Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (227520)	2/15/2002 7:52:22 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 769670

Congress debated this very issue about a year ago. End result: No real distinctions could be made between big-business contributions and labor contributions. That statement doesn't make a lot of sense. Congress might not have supported creating a law that made distinctions but that doesn't mean that there are know distinctions to be made. The one I made is a strong one and my statements about it are true. I could go into much greater detail and poke holes in some of your points ... open shop vs. closed shop ... what percentage of union dues actually is spent for politicking (it's much smaller than most people think) ... the fact that many companies pressure executives to donate to Republican candidates and conservative causes. On and on. None of those poke holes in my argument. Yes not all workplaces are closed shop, some are even in right to work states where you can't have a closed shop, but my argument applies to any situation where union membership is required and also to some other situations where memebership is not required but all workers even if they do not actually join have to pay dues to the union. The % of union dues going to political spending may not be large but if it was 0.000001% (and its not) it would still be an injustice if people are prevented from opting out of that part. Legally they are supposed to be able to opt out but the Clinton administration decided not to enforce that and I haven't seen that Bush has overturned that decision yet. As for companies pressuring their executives to donate to Republicans (or Democrats, that happens as well) that is just another example of abuse it doesn't justify the abuse by the unions and in any case it is less common. Actually, organized labor is fairly well-situated these days. The politically smart Republicans (including GWB) realize that one of the few ways to grow the party is to capture more labor votes. That's fine with me. Let's get into a bidding war ... Democrats vs. Republicans ... for the labor vote. I would not want the Republicans to get in to a bidding war for labor votes for several reasons. First the labor unions have strongly supported the democrats (even if the individual members are more split between the parties), from a purely partisan perspective I don't want the Republicans spending political capital on people who wont support them much anyway. Secondly I disagree with a lot of what organized labor is supporting. And last but not least I don't like the idea of policies getting decided by bidding wars for special interest votes. Tim

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (227520)	2/15/2002 11:31:25 PM
From: Mr. Palau	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Looks like Katherine Harris is going to have a busy campaign season: Judge Decides Katherine Harris Will Face Lawsuit NAACP Sues Former Secretary Of State Posted: 11:59 a.m. EST February 15, 2002 MIAMI -- Katherine Harris, Florida's former secretary of state, wanted a lawsuit against her thrown out, but a judge has decided to let the case go trial. The NAACP and four other groups filed suit against Harris , a former state election chief, and the county elections supervisor. The suit charges that black voters were disenfranchised during the 2000 presidential election. U.S. District Judge Alan Gold cited "the importance and immediacy of the claims" as he rejected attempts by two state agencies and a company that helped purge voter lists to get out of the case. The lawsuit cites the state, several counties and the contractor over procedures for voter registration, voter lists and balloting. The trial is set for August. click10.com