues came up, but nothing happened to disrupt voting. (Read more from “‘Edge of Constitutional Legality’: Obama White House Oversaw Election Day News Monitoring” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Hackers Took Over Electronic Voting Machines in Two Hours at DEF CON

July 31, 2017/0 Comments/in Featured, Video /by Aaron Kesel

Hackers at the Las Vegas’ annual DEF CON event took over electronic voting machines in a display of a simulation run for the White House proving that rigging an election is indeed possible, something that many researchers have warned about for several years.

It took under 90 minutes for hackers to physically break down the 30 voting machines and discover weaknesses in their defenses, The Register UK reported.

Of the 30 voting booths, the hardware and software were manufactured by Diebold, Sequoia and Winvote.

Hackers proved the low level of security that voting machines have had which has been known for years; even a former Diebold contractor whistleblower, Chris Hood, told of the weakness of security and how easily voting machines can be exploited.

One of the voting booths was wirelessly hacked by a hacker proving that you only need to be near it and in range, not physically next to it, to exploit the system’s software like how Princeton University demonstrated 10 years ago.

“Without question, our voting systems are weak and susceptible. Thanks to the contributions of the hacker community today, we’ve uncovered even more about exactly how,” Jake Braun, a hacker said.

The scary thing is we also know that our foreign adversaries — including Russia, North Korea, Iran — possess the capabilities to hack them too, in the process undermining the principles of democracy and threatening our national security.

The other main issue isn’t physical voting but rather allowing voters to vote online. It’s convenience vs. security. A whopping 30 states offered voters the option of online voting despite the fact that it was known by security researchers to be vulnerable during the 2016 election last year. That’s enough states to flip the vote and nullify democracy.

Online voting is not secure and can be heavily tampered with finding various vulnerabilities in outdated software and hardware alike.

Finally, the last issue is bribing programmers or the poll workers who are supposed to oversee the election as Diebold programmer Clinton Eugene Curtis alleged when he testified that Tom Feeney (Speaker of the House of Florida at the time) told him to rig election counts for a paycheck.

Numbers don’t match up, time and time again in the exit polls; as investigator Richard Charin found, the polls don’t match up some by a whopping 10% or more.

Everything is working according to plan and the sheepish American public, as a congressman known only as Congressman X inferred in his book, are following right along with no objection; therefore, we are consenting to all this mistreatment and perversion of democracy.

SCREW THE NEXT GENERATION’ AND ‘HARRY REID’S A POMPOUS A**’: DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN X WRITES ANONYMOUS TELL-ALL BOOK SLAMMING ‘NATION OF NAIVE, SELF-ABSORBED SHEEP’ AS HE ADMITS HE NEVER READS BILLS HE VOTES ON. ~ CONGRESSMAN X

Although the machines the hackers breached were not fully secured, according to The Register UK, it reveals the potential for damage that is possible.

The good news is that we have three years to fix our current voting problems and structure, but that’s only if voting for a new establishment head even matters. (For more from the author of “Hackers Took Over Electronic Voting Machines in Two Hours at DEF CON” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

After Election Upset, Britain Will Keep Calm and Carry On

June 9, 2017/0 Comments/in Featured, News /by Nile Gardiner

In a huge political upset, Britain’s Conservative Party has failed to secure an overall majority, falling just short of the 326 seats needed in the 350-seat House of Commons.

Prime Minister Theresa May will now lead a minority government.

The Conservatives will rely on the support of Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party to remain in power, who won 10 seats. It is conceivable that another general election could be held in the coming months if the Conservatives are unable to drive legislation forward.

While the Conservatives lost seats, British voters did however reject the idea of a far-left Labour government, with the socialist emphasis on big spending, increased taxes, and heavy state intervention.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, an admirer of Karl Marx whose shadow Cabinet includes former communists, was viewed as too extreme by the British electorate, who were not prepared to bring to power a socialist government that could not be relied upon to grow the economy and deliver Brexit in an effective manner.

Ultimately, Corbyn’s Marxist-influenced outlook was perceived as a throwback to the 1970s, when a left-wing Labour government brought Britain to its knees, on the verge of bankruptcy.

The Conservative administration faces significant challenges ahead, from negotiating with a largely hostile European Union to securing a series of free trade deals with countries across the world.

It must also deal with a rising Islamist terror threat, one that will require significantly tougher counterterror measures, and a willingness to do what is necessary to decisively defeat the Islamic State and other Islamist terror groups, both at home and abroad.

