Putting Unions Ahead of Job Creation
Many Senate Democrats are (not-surprisingly) silent on the National Labor Relations Board vs. Boeing debacle.
By remaining silent, these lawmakers are choosing to side with unions in order to shore up their political base instead of embracing the job-creating benefits of an employer like Boeing, or even when it comes to free trade agreements.
“I really don’t want to get involved.” – Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
“I have to speak to a senator right now, I’m sorry,” – Senator Ben Nelson (D-FL), trying to dodge the question.
Some are a bit more open in their support for government intervention into where to create jobs.
“This is a legitimate case before NLRB.” Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)
The NLRB “acts as a check on employers and employees alike” and is consistent with the “spirit of checks and balances” established by the Founding Fathers – Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV)
(It is no wonder our country is in trouble, the Senate Majority Leader doesn’t even understand the concept of checks and balances.)
With unemployment over 9%, Americans can’t afford anymore “bumps” in the road. The NLRB suit against Boeing is clearly blocking job creation. It’s no wonder that 2/3 of the American people believe that this country is on the wrong track and why half of the country thinks we’re heading for a second great depression.
Even though President Obama likes to say “as president, my job is to make sure that I am finding every good idea that we can to move the country forward,” by remaining silent on the Boeing/NLRB issue, he has basically taken the side of the unions (again, no surprise).
But if the President was doing everything he could to get our country moving forward, why isn’t he letting Boeing continue with their expansion to South Carolina, a right-to-work state? (By the way, Boeing had already built the $1 billion building and hired 1,000 employees before the NLRB made an issue, which was also right around the time that unions were making a fuss over Wisconsin’s collective bargaining agreement.)
It’s clear President Obama is on the side of unions. They were some of his biggest donors in 2008, and will most likely be some of his biggest donors in 2012, so the President appears obliged to listen to them. And unions want to help the unions. They want Boeing to expand in Washington so that more union members are hired and they maintain control. They don’t want the three free trade agreements to be ratified because they fear competition.
If this country has any chance of restoring the American dream, the President needs to stand with the American taxpayers, not the 7% of workers who belong to unions.