THE FACE OF FREEDOM

THE CASE FOR FREEDOM

Every American has the right to speak his or her mind without fear of being punished by the government. This protection applies to all of us, no matter our position in society. School children, public workers and, yes, even public officials.

The ability of public officials to speak their minds on important issues is particularly important.

If officials are unable to voice their opinions on proposed public policies (like reigning in massive budget shortfalls due to the existence of public-sector unions), the voters are unable to exercise democratic oversight and make their own preferences known. So in the majority of the United States, the free speech rights of officials are recognized and protected.

Unless you live in California.

In California, the government has made it illegal for public officials to give their employees any information about their own constitutional rights. Not only does this “gag order” make little sense, but it violates the First Amendment.

In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed in Janus v. AFSCME that public-sector workers have a constitutional right not to give any money to a union. If they decide to anyway, they’re waiving this right, and that waiver must be clearly demonstrated to their employer.

Janus overturned 40 years of precedent allowing workers’ pay to be skimmed by the unions and was hailed as a victory for workers’ rights.

But unfortunately for California workers, on the very day Janus was decided, Gov. Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown signed SB 866 into law. The timing of this bill was no coincidence. SB 866 was specifically designed to prevent employees from knowing about their rights.

Under the measure, public employers telling employees anything that could “deter or discourage” them from becoming or staying union members (like telling them about their constitutional rights, for example), could be accused of a labor violation and hauled in front of PERB.

As a result, public officials across the state must bite their tongues out of fear that one verbal misstep could land them in legal hot water.

But all is not yet lost. Because the gag order distinguishes between one kind of speech it likes (pro-union) and one kind of speech it doesn’t (the truth), it runs afoul of the First Amendment, which forbids the government from making this kind of distinction.

Further, because it discourages speech

California continues its assault on free speech

By TIMOTHY R. SNOWBALL, Litigation Counsel

that public officials would otherwise want to make, it is also unconstitutional.

Hence, the legal grounds for challenging the gag order are strong. What’s missing is a group of public officials in California with the guts to push back on this blatant tyranny.

Unless they’re willing to fight for the First Amendment, hundreds of thousands of public workers will remain in the dark about their constitutional rights, and the unions in California will continue to reap a windfall in money to be used in pushing leftist politics.

The choice is no choice at all.

Don’t let them kid you — unions love ‘free riders’

Whenever the Freedom Foundation lets public employees know they no longer have to be a member of a union — and pay dues for the “privilege” — our friends the government unions inevitably wail about “free riders.”

That’s a slang expression for someone getting something they’re not paying for — in this case union representation.

The government unions insist it’s unfair they be required to provide a free service.

And you know what? In some ways, they’re right. The only question is who the practice is unfair to.

That’s why the Freedom Foundation is pleased to support HB 3119, a newly introduced bill in the Oregon Legislature. The measure, authored by state Rep. Mike Nearman (R-Independence) would end the alleged burden of “free riders” by freeing unions from the responsibility of speaking for even nonmembers.

Rather than the current arrangement, in which all employees are “represented,” the bill proposes a system in which there are “union” and “independent” employees. According to the wording:

By BEN STRAKA, Policy Analyst

“If an independent employee does not pay union dues or any other assessment to defray the cost of a labor organization’s services…(t)he labor organization is not required to engage in collective bargaining on behalf of the independent employee or otherwise represent the independent employee in the independent employee’s employment relations with the public employer.” employees is based on merit:

“A public employer shall determine the wages, benefits and other terms and conditions of employment of an independent employee based on the independent employee’s education, experience, training, skills and performance.”

Somewhat ironically, one shouldn’t expect Oregon’s Democrat-dominated legislature to give the bill a hearing. Could it be the responsibility for representing everyone in a given bargaining group — members and nonmembers alike — isn’t the burden the unions claim it is?

If passed, the bill would create a new dynamic that wouldn’t be patterned after the labor vs. management model, but a partnership between labor and management based on what the employee could offer and what management needed. This alone could increase productivity and morale.

But despite what they may say, a partnership is the last thing unions want. Recent history shows that government unions have enough allies in the Legislature to amend the state’s collective bargaining laws when it suits them — meaning they would likely have no problem shedding the statutory “burden” of representing nonmembers themselves.

But you know what? They’ve never tried.

That’s because these workers aren’t free riders. Under a union protection clause, they’re “forced” riders.

The best thing about HB 3119 is that it exposes the essence — and problems — of socialism, which is undeniably what unions are based on.

In the same way a Marxist economy builds walls, so does the union workforce need to build walls — though in this case the wall is the exclusive representation clause.

THE FACE OF FREEDOM Biden’s first expression of ‘unity’ is to fire Freedom Foundation’s Nelsen from labor dispute panel

Freedom Foundation Labor Policy Director Max Nelsen got fired last month.

Not by us, mind you. We couldn’t be prouder of our young dynamo.

Since his appointment by President Trump in 2019, Max Nelsen served as a member of the Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP), a powerful labor relations board that resolves collective bargaining disputes between federal agencies and government unions.

