The American Spectator : Bend It Like Becker

Text Size

Bend It Like Becker

By Jeremy Lott on 4.1.10 @ 6:08AM

How a recess appointment could impose card check -- and even greater unemployment.

Does Barack Obama want to wreck the American economy? That's one obvious and troubling question raised by his recess appointment of Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board.

People who know anything about labor law are extremely worried about this decision. Appointing Becker to the NLRB is a bit like assigning the fox to guard the hen house -- if chicken were an endangered species.

The president's political calculus was simple enough. The union bosses wanted Becker, and Obama wants the unions' support in the midterm elections. Becker is a lawyer who has represented both the AFL-CIO and the SEIU (and, by extension, ACORN). He is at the leading edge of radical labor opinion.

To wit, Becker helped to pioneer the idea of card check that unions so desperately want to pass. This change in labor law would effectively substitute the public clipboard for the private ballot box, which Becker has disparaged as being "profoundly undemocratic."

Card check is deeply unpopular and is not likely to be passed by Congress, but Becker may have a way around that. He has hinted that the NLRB may be able to impose changes on the way unionization elections are conducted without Congress legislating any changes in labor law. He has also advocated that companies not be allowed to participate in NLRB hearings or contest election results, and that they not be allowed to have observers at the polls to challenge ballot fraud.

Becker wants this pro-union tilt to labor law because he believes that all Americans should be represented by unions, whether they like it or not. He has written, "Just as U.S. citizens cannot opt against having a congressman, workers should not be able to choose against having a union as their monopoly-bargaining agent."

Congress saw that Becker on the NLRB would be a one-man card check bill. That's certainly the interpretation of labor law that he will be pushing for and that, with a new Democratic majority on the NLRB, he might just get.

That's why the Senate didn't even come close to ending the GOP filibuster of his nomination. The vote was held on February 9. Becker got only 52 of the needed 60 votes and we don't even know if, in a non-cloture vote, he would have got a majority. It's possible that some senators voted for him because they thought it would be a painless sop to unions.

Untroubled by the will of the Senate, Obama used his power of recess appointment to install Becker on the NLRB. Becker's term will run until the end of 2011 and Congress is unlikely to give him an extension. But by that time the damage may already have been done.

In a good economy, the Becker appointment would be troublesome for constitutional reasons. Presidents should not use be using the power of recess appointment to get around the duty to secure the Senate's "advice and consent" for key appointees.

In the bad economy that we currently have -- the one that saw yet more job losses for the month of March and that threatens to double dip back into recession -- a strong pro-labor tilt could be devastating to job creation.

For technical reasons, the Supreme Court is set to rule soon on whether the NLRB decisions of the last year-plus are valid. One labor watcher told me he hopes the justices throw the whole mess of them out. That way, he said, Becker and company would have their hands full for some time rehearing and reruling on the old cases. In his view, idle bureaucratic hands are a danger to our liberties.

topics:
Unions, Card Check, Craig Becker

About the Author

Jeremy Lott is editor of RealClearBooks.com and RealClearReligion.org and associate editor of RealClearScience.com.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (23) | Leave a comment

drudge ette obama| 4.1.10 @ 6:39AM

Americans are represented by a union - it's otherwise known as the House of Representatives. Oh, I forgot, the House isn't listening to its constituents. Well, there is a "union" vote coming in November 2010.

Anyone with a D after his name, give them the boot. Even if they voted against Healthcare because they were in Pelosi's pocket if they were needed.

The question for Democrats like Jim Marshall (you know, the jogging in the snow in D.C. Democrat from Georgia) who voted against the health care bill is this: if Nancy Pelosi had needed your vote, would you have voted for the bill?

If he says no, then ask Jim Marshall of Georgia why no one heard him rail against the bill. Jim Marshall as a "real silent" no vote. That is weakness. Stand for something, weak people. Hold these "Silent No Voters" accountable. Jim Marshall is a pension collector. That's it.

