Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Mostly Sunny Mostly Sunny, 99° Weather Forecast

The Political Eye blog

A look at Nevada politics by the staff of the Las Vegas Review-Journal and Stephens Media Washington Bureau.

The Political Eye is also on Facebook and Twitter.

Recent blog entries
View all blog entries
May 2012
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
« Apr    
  01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Heller seeks to discuss Employee Free Choice Act with Pelosi
Posted by Jennifer Robison
Thursday, Mar. 12, 2009 at 01:03 PM

Congressman Dean Heller, R-Nev., has written to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., requesting a meeting to discuss the potential effects of the Employee Free Choice Act.

Heller doesn't support the bill, which was introduced in the House and Senate Wednesday, and he said he wants to talk to Pelosi about how he thinks the law would restrict workers' rights.

Heller said in his letter that he was "very displeased" that Congress took action on the law. If it passes, he wrote, the bill could cost the country 600,000 jobs by the end of 2010, and that would devastate "Nevada workers who in some communities are facing unemployment rates as high as 15.1 percent."

"The Employee Free Choice Act is one of the worst power seizures by special interests and labor lobbyists that I have seen during my time in public service," Heller wrote.

The act would make union organizing easier by allowing labor groups to claim representation of workers if a majority of them sign a card seeking the union. Under current law, secret-ballot votes determine whether a workplace will be organized.

Pelosi hasn't yet responded to Heller's request.

This entry was posted on Thursday, Mar. 12, 2009 at 01:03 PM and is filed under The Political Eye. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response.

Comments (9)

Registration Notice: The Review-Journal has implemented a new registration procedure that requires all existing and new accounts to validate and login using Facebook. Visit the Registration FAQ for more information.

Share your thoughts on this story.

Sign in or register to make a comment.

Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.

Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

9 Responses to "Heller seeks to discuss Employee Free Choice Act with Pelosi"
Yep, now we are starting to see what kind of promises Mr. Obama made in return for union support during his election bid. This bill would result in the intimidation of workers plain and simple.
Written by: Darrin on Thursday, Mar. 12, 2009 at 1:16 PM -- Report abuse
Good for Heller! Finally someone to stand up and say what is right. Obama was elected on a list of promises and now he has a list of people to pay back and this card check is just one of those things on this list and it would be terrible policy for our State!!! Wake up people and do some homework on current topics, don't just believe what you hear on the bias news:)
Written by: Hurray on Thursday, Mar. 12, 2009 at 1:38 PM -- Report abuse
I have the funny feeling that when Heller sent Pelosi his request, she thought to herself, "Who is this? I've never heard of him."
Written by: Michael Green on Thursday, Mar. 12, 2009 at 2:18 PM -- Report abuse
"Restriction of worker's right's" isn't the problem congressional Republicans have with the EFCA legislation. The issue is they have is the ease of forming unions that this legislation would grant. Plain and simple. Heller, and many of the people criticizing this legislation ought to just come out and express the problems they see with the formation of unions have on businesses instead of hiding behind the "we're looking after the worker's best interest" argument. I think if he were honest with the American public - many who aren't in a union or who work in management - people may not feel so manipulated when they see a Republican all worked up over a union issue. The conservative party in this country sides with business. It's no secret. Just say it like it is.
Written by: Cathy on Thursday, Mar. 12, 2009 at 3:22 PM -- Report abuse
Re: "Employee Free Choice Act"

Here we again encounter Bushish double-speak in the Orwellian spin.

What this means is the denial of a secret vote to an American.

Pelosi and a few others in her mob (Carmine, Vinnie, etc.) want to hold a baseball bat swung back ready to crack one or both of your kneecaps while they look at what you write on your ballot. A system right out of the Gulags, Marx's policies, and Lenin's thuggery.

Pelosi and her ilk perhaps would feel a lot more at home in Sicily
Written by: tucanofulano on Thursday, Mar. 12, 2009 at 3:58 PM -- Report abuse
Cathy, this has nothing to do with party politics. What this means is that union officials will be able to identify and harass individuals that would otherwise have anonymity by way of a secret ballot.

Why would anyone have a problem with a secret ballot? This is to protect the individual and their opinion from mob tactics.

Written by: Darrin on Thursday, Mar. 12, 2009 at 3:59 PM -- Report abuse
Cathy--the problem with your post is that it suggests that being in favor of unions is the same as being in favor of employees and being anti-union is the same as being anti-employee. This is simply not the case. Employee's deserve a fair process free of intimidation (by either an employer or a union) when choosing whether or not to be represented. It is very possible to be pro-business and pro-employee at the same time.
Written by: Chris on Thursday, Mar. 12, 2009 at 4:05 PM -- Report abuse
Not being one to believe what I hear, I took the liberty of downloading a copy of the EFCA from the Lib of Cong. and after reading it twice and some help from a legal dictionary, I have found nothing in the Act that removes the right of secret ballot. I have come to the conclusion that the objections are all hogwash and are not based on fact. It seems to me that Ensign and Heller have not read the text of the act and have no interest in the workers at all. It makes a person wonder who is paying them off to object to the EFCA.... Food for thought.
Written by: loyalconservative on Thursday, Mar. 12, 2009 at 5:19 PM -- Report abuse
loyalconsrvative, you are GOOD. I'll give you that.

How about you read it a THIRD time. Use your legal dictionary if you choose.

Now tell me that a union representative cannot approach an American worker and pressure them to sign a card to vote for union representation, or not to vote for same.

Can you tell me that?

Previously, this was only done by secret ballot.

The reason for this, is to protect the choice of the individual. The American worker would have the CHOICE to vote for or against the union without fear.

Fear of retribution, fear of being ostracized, fear of losing their livelihood.

Is this not a democracy?

Where else are our votes declared up front and in public?



Written by: Darrin on Thursday, Mar. 12, 2009 at 6:06 PM -- Report abuse
Recent Comments
More Blogs