But Britain has tremendous capacity to ensure that it thrives and prospers outside the EU, and remain at the heart of the transatlantic alliance.

A clear majority of British voters still wish to see their country move forward outside the EU as an outward-looking, truly sovereign Britain, while leading on the world stage.

Even the Labour Party pledged to implement Brexit in its manifesto, a reflection of the fact that at least a third of its supporters voted to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum.

As the world’s fifth-largest economy, with the globe’s biggest financial center, and as one of the strongest military powers in the world, Brexit Britain will be a force to be reckoned with, despite the upheaval generated by last night’s election.

Brexit will not be derailed by a climate of political uncertainty. The will of the British people is clear: Britain’s future lies in sovereignty and self-determination. (For more from the author of “After Election Upset, Britain Will Keep Calm and Carry On” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Election Ushers in Batch of States Preparing for Right-To-Work Laws

January 2, 2017/0 Comments/in Featured, News /by Melissa Quinn

Not only did the 2016 election bring the country a new president, but Nov. 8 also ushered in the right political environment for a batch of states to pass right-to-work bills.

Twenty-six states have right-to-work laws on the books, and labor experts are expecting lawmakers in at least three more—Kentucky, Missouri, and New Hampshire—to pass bills giving workers the power to choose whether they want to join a union or pay union dues.

“2016 was sort of the tipping-point year for right to work,” Ben Wilterdink, director of the commerce, insurance, and economic development task force at the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, told The Daily Signal.

“We just got 26 states signed on, and that was the tipping point, and we’ve crossed that threshold,” he continued. “2017 is now going to be the year of right to work.”

In Kentucky, Missouri, and New Hampshire, last month’s election resulted in a flip in party leadership in either governors’ mansions or state legislatures, which put previously defeated right-to-work legislation back on the table.

The issue pits the business community against labor unions, and has proved to be a contentious one for both parties.

Proponents of right-to-work laws argue that they force unions to become more accountable to their members and make states more attractive to companies looking to move.

But unions fiercely oppose right-to-work legislation and say that not only do such laws harm union membership, but they also lead to decreased wages and benefits.

Still, labor experts say they believe that the political landscapes in Kentucky, Missouri, and New Hampshire have created a prime opportunity for right-to-work laws to pass in each of those states.

“The world changed in November of 2016, and advocates of labor reform and for worker freedom are emboldened,” Vincent Vernuccio, director of labor policy at the Mackinac Center in Michigan, told The Daily Signal. “While you’ve seen the fire of worker freedom spreading brightly across the country, it’s now raging thanks to the November election.”

Kentucky

According to Dave Adkisson, president of the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce, right to work has been a priority of the business community in the Bluegrass State for at least 30 years.

Republicans in the state Senate have pursued right-to-work legislation in the past, but the bills died in the state House of Representatives, which was controlled by Democrats.

But last month, Kentucky voters gave Republicans control of the state House for the first time in more than 90 years.

Now, with a GOP trifecta in the state Senate, state House, and the governor’s mansion—Gov. Matt Bevin, a Republican, was elected to a four-year term in 2015—Adkisson said business leaders are “almost to the point of [being] giddy.”

“One of the key elements of the labor argument is that right to work doesn’t matter to business, that they choose locations for other reasons,” Adkisson told The Daily Signal. “I can assure you that business leaders consider right to work as a major signal about whether a state is pro-business or not.”

Adkisson said international firms will typically hire consultants to help determine where in the U.S. they should move, and many of those consultants will “start their search only considering right-to-work states.”

For Kentucky, that ultimately meant losing out on economic development opportunities.

“Companies are not going to relocate to a place where they don’t think they can get a workforce, but invariably in that top list of factors is right to work,” Adkisson said. “You want to at least make the long list to be considered.”

Until recently, business leaders, particularly those in Louisville, were more “fatalistic” about right to work not passing Kentucky’s state Legislature.

But when Indiana—Kentucky’s neighbor to the north—passed a right-to-work law in 2012, “that suddenly got the attention of Louisville,” Adkisson said, in part because Indiana appeared “more pro-business.”

“It’s just a general issue of competitiveness,” he said.

Kentucky state legislators will meet for a shortened session, just 30 days, in January, so they have a tight timeline to pass right-to-work legislation.

