Home / Defeat Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Proposition 75? Si Se Puede

Defeat Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Proposition 75? Si Se Puede

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

The forces that favor corporate greed over the rights of the working man are gearing up for an all out war. Alphaliberal.comIn California, on November 8, these forces, aligned with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, will to try to sneak through a devious anti-worker proposition that will weaken the clout of the unions.

Paying reverance to his multi-national corporate masters, Arnold will do anything and say anything to make you believe passing Proposition 75 will be somehow beneficial for anyone, somehow, somewhere, at some time –but it is not.

What is really behing Proposition 75 is the ongoing wish of greedy corporate giants to further weaken the union’s ability to get the things done in the way they feel they need to, in order to fight back.

In essence, Aronld wants to take away the union’s clout and increase the clout of his corporate masters. Weakening unions hurts the worker’s ability to organize and use collective power to demand improvements to their lives, health care, and working conditions –when fighting against rich and nearly-immovable corporate powerhouses. If proposition 75 passes, unions will be further hamstrung in their efforts, which help promote policies that will help workers.

In Los Angeles a “black-brown” coalition landslided in the first latino mayor in over a century. It may take such a coalition again in California to beat back these initiatives that will make it harder for the poor to rise up and for the middle-class to have decent lives.

Yes they could do it in Los Angeles, can they do it also throughout all of California? In the face of the charismatic governator? Will this growing coalition of workers and their allies once again stand up, show up at the polls, and show who is going to be setting the agenda for California’s future?

From what I have seen, I am sure we can.

Alpha Liberal: Recommended Diaries

Balletshooz blogs at Alphaliberal

Powered by

About Balletshooz

  • Josh

    Strange, you never really said how the prop. 75 will do all this – just that you believe it will impact the unions in some negative way. I would like to hear some more details on the specifics. All I have read on specifics for this prop. seem to say that it would require unions to get member approval before spending money on specific political initiatives.


  • Well, 75 is aimed straight at the heart of union power — the ability to compel members to provide funds for the use of the union’s political ends, whether or not the individual member agrees with those ends or not.

    Free example: California unions have a war-chest of $25 million tapped for defeat of Prop. 75.

  • John

    Propr 75 requires unions to get the consent of the members before spending member dues on political activities. It’s ironic that the unions leaders hiked up union dues this year specifically to fight prop 75!

    I support democracy. It’s sad that union leaders want to deprive their own due paying members of having a voice. The opposition to prop 75 (and this opinion piece is a prime example) is the most blatant example of misleading politics on the part of union bosses I’ve seen in a long time.

  • It gets more interesting: California teachers’ union mortgaged their property to get funds to fight 75. Even if the proposition passes, the members will still be assessed a fee to repay the loan.

    Gotta love it!

    See this article for the full quote:

    Landmark Legal Foundation has today asked the California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) to investigate the California Teachers Association (CTA) for the union’s use of nonmember teachers’ fees to illegally finance a multimillion dollar effort to defeat ballot initiatives in the statewide November 5 special election.

    Landmark has asked PERB to investigate whether the CTA is using a $60 per member annual special assessment for three years — that the union described as being for “debt retirement” — to, in fact, finance political expenditures to defeat Propositions 75, 76 and other ballot initiatives in the November special election. Teachers who are not members of the union but who are required by law to pay fees to the union for collective bargaining services are also being assessed the special $60 fee.

  • Mark

    You guys claim to support the very teachers that you are bankrupting by fighting this thing off. The truth is that this will save teachers money and gives them a choice whether or not to endorse union’s candidates. You guys need to stop lying and start telling the truth

  • Balletshooz doesn’t explain Prop 75 specifically because he wants to confuse the issue. The fact is that all the proposition does is put the kind of restriction on union abuse of their membership that people around the country have been screaming for for years. This isn’t a law to weaken unions or help corporations, it’s a law to protect union members. If he can’t see that you have to wonder exactly who’s side he’s on.


  • excerpt from: A Tad Askew

    The other day I was thinking about this general situation and fixating on how it was back in the fifties when I remembered that the company that literally turned itself inside out to make us happy did have one other very definite area of concern – unionization. The labor movement was riding high in those days. The unions aggressively exploited every opportunity to expand into new areas of opportunity, be they blue collar or white collar. Non union companies, such as mine, were paranoid of the union movement and employees at unionized companies were doing well. The names of the union leaders were well known to everyone because of the power they wielded for good or evil – John L. Lewis, Walter Reuther and Jimmy Hoffa, to name a few.

    Then, I thought about how the power of the labor movement has diminished. How the AFL-CIO is threatening to break up, and how little we even read about the unions these days. The facts seemed to be suggesting the possible existance of a new, fundamental law in economics – namely, that the well being of all workers in America is directly related to and proportionate to the well being of the labor movement. And history tells us that the term “workers” in this case means everyone below top management. The junior officers in financial institutions, the mid level managers, the engineers, the scientists in drug companies ? many of these workers who very likely consider themselves to be disassociated from organized labor are, in fact, suffering from a high degree of work related anxiety these days, and the reality of the situation is that their job security has evaporated in lock step with the deterioration of the union movement.

    Unfortunately, our government has played a major role in the dismantling of the unions? power. President Reagan, himself a product of and beneficiary of the actor’s union, unintentionally perhaps drove the largest nail into labor’s coffin when he fired the striking air traffic controllers back in the eighties. This event more than any other precipitated the downward momentum of the labor movement. In addition, the large amounts of moneys “donated” by management to our politicians have resulted in legislation that has further weakened the unions. The term “management,” as used here, means those who own and control the vast pools of corporate funds.

    Proposition 75, on the November 8, 2005 special election ballot in California, would require unions to obtain written permission from members each year before directing money from their dues into political campaigns. It is sponsored by business groups and others associated with the Republican Party. Similar measures in other states have led to sharp decreases in political donations from the unions, and reductions in their political clout. Small wonder – imagine what would happen if the same type of measure was imposed on corporations.

    It is a sad commentary on our money-based political system that……

    [note to author: no raw links are allowed. Please code for links properly in the future]