# No, SEIU, SCOTUS Says You Have to Keep Your Grabby Hands Out of Other People' Pockets! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 21, 2012, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853 "2012-06-21T16:20:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/101 "2012-06-22T01:22:35Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > The Daily Kos is as just about as credible as Rush Limbaugh or any other political shock media property. > > Here they intentionally and outright LIE about the nature of the previous decision. > > It may have been an outcome of the decision but it is a pure lie to say that was the reason or the intent. Kos is completely mistaking this decision like it and almost every liberal in the world (and I speak as a liberal) misunderstood Citizens United. As far as I can tell, the decision in the OP does nothing more than reaffirm that unions have to let NON-members who are required to pay a fee to the union in lieu of joining as a condition of employment the ability to not pay for political activity, a right they have from the Beck v. Communication Workers decision. This case may have something to do with the timing and method and notice of reimbursements or require unions to not charge special assessments in the first place, but that’s about it. Just as Citizens United had nothing to do with campaign contributions or corporate personhood, this decision has nothing to do with union members. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/102 "2012-06-22T01:31:51Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > LOL! That’s absurd. Union representation is at an all time low. How is this absurd, that actually fits in with my argument, if organized labor wants to attract more people they need to make it worth those peoples time and money. If they can’t fund their political work with non-members funds who failed to opt-out in the right way they will need to be more responsive to the workers to raise the money. I personally think that would be a good thing. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/103 "2012-06-22T01:32:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It’s immoral to force people to pay you money for political lobbying. Hentor.\* > [@Bricker](#): > > All non-profits are similarly subsidized. It’s not just churches. Since as a tax payer, I’m paying for part of the Catholic Church’s operations in the US through subsidization. > **[Archbishop Dolan Calls Refusal to Defend Defense of Marriage Act an ‘Alarming...](https://www.usccb.org/news/2011/archbishop-dolan-calls-refusal-defend-defense-marriage-act-alarming-and-grave-injustice)** > > WASHINGTON— “Our nation and government have the duty to recognize and protect marriage, not tamper with and redefine it, nor to caricature the deeply hel... > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON— “Our nation and government have the duty to recognize and protect marriage, not tamper with and redefine it, nor to caricature the deeply held beliefs of so many citizens as ‘discrimination,’” said Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). His statement followed the February 23 announcement that President Obama has instructed the Department of Justice to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a move Archbishop Dolan called an “alarming and grave injustice.” As a Catholic, what are you doing to fight this immorality that’s being inflicted on me, and my fellow Americans? Enjoy the Tu Quoque, AKA your own medicine. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/104 "2012-06-22T01:41:09Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > How is this absurd, that actually fits in with my argument, if organized labor wants to attract more people they need to make it worth those peoples time and money. It contradicts your argument because if you couldn’t decertify, unions would have alot more members. The REASON they don’t have many members is because it is so hard to organize now. The number of workers who say they would join a union if they could has grown steadily. In 2004, the last date for which I found a poll, it was at above 50%! > **[Workers want unions now more than ever](https://www.epi.org/publication/webfeatures_snapshots_20070228/)** > > See Snapshots archive. Snapshot for February 28, 2007. Workers want unions now more than ever by Ross Eisenbrey Today, more than at any time in the recent past, American workers want to join unions and have unions represent them in the workplace. In... > [@](#): > > If they can’t fund their political work with non-members funds who failed to opt-out in the right way they will need to be more responsive to the workers to raise the money. But this isn’t about union members complaining about paying it. