The world of Brownback?

So let's see....I ask for specific Brownbackian anti-union transgressions....and the only response is 'Google it'! Pretty lame. Originally Posted by lacrew_2000

http://www.ibew304.org/home/

http://www.ibew304.org/good-news-worth-sharing/

At the beginning of this week Vice president Anthony Lira and Local 304 Organizer Chad Manspeaker were interviewed by Kansas First News in Topeka about the significance of Labor Day. In case you missed the clip that aired you can see it here. They spoke on the history and importance that Labor day represents for all working people and specifically the sacrifices union members have made.
We had another successful Labor Day parade and rally in Topeka. A big thank you to Ginger Smoot and the Topeka Federation of Labor for all the hard work that goes into making this event a success. There was a story about the event in the Topeka Capitol Journal.
International Representative and Local 304 member Todd Newkirk was appointed by Governor Sam Brownback to the KANSAS Works Board. “The KANSAS WORKS State Board serves as a review board and change agent empowered with the responsibility of making recommendations to the Governor and to state agencies to align workforce development with the needs of economic development in the state…” Congrats to Todd, we know he will serve the interest of working people well in this capacity.
Last but not least Local 304 will be hosting the Working Kansas Alliance at our hall in Topeka Saturday September 8th at 10am. The Working Kansas Alliance has organized a day of action to canvass for labor supported political candidates. If you are interested in attending you can find more information here.

http://www.ibew304.org/home/

Legislation introduced by Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker could strip state union workers of nearly all of their collective bargaining rights. Other republican governors are also pushing anti-union legislation. Our own Gov. Sam Brownback is trying to weaken the union’s political power with the “paycheck deception” act. All eyes are on Wisconsin right now, if they manage to pass this legislation, dominoes will start to fall, and if you think Brownback won’t be one of the first on the bandwagon, you’re only kidding yourself. So what’s next? After state workers’ unions have been busted, police? Firefighters? How far behind do you think Utility workers will be? How long until the precedent is set and all forms of collective bargaining are outlawed? An attack on one is an attack on all, we cannot stand idly aside and let the greedy special interests divide and conquer our labor force. The time for action is now.
“Although it is true that only about 20 percent of American workers are in unions, that 20 percent sets the standards across the board in salaries, benefits and working conditions. If you are making a decent salary in a non-union company, you owe that to the unions. One thing that corporations do not do is give out money out of the goodness of their hearts.” – Molly Ivins
This is not only an attack on unions, this is an attack on workers altogether. Our interests are one and the same, when one worker is repressed, all are repressed. We stand together, our one strength is solidarity, and it is the most powerful weapon there is, for without labor, there is no capital. This is not about red states or blue states, pro-life or pro-choice, gay marriage, guns or any other hot button issue used to distract at election time. This is about our ability to earn a living, our ability to provide for our families, our ability to have our voices heard, our rights! Let’s not forget, collective bargaining is the sitting down of both sides to negotiate an agreement, the very people trying to deprive us our bargaining rights are the very people who agreed on the contracts they are now trying to void.

http://www.ontheissues.org/sam_brownback.htm
Voted NO on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations. (Apr 2001)
Unions do good, but need effective oversight. (Oct 2007)
Voted NO on restricting employer interference in union organizing. (Jun 2007)
Rated 0% by the AFL-CIO, indicating an anti-union voting record. (Dec 2003)
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2011/ma...rs-and-unempl/

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2011/ma...rs-and-unempl/
Gov. Sam Brownback on Thursday, May 5, 2011, answers questions on the state public pension system, Kansas Neurological Institute, an anti-union bill and higher education.

Anti-union bill
Brownback seemed to support House members who are wanting to add a bill opposed by unions to legislation dealing with the state’s payback of a federal loan that provided unemployment insurance benefits. He said the loan payback legislation was needed.
“Let’s see what it takes to get it through the legislative process,” he said.
The issue was at the center of a tense House-Senate conference committee meeting earlier Thursday.
Legislators say they need to pass a bill setting up a way for the state to repay to the federal government $171 million in loans made last year to cover benefits for unemployed Kansans.
But House Republicans, led by Rep. Anthony Brown, of Eudora, want to add to that measure to another bill that would prohibit unions from using funds deducted from members’ paychecks for campaign purposes.
The Senate’s lead negotiator on the unemployment issue, Susan Wagle, R-Wichita, also supports the anti-union bill, but said she doubted it would pass in the Senate.
Brown replied that the House “was prepared to walk away” from the underlying bill that deals with paying off the unemployment insurance loan.
Wagle said that would result in a massive tax increase for businesses and federal penalties.
“We’re going to have to find a way to solve the family feud,” she said. Brown responded, “The ball is in your court. We’re waiting on your chamber.”
Wagle tersely replied, “We’re adjourned.”
The so-called paycheck protection bill that Brown wants was at the center of controversy earlier in the legislative session.
Supporters of the bill say it will protect workers from being forced to contribute to candidates they don’t support. Critics of the bill say paycheck deductions for political purposes are voluntary. Democrats say the measure is a way for Republicans to hinder union fundraising.
When the House approved the measure in February, several union members shouted from the public House gallery, urging legislators to vote against the bill. They were escorted out, and Speaker O’Neal barred one union official from the gallery for the rest of the session.
Republican House leaders also said several union members said obscenities to female legislators and staff members prior to the vote. But union members vehemently denied the allegation.

www.huffingtonpost.com/news/sam-brownback

MORE MORE MORE https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp...3&bih=498&bs=1

Both conservative and liberal, Republican and Democrat, can all of you go argue in a corner somewhere! Yes, there is a strain of Republican that is inclined to push standards of morality on you by law, now where are you going there you liberal Democrat? There is also a strain of Democrat that wants to control the rest of your life. What you eat, what you drink and how much. They now have control of your healthcare. (what could possibly go wrong)

So again I say, go argue in a corner somewhere and all of you big government, let's make a law, nanny state, finger wagging, moralizing, politicAlly correct, we know better than you from the two party system can kiss my libertarian, max freedom loving pucker.