Carol| 4.1.10 @ 7:25AM

I know the GOP is supposed to be the party that follows the rules. But when they take back power I hope they run roughshod over the rules just like Obama and Pelosi and Reid have been doing.

I want to hear Pelosi talk about incivility coming from the GOP. I want to to hear Obama speak about what the GOP has done to the people.

Fair is fair. If the Obama and the Democrats can do anything they want without the consent of the governed, then so can the GOP.

goldman| 4.1.10 @ 8:50AM

The fox guarding the hen house...What's unusual about that? President Bush repeatedly appointed industry lobbyists to numerous agencies such as the EPA, Mining Safety Board, and Consumer Product Safety Board. Sure Obama has put Goldman Sachs and City Bank cronies in Treasury, but isn't this what Bush did with his close allies in the energy industry? I don't see Obama's preference for the NLRB to be a bad thing for American workers. Perhaps it will bring some balance given that for many years the NLRB has tilted favorably to industry. If one is opposed to workers having rights on the job I suppose this would be alarming, but for those folks in America who are making 8 dollars an hour working as janitors for some miserable fly by night cleaning company doing subcontracting work for elite office buildings I'm sure they would like the chance to make a living wage and have decent benefits and rights on the job.

2Anglico| 4.1.10 @ 9:33AM

How do you like living on $0 per hour? That is what unions and bambi have wrought. And I learned at age 4 or 5 from my mommy that 2 wrongs do not make a right.

Eric Cartman| 4.1.10 @ 10:25AM

If they don't like "making 8 dollars an hour working as janitors for some miserable fly by night cleaning company doing subcontracting work for elite office buildings " they should pole vault back over into Mexico where they belong. Wanna raise wages? Stop illegal immigration.

Rita| 4.1.10 @ 1:29PM

In theory what you are saying is commendable. However, the janitor could have furthered his education and could be making that living wage you call it. I know, I was a waitress for a while...but went back to school at 36 while raising three kids alone. Now, I'm making that living wage. All I'm saying is, you get what you work and sacrifice for. Stop expecting some big brother (in the form of a union, or a president) to continually come to the rescue. As for me, I don't want anything to do with a union...as they are no longer what they started out being. Now, they are all about power and government influence.

Vicki| 4.1.10 @ 6:14PM

If you don't like your wages then get a better education, start your own company, take a risk yourself. You can't just demand more money because you want it, the job as to be worth whatever amount it is you want to make. Case in point, the auto industry, they WERE making great money, now they are out of jobs or they are being run by Goverment Motors, and I hate to think if Obama wants to take over the janitorial services, fast food industry, child care industry, and any other low paying UNSKILLED job out there. But I would like to stress IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE PAY DO SOMETHING YOUSELF TO CHANGE YOUR LIFE.

John Navratil| 4.1.10 @ 7:42PM

Unless the labor is coerced (slavery) this $8/hour is a voluntary exchange of service for pay. You seem to think that some third party can make this better. No! It is simply a dis-economy which has its own costs. On the one side it is greater unemployment. On the other it is --- greater unemployment.

The Depression was a pretty good time - if you had a job.

John Navratil| 4.1.10 @ 7:44PM

Sorry Vicki!

I thought I was replying to "goldman".

Rmm| 4.4.10 @ 8:48AM

Wanna talk about unions, go ask General Motors. The UAW will not 'own' the truth about being the main reason for bringing down one the great companies in American industry. Unions take, but they have a hard time giving back to save a company from going over the cliff.

victor| 4.4.10 @ 3:26PM

Goldman:
"I don't see Obama's preference for the NLRB to be a bad thing for American workers."

Becker's and Obama's "choice" is not about whether you join a union or not, but rather what union you will join.

Pete| 4.1.10 @ 9:21AM

"Does Barack Obama want to wreck the American economy?"

What do your eyes tell you?

Petronius| 4.1.10 @ 11:09AM

Nobody will be checking any cards if there are no jobs and the Obamaciles economic policies are self fulfilling. Until the Luddites get it: the "it" being that the days of an inflated union paycheck for the minimal pursuits of mindless occupations are over, the decline will continue. But he and the demoncrats don't want a healthy prosperous working class, they want a captive electorate obliged to vote for them for their next bowl of slop.