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/105 "2012-06-22T01:51:41Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I don’t know, because I cannot parse the sentence. Straight up, no snark intended or implied, I have no idea what “odd agency dues collection right” means. The ruling that allows unions to force non-members to pay into the system in an agency shop is an odd decision, it is unlike other laws in the same area. so word soup > [@](#): > > “First Amendment values [would be] at serious risk > if the government [could] compel a particular citizen, or a > discrete group of citizens, to pay special subsidies for > speech on the side that [the government] favors.” United > Foods, 533 U. S., at 411. Why should I be forced to pay money to an organization which fights against gay marriage rights and women reproductive rights. I understand the concept of the “free rider” But why should I as an individual, be subject to the whims of a unions political aspirations. Why should they have the right to garnish wages from my payroll check to fund political campaigns that are morally repugnant to me? In what other case is a compelled payments to lobbing groups forced upon a person by default? I understand that people who make mistakes on their opt-out, miss the application date etc…shoves an important amount of money into the pockets of these special interests but why do they get an exception? I am unaware of any other law where a private organization which I do not belong to can garnish wages to further their special interests through politicking without consent. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/106 "2012-06-22T01:53:42Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > It contradicts your argument because if you couldn’t decertify, unions would have alot more members. > > The REASON they don’t have many members is because it is so hard to organize now. The number of workers who say they would join a union if they could has grown steadily. In 2004, the last date for which I found a poll, it was at above 50%! > > [Workers want unions now more than ever | Economic Policy Institute](http://www.epi.org/publication/webfeatures_snapshots_20070228/) > > But this isn’t about union members complaining about paying it. A lot of that has to do with right to work state laws too, this ruling would do nothing with that and it is a separate subject.. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/107 "2012-06-22T02:01:40Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > A lot of that has to do with right to work state laws too, this ruling would do nothing with that and it is a separate subject.. Yes, overall unions are weaker because of attacks from without, not failure from within. Though there is both. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/108 "2012-06-22T02:22:19Z")
if not unions, who? Who is going to protect workers rights as a political function? The Republicans? The Chamber of Commerce? Wal-Mart? Who? Are we to imagine that heartless greed is now banished from our nation? Working people can simply trust their employers to protect their best interests? Republicans will protect them? They should maybe place their faith in the sacred Free Market (blessings and peace be upon it…)? When you dance on the grave of unions, you’ll be dancing on your own. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/109 "2012-06-22T02:48:41Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > Since as a tax payer, I’m paying for part of the Catholic Church’s operations in the US through subsidization. > > [Archbishop Dolan Calls Refusal to Defend Defense of Marriage Act an ‘Alarming and Grave Injustice’ | USCCB](http://www.usccb.org/news/2011/11-043.cfm) > As a Catholic, what are you doing to fight this immorality that’s being inflicted on me, and my fellow Americans? > > Enjoy the Tu Quoque, AKA your own medicine. I for one certainly appreciate your support. But the Catholic Church is not getting your dollars in nearly the same way. Any non-profit organization gets a tax exemption. And this is done to encourage non-profits’ work. But an individual’s dollars don’t flow directly to a particular non-profit through tax exemptions. The effect is thus attenuated, and distinguishable from the unions’ reaching into the pockets of workers and taking their dues. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/110 "2012-06-22T02:50:40Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > if not unions, who? Who is going to protect workers rights as a political function? The Republicans? The Chamber of Commerce? Wal-Mart? Who? > > Are we to imagine that heartless greed is now banished from our nation? Working people can simply trust their employers to protect their best interests? Republicans will protect them? They should maybe place their faith in the sacred Free Market (blessings and peace be upon it…)? > > When you dance on the grave of unions, you’ll be dancing on your own. I am perfectly happy to protect my own rights as a worker. And the free market lets me do it. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/111 "2012-06-22T03:08:41Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I am perfectly happy to protect my own rights as a worker. And the free market lets me do it. Well, no, you don’t have to hire a lawyer, you are one. And your parsing skills are of such a high degree, you could work as a professional semanticist. If they have such. Now, let it be noted, for the record, that the Lily Ledbetter case was argued by a _pro bono_ lawyer, may the Goddess bless him and keep him snug to Her bountiful bosom all the days of his life, amen. But how many are there? Enough, do you think? (And lest I be misunderstood, I wasn’t referring specifically to you, **Bricker**. I haven’t the slightest doubt that you are the very embodiment of rugged individualism, John Galt with a briefcase.) ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/112 "2012-06-22T03:32:57Z")
