Wisconsin: Not Over Yet

Dear Jim,

You're stopped at the traffic light, and a man with a squeegee races over and slings dirty water all over your windshield.

Then he smears it around and demands payment for services rendered -- services you never wanted.

That's the model union bosses rely on to ensnare workers into dues-paying ranks against their will.

But union bosses take it a step further.  They can demand any worker be fired for refusing to pay -- unless the worker is protected by a Right to Work law.

That changed for most government-sector workers in Wisconsin earlier this year when Governor Scott Walker signed the monopoly bargaining reform bill.

Not only does the bill protect the Right to Work, the reforms also sharply limit the government union hierarchy's monopoly bargaining power over the taxpayers.

But as you know, the desperate Big Labor bosses will do anything to protect their ill-gotten power.

This summer, union lawyers launched a new lawsuit in U.S. District Court, claiming that the First Amendment that protects our freedom of association somehow entitles union bosses to seize dues from independent workers.

The claim is absurd on its face, of course.

Only a union lawyer would argue that freedom of association -- the right of individuals to voluntarily come together to express their opinions and petition the government -- gives union bosses forced-dues and monopoly bargaining powers!

In the Foundation-won U.S. Supreme Court precedent Davenport v. Washington Education Association, the Court held that "unions have no constitutional entitlement to the fees of nonmember employees."

Unlike the law at issue in Davenport, Governor Walker's bill requires union bosses to collect ALL their own dues, making it not only better policy, but less vulnerable to legal attack.

That's why Foundation attorneys are fighting back.

On Thursday, Foundation attorneys filed legal briefs in the case for three Wisconsin civil servants, including two teachers, who object to compulsory union membership and wish to negotiate for themselves.

As the brief details, "The Employees neither want what the Unions are selling, nor want to pay for the unwanted 'services.'"

This is a major case that may go to the U.S. Supreme Court and set the course of compulsory union litigation for the next decade.

That's why I'm so grateful for your continued support.

Sincerely,

Mark Mix