Bevin said in September he wanted to see the state Legislature tackle right to work next year, but in an interview with the Paducah Sun earlier this month, he said he would allow the Legislature to decide how to address a bevy of issues they’ll face next year.

“I know people want to see right to work addressed, they want prevailing wage addressed, they want school choice addressed, they want tort reform addressed, they want tax reform addressed, they want pension reform addressed,” he said.

Still, labor experts say they are hopeful.

“Kentucky has demonstrated that the state is ready,” Jonathan Williams, vice president of the Center for State Fiscal Reform at ALEC, told The Daily Signal. “I’d expect it within the first half of the year.”

Missouri

While the success of right to work in Kentucky hinged on the makeup of the state Legislature, it was the election of Republican gubernatorial candidate Eric Greitens in Missouri that bolstered Republicans’ attempts to pass right-to-work laws in the Show-Me State.

Greitens, who defeated Democratic nominee Chris Koster last month, has stressed his support for right-to-work laws.

“I support it because it would stop companies and union bosses from taking a cut of your paycheck to support their political organization,” Greitens said of right to work on his campaign website. “It’s just common sense. That money is your money—and you should decide how you want to spend it.”

Republicans have a supermajority in the state House of Representatives and the state Senate, and already, GOP state lawmakers in both chambers have prefiled right-to-work bills for the 2017 legislative session.

“It’s going to be a race to see who is state 27, 28, and 29,” Vernuccio said.

New Hampshire

Williams, of ALEC, said Kentucky and Missouri are the “low-hanging fruit” for right-to-work proponents.

Though he and other labor experts are hopeful New Hampshire will join their ranks next year, New Hampshire is “somewhat on the bubble,” he said.

Republicans will control the state Legislature and the governor’s mansion in the Granite State after voters elected Republican Chris Sununu governor in November.

Sununu supports right to work and said earlier this month he’s “fairly” confident state lawmakers will pass right-to-work legislation next year.

“I’ve talked to businesses outside of this state that have clearly brought it up to me, so there’s no doubt by passing right to work, it will open up new economic opportunities for the state of New Hampshire,” he said in an interview with the New Hampshire Union Leader.

Still, the governor-elect encouraged state lawmakers to “be good listeners on both sides of the aisle.”

State lawmakers in the New Hampshire House passed a right-to-work bill last year, but it didn’t make it out of the Senate.

Though Republicans control the state government, Williams said there has been resistance among the GOP’s ranks.

Additionally, Democratic state Sen. Lou D’Allesandro of Manchester told the Union Leader opponents of right to work “have a good chance to stop it.”

Also at issue in New Hampshire is the dearth of other right-to-work states in the New England region.

Kentucky and Missouri are surrounded by states with right-to-work laws on the books, so they compete with others for business opportunities.

For New Hampshire, which would be the first in the region to become right to work, that competition doesn’t exist.

“There’s less pressure on them to get this across the finish line,” Wilterdink said.

Still, Williams said success in New Hampshire would be a “symbolic victory for conservatives.”

“If you saw the first state in New England become a right-to-work state—it’s been a tough region for conservatives to crack,” he said. “It would embolden right-of-center officials to push harder.”

Growing Momentum

Labor experts are confident that by the end of 2017, the number of right-to-work states will hover around 30.

Though they’re certain Kentucky and Missouri, at a minimum, will pass right-to-work laws, Wilterdink said lawmakers in three more states—Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Mexico—will at least consider bills to make right to work a reality.

“We’re seeing a lot of movement and a lot of pressure, especially as businesses look at other states, especially as more and more states become right to work,” Wilterdink said. “States and their citizens are realizing they’re missing out.”

Republicans in Pennsylvania introduced right-to-work bills in the past, without success.

Earlier this year, New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez committed to including right to work on her agenda for the 2016 legislative session.

Right-to-work bills have also been introduced in the Delaware General Assembly, but they were ultimately blocked by Democrats who control both chambers.

“This is a jobs bill in the states,” Williams said. “As more and more legislators are elected and looking for ways to make their states more competitive in growing jobs, we’ve continued to see businesses move from one state to another with better climates. This is one of the best things states can do.” (For more from the author of “Election Ushers in Batch of States Preparing for Right-To-Work Laws” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Election Ushers in Batch of States Preparing for Right-To-Work Laws

December 30, 2016/0 Comments/in Featured, News /by Melissa Quinn