Oldefarte| 4.1.10 @ 11:33AM

The problem is not the recess appointment, but the appointment of this radical, socialist lawyer. Bush [recess] appointed John Bolton, but he was not a radical socialist, whereas Becker is [but of course, his now BOSS is also; so that 'SPLAINS THE SITUATION', doesn't it?]!!!!!!!!!!

Lazy Jack| 4.1.10 @ 11:57AM

If I recollect correctly, within eighteen months of the enactment of the Wagner act in the mid-thirties, union membership increased by 50%. The beauty of the legislation was that unemployment grew from 14% to 19%. Many of Wagner’s more distorting features were later repealed, to the benefit of everyone. Apparently, the smartest administration in the history of the universe pays no attention to history, or math. Becker's appointment is either an indication that there are no critical thinkers in the administration or that they are serious in their desire eliminate exceptionalism and replace it with the S-word. More Like, both. A pity.

Best,
Lazy Jack

For more on the six worst things your current government is doing for you:

http://thanksforthelaughs.word.....ng-report/

www.thanksforthelaughs.wordpress.com

Cow Rie| 4.1.10 @ 10:08PM

You can bitch and complain all you want about Obama and his gang. The question is , what are YOU going to do about it?

Yosemeti Sam| 4.2.10 @ 12:22AM

" ... Congress saw that Becker on the NLRB would be a one-man card check bill. That's certainly the interpretation of labor law that he will be pushing for and that, with a new Democratic majority on the NLRB, he might just get...."

There are 13 Circuit Courts of Appeals to which a blizzard of challenges may be made whenever this BHO ideological flunkey wants to strut his guff.

These in-your-face BHO appointments will simply
add fuel to the we've been had cognitive fire in the bellies of Non-Marxist Americans.

Seven Jeans| 4.2.10 @ 1:18AM

Find yourself perfect jeans at House of jean-jeans.com online. Next day delivery available from House of jean-jeans.com online.Latest denim for Men's Jeans, Women's Jeans. Denim Jeans, true religion jeans and seven jeans here.
http://www.jean-jeans.com/

Oakley| 4.2.10 @ 1:57AM

Oakley Sunglasses are on sale, Oakley Grapevine and Ray Ban Sunglasses may please you. http://www.sunglasses-shopping.com/

don drummer| 4.2.10 @ 4:28PM

Yes he wants to wreck our economy. When that is done stealing your IRA and 401k, and unleashing his civilian defense force will look like a good idea to the uninformed. Don

mrust@fillmore.wnyric.org| 4.5.10 @ 8:50AM

I too went to college while raising children and working. It took a lot of hard work... but I must add it would not have been possible without the assistance of subsidized Federal student loans, Pell Grant, NYS TAP grant, food stamps, and Medicaid for my wife and child. I'm now paying taxes and contributing to society in a variety of non-monetary ways. Hark work, and 'keeping your nose to the grindstone,' simply doesn't pay off for everyone. For many people, they need help to go along with their hard work. Scarcely any of us have made it through life without help from a third party - public school, police department, post office, publicly funded libraries, highways, health clinics, etc. There are no lone rangers. No man is an island. Even the rich use the government for their own benefit - take a look at the farm bill, defense contracts, bank bailouts, health reform bill - the big winners in each case are corporations, the vast majority of which are owned by the richest investors who are in fact the richest Americans. The public sphere is only demonized at the expense of the people who need and rely on it the most. Its particularly ironic when we see folks at Tea Party rallies shouting : "Down with Obama's 'socialist health care,' keep your hands off my Medicare."

qweq| 4.13.10 @ 10:40AM

Come on, people, self promotion is as human as egotism (something we all share to some degree), and, in the case of name recognition, as important as eating. Can any of you name a single politician, writer, sports figure, actor or actress, media darling, and the like, chi straightener buy now who DIDN'T indulge in a bit of self-promotion?