In fact, the first decision of the FSIP under the Biden Administration — 145 pages in length — was written by Nelsen.

Members of the FSIP serve five-year terms but can be dismissed by the president at any time. While it is customary for new administrations to remove and replace the FSIP members appointed by the previous administration, Biden moved to do so quicker than any modern administration.

On Groundhog Day, Creepy Joe demanded the resignations of those FSIP members who had not already resigned. The two members who didn’t submit resignations by the end of the day — including Nelsen — were terminated.

The move was cheered by federal employees’ unions and liberal columnists. An official for the largest such union — the American Federation of Government Employees — decried the Trump appointees as “a grotesque parade of horribles.” An official for the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers describedTrump’s FSIP as “a ‘Who’s Who’ of union-busters and anti-government ideologues.”

Given its “attacks on public-sector unions in Washington state,” Nelsen’s affiliation with the Freedom Foundation was listed as a prominent example in a celebratory article by The Los Angeles Times’business columnist.

In their statements to the press, union officials claimed to look forward to more “neutral” members being appointed by Biden. A columnist for the far-left publication Slate went so far as to accuse Trump’s FSIP of “consistently (defying) the panel’s legal obligations to remain a neutral arbiter.” In fact, federal law authorizes the FSIP to “take whatever action is necessary” to resolve disputes but the Times writer quickly undermined his own credibility by stating that Biden’s future appointees to the FSIP would be “expected” to “protect federal unions.”

These firings and Biden’s unprecedented canning of National Labor Relations Board general counsel Peter Robb are just the beginning of Biden making good on his promise to be “the most pro-union president you’ve ever seen.”

But because unions’ interests are decidedly not the same as workers, much less taxpayers, the work of the Freedom Foundation in holding government unions accountable will be increasingly important in the coming years.

By ASHLEY VARNER, VP for Communications

For his first official act as ex-president, Trump gives union the back of his hand

There seems to be little consensus about what Donald Trump accomplished during his four years as president, but no one can quibble with his first official act as a private citizen.

He opted out of his union.

According to a story on the Fox News website, the ex-president terminated his longstanding membership in the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) after the union threatened to expel him in the wake of his handling of the mob takeover of the Capitol Building in January.

Trump called SAG’s ploy a “blatant attempt at free media attention to distract from your dismal record as a union. Your organization has done little for its members, and nothing for me — besides collecting dues and promoting dangerous un-American policies and ideas — as evident by your massive unemployment rates and lawsuits from celebrated actors, who even recorded a video asking, ‘Why isn’t the union fighting for me?’ ”

Trump was referring to a video posted last year by actors like Mark Hammill, Whoopi Goldberg and Morgan Freeman, among others, who slammed the union’s health plan benefit cuts. In the video, Goldberg asks: “Why isn’t the union fighting for me?”

Meanwhile, the former president slammed SAG for its “policy failures,” and further said its “disciplinary failures are even more egregious.”

“I no longer wish to be associated with your union,” Trump wrote. “As such, this letter is to inform you of my immediate resigning from SAG-AFTRA.”

He added, “You have done nothing for me.” Although SAG is a private-sector union representing motion picture and television performers, his letter of resignation could serve as a template for government employees struggling to opt out of SEIU, AFSCME, the Teamsters or any of countless teachers’ unions. “Why isn’t the union fighting for me?” Because you — and millions like you — have spent years looking the other way while a greedy, politically motivated special interest picked your pocket “for your own good.” But the jig is up. A series of U.S. Supreme Court rulings have made it easier for government employees to opt out, and thousands more are walking out every month. President Trump is no longer a public employee, but his actions set a great example for millions who still are.

By JEFF RHODES, VP for News & Information

What They

What They &

What he said: “Pull all support, vocal and financial, from the Freedom Foundation. It seems they promote fascism.”

What he meant: “I couldn’t give you a coherent definition of ‘facism’ if my life depended on it. Like all liberals, I know I can’t debate GARRY BREWSTER Vancouver, Wash. Facebook post ideas like those Jan. 9, 2020 the Freedom Foundation promotes intellectually, so I resort to name-calling. ‘Facist’ and ‘racist’ are my favorites because, while no one wants to be one, very few people actually actually know what one is.”

n n n

What he said: “The Freedom Foundation is nothing but a scam.”

What he meant: “On the one hand, we have unions, which promote themselves as being pro-worker but have relied for generations on compulsory dues and are still trying everything in their power to limit their members’ freedom to choose for themselves. On the other, we have the BRAD KEELER Freedom Spokane, Wash. Foundation, Facebook post which is Jan. 15 , 2021 funded 100 percent through voluntary contributions from people who support its work. Who’s scamming who?”

n n n What he said: “I hope the Freedom Foundation pays for its misdeeds. I think the organization stinks.”