So what we’re saying here is that the GOP has passed a law that prevents Unions from giving out campaign contributions, even if the majority of the members have decided to spend the funds like this. But does this apply to the Corporations? They can still give $$ to the GOP, even if individual shareholders oppose them, right? See how unfair these laws are? They are done only to attack the Democratic party. They have nothing at all to do with “fairness”. "All animals are equal, _but some animals are more equal than others"_ Now what the Dems have to do in the states they control is pass the opposite law. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/113 "2012-06-22T03:36:49Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I for one certainly appreciate your support. > > But the Catholic Church is not getting your dollars in nearly the same way. Any non-profit organization gets a tax exemption. And this is done to encourage non-profits’ work. But an individual’s dollars don’t flow directly to a particular non-profit through tax exemptions. The effect is thus attenuated, and distinguishable from the unions’ reaching into the pockets of workers and taking their dues. An odd distinction without much of a difference. The Catholic Church receives significant benefits from the same tax funds I, and the very people the church seeks to make the state oppress, pays into. Why is the work of preaching mindless bigotry against gays something that should be encouraged? > [@Bricker](#): > > It’s immoral to force people to pay you money for political lobbying Why not renounce the church, which you feel is being immoral by accepting tax supported services financed in part by the people they seek the state to oppress, and become a Lutheran or a Buddhist or something? Why support your own hypocrisy? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/114 "2012-06-22T03:37:30Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > So what we’re saying here is that the GOP has passed a law that prevents Unions from giving out campaign contributions, even if the majority of the members have decided to spend the funds like this. > > But does this apply to the Corporations? They can still give $$ to the GOP, even if individual shareholders oppose them, right? > > See how unfair these laws are? They are done only to attack the Democratic party. They have nothing at all to do with “fairness”. "All animals are equal, _but some animals are more equal than others"_ > > Now what the Dems have to do in the states they control is pass the opposite law. Um… What? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/115 "2012-06-22T03:38:58Z")
> [@](#): > > …and become a Lutheran or a Buddhist or something? But not Jewish. Jews hate to argue. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/116 "2012-06-22T03:45:09Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > An odd distinction without much of a difference. > > The Catholic Church receives significant benefits from the same tax funds I, and the very people the church seeks to make the state oppress, pays into. Sure does. And again let me thank you for your support. The Bishop and I both appreciate it greatly. > [@](#): > > Why is the work of preaching mindless bigotry against gays something that should be encouraged? Well, the First Amendment doesn’t really permit the government to prefer one message over another. So it should be encouraged because it can’t be culled out from the general category of political advocacy. > [@](#): > > Why are you giving money, and service, to an entity you feel is behaving immorally? Why don’t you renounce the immorality and become a Lutheran or a Buddhist or something? Why support your own hypocrisy? Well, I don’t agree with two of the Four Noble Truths. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/117 "2012-06-22T03:51:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure does. And again let me thank you for your support. The Bishop and I both appreciate it greatly. > > Well, the First Amendment doesn’t really permit the government to prefer one message over another. So it should be encouraged because it can’t be culled out from the general category of political advocacy. Wait, wait, wait. You said “It’s immoral to force people to pay you money for political lobbying”. You and the bishop are using my tax dollars, that I have to pay, to support your bigoted lobbying. You and the Bishop are behaving immorally, according to your morals, QED. Why don’t you stop supporting the Bishop’s immorality? ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/118 "2012-06-22T03:53:39Z")
Why don’t consumers and stock holders get a say on how corporate profits are used to fund politics? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/119 "2012-06-22T03:56:55Z")
That’s where the right to remain silent comes in. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2012, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853/120 "2012-06-22T03:57:00Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > Wait, wait, wait. You said “It’s immoral to force people to pay you money for political lobbying”. > > You and the bishop are using my tax dollars, that I have to pay, to support your bigoted lobbying. > > You and the Bishop are behaving immorally, according to your morals, QED. > > Why don’t you stop supporting the Bishop’s immorality? Because we’re not using your tax dollars. Your tax dollars go to the government. At that point, they belong to the government. What the government chooses to do with them is up to it. “QED” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-seiu-scotus-says-you-have-to-keep-your-grabby-hands-out-of-other-people-pockets/625853.md?page=7)