Don't act as if you don't want to control me on some issue, liberal or conservative. Get out of my life! All of you. Read libertarian,learn libertarian, maximum freedom, real choice and competition. You over here can keep your strip clubs, you can smoke your weed, you can have ultimate over the thousands of decisions you make each day and are limited by government now!

<rant off>

Mr. Crowley, what went wrong in your head?
Hahaha! A TRUE Libertarian would ONLY vote for Libertarian candidates. Do you? Or do you wave the flag of a Libertarian then sneak off to elect Republicans? You are what you vote.

Also...<shock!>...you're wrong about most Liberals want. Remember, modern Liberals come from Classic Liberals just like Libertarians. We want freedom just like they do, but we're smart enough to realize when one person's freedom tramples on another person's freedom. You have the right to do any foolish thing that makes you happy, until it starts messing up other people's lives. An example is smoking. Smoking causes cancer and is nasty, but I have no problem if you throw away your money and health on cigarettes. That is until it starts annoying others and making them sick. Then you're going to have to deal with whatever rules that the majority (that you pissed off) comes up with.

"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" Mr. Crowley? No, that's just the whole of YOUR own personal law. The majority of the world has other laws...and they outnumber you...and you are weak compared to them in every way.

Or are you even a Libertarian at all? Maybe you're just a community college anarchist that thinks "Libertarian" or "Independent" sounds cool.

Libertarianism is a set of related political philosophies that emphasize the primacy of individual liberty, political freedom, and voluntary association. Libertarians advocate a society with a greatly reduced state or no state at all.[1]
There is no consensus definition of libertarianism.[citation needed] The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines libertarianism as the moral view that agents initially fully own themselves and have certain moral powers to acquire property rights in external things.[2] George Woodcock, author of a history of libertarianism, defines it as the philosophy that fundamentally doubts authority and advocates transforming society by reform or revolution.[3] Libertarian philosopher Roderick Long defines libertarianism as "any political position that advocates a radical redistribution of power from the coercive state to voluntary associations of free individuals", whether "voluntary association" takes the form of the free market or of communal co-operatives.[4] According to the U.S. Libertarian Party, libertarianism is the advocacy of a government that is funded voluntarily and limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence.[5][6]
Libertarian schools of thought differ over the degree to which the state has a role.[1] Anarchist schools advocate complete elimination of the state. Minarchist schools advocate a state which is limited to protecting its citizens from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud. Some schools accept government assistance for the poor.[7] Additionally, some schools are supportive of private property rights in the ownership of unappropriated land and natural resources while others reject such private ownership and often support common ownership instead (libertarian socialism).[8][9][10]
Some political scholars assert that in most countries the terms "libertarian" and "libertarianism" are synonymous with left anarchism, and some express disapproval of free-market capitalists calling themselves libertarians.[11] Conversely, other academics as well as proponents of the free market perspectives argue that free-market libertarianism has been successfully propagated beyond the U.S. since the 1970s via think tanks and political parties[12][13] and that "libertarianism" is increasingly viewed worldwide as a free market position.[14][15] Likewise, many libertarian capitalists disapprove of socialists calling themselves "libertarian."[4] In the United States, where the meaning of liberalism has parted significantly from classical liberalism, classical liberalism has largely been renamed libertarianism and is associated with "economically conservative" and "socially liberal" political views (going by the common meanings of "conservative" and "liberal" in the United States),[16][17] as well a foreign policy of non-interventionism.[18][19]

TAKE THE QUIZ

http://www.lp.org/
I actually voted Lib for 4 generals and fell to the "dream" in the last one.
http://www.lp.org/have-you-seen-thes...rian-party-now
I cannot list the platform segments because some violate Eccie Guidelines and some one hinted at in a previous post

If I can decipher the links correctly, Brownback's totalitarian offense (which makes free people shudder in hiding like Anne Frank) is a desire to eliminate the government (which is supposed to represent us all) as the agent that collects union dues that are used for political (for some of the people) activity.

And as a result, the unions would have to collect money used for political activity (without the assistance of the people's government) just like every single other political group.

I'm ok with that...and I think its both conservative and libertarian to desire and end of the people's government's involvement in one special interest group's political activity.

If that's Brownback's major offense, I think I can rest easy.

Btw....I don't really care left right or sideways about Brownback.
..and governors have very little power these days anyway. But, this woe is me notion that we are living under somebody's boot because Brownback is governor is tiring to me. If he's so bad, how about the Democrats run a serious candidate against him next time. We know that's impossible though, because the Dem party in Kansas has been destroyed. And Brownback didn't destroy it....he just saw the opportunity after Sebelius decimated it.

If nothing else, Brownback and Company seem determined to prove the existence of the left end of the Laffer Curve.

I say let them try and see how it goes.

But, thankfully, I don't live in KS, either...so I don't have any skin in the game.

Best,
Noah