What he meant: “Thanks to Washington’s corrupt attorney general, the Freedom Foundation has several times been ordered to pay for things that aren’t misdeeds at all. Meanwhile, unions consistently get caught red-handed concealing millions of dollars in political activity but are allowed to settle for pennies on the dollar. This is my idea of how justice should work in a world that doesn’t stink.”

PHIL VENDITTI University Place, Wash. Instructor, Clover Park Technical College Facebook post Dec. 9, 2020

THE CASE FOR FREEDOM

Teachers unions are the real reason all those classrooms are still empty

By JASON DUDASH, Oregon Director

By JASON DUDASH Reprinted from REDSTATE.com

Feb. 10, 2021

These days it seems the news is inundated with increasingly dire projections about how much longer our daily lives will be disrupted as public health officials struggle to get a handle on the global COVID-19 pandemic.

A blip of hope has emerged, though, as most school districts across the country are now on track to return to some version of in-person learning. This news is considered long overdue and welcomed with open arms by weary parents, most of whom found themselves required to suddenly become part-time teachers in addition to their fulltime careers.

The only population possibly more excited about the return to the classroom and a sense of normalcy than the parents is the students themselves.

During the summer months, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) declared that schools should reopen for the educational, social, and mental health and well-being of school children. Both cautioned that prolonged absence of in-person education prevented children from important educational and social development, and both expressed concerns that nutritional and oversight of children’s home lives would be sorely neglected for low-income and at-risk kids.

Both were correct. The results of prolonged remote learning have been disastrous for American students. According to a December article published on the NBC News website:

Emergency rooms have seen a 24 percent increase in mental health-related visits from children ages 5 to 11 compared to last year. The increase among older kids is even higher — 31 percent.

Food banks have been slammed with hungry families as an estimated 17 million children — many largely cut off from free school lunches — are now in danger of not having enough to eat.

That’s an increase of more than 6 million hungry children compared to before the pandemic.

Schools are struggling to teach students remotely or in classrooms in which children wear masks and sit behind plastic shields. One national testing organization reported that the average student in grades 3-8 who took a math assessment this fall scored 5 to 10 percentile points behind students who took the same test last year, with Black, Hispanic and poor students falling even further behind.

Classrooms have been unusually empty, with quarantines and sickness affecting attendance in face-to-face schools and computer issues interfering with online instruction.

Some districts report that the number of students who’ve missed at least 10 percent of classes, which studies show could lead to devastating lifelong consequences, has more than doubled.

And an estimated 3 million vulnerable students — who are homeless, in foster care, have disabilities or are learning English — appear to not be in school at all.

Even worse, experts believe the pandemic is responsible for an alarming spike in rates of depression, substance abuse, and even suicide among students whose social safety net was ripped away with no warning.

A Sept. 29 article in the Daily Signal points to studies showing that “(T)he stringent social-distancing measures put in place to combat the spread of COVID-19 have significantly worsened teen mental health. Because teenagers are social by nature and developmentally reliant on their peers, the pandemic has exacerbated mental health issues among an age cohort already vulnerable to begin with.”

Despite all the dreadful things our students have experienced over the last year, however, not everyone is excited for them to return to the classroom. America’s teachers’ unions appear to be the loudest — and seemingly only — opposition to schools reopening. “The push to reopen schools is rooted in sexism, racism and misogyny”, the Chicago Teachers Union wrote in a famous, now-deleted tweet.

Similarly, to absolutely no one’s surprise, an equally ludicrous union president from the Washington Education Association stated that parents emailing school board members worried about the suicide risks present with their children are “ignorant,” and “another expression of white privilege.”

A December report from Fox 5 in Las Vegas confirmed the Clark County School District lost 11 students to suicide in one semester.

Some union pushback, though, is a bit less absurd and more honest about its intentions and desires. In July, a list of demands was published from United Teachers Los Angeles that would be required to be met before the 30,000 teachers represented by the union return to the classroom.

Among the demands were defunding the police, Medicare for all, and a shutdown of all private charter schools. Similarly, the Oregon Education Association penned a letter asking that Gov. Kate Brown limit the number of Oregon students who could enroll in private online charter schools to continue receiving quality education.

Each of these examples has at least one thing in common. At the top of the list is that while teachers’ unions care about a great deal of things, the last thing they care about is our students.

Thankfully, it appears that while they wield a big stick, the teachers’ unions have overplayed their hand. Parents are furious. Those who can are putting their children in other educational settings and many are pressuring their state and local officials to stop taking their marching orders from union officials.

The Chicago Teachers Union has lost the support of Mayor Lori Lightfoot. Rankand-file educators in Bellevue, Wash. voted to return to work over the continued objections of their union leaders. The California teachers’ unions may very well help get Gov. Gavin Newsom recalled.

This isn’t a race or class issue. Prolonged remote learning is increasingly becoming a public health crisis in and of itself.

America must re-open the schools. Not to do so is imprisoning children to a life without socialization they did not choose and cannot control or escape, on top of a dismal educational future.

Jason Dudash is the Oregon director of the Freedom Foundation, a national nonprofit organization with the mission to advance individual liberty, free enterprise, and limited, accountable government.