What I am saying is from what I know for over 50 years employeers have been trying to delay, eliminate, and stop elections. I may be old but before 50 years I have no personal experience so I did not want to speak about before 50 years. But lets take it back to the passage of Taff/Hartly
Have you or do you know anyone who has gone through an organizing election?
OK, sorry, I thought something happened 50 years ago. Put that aside. Yes, me, I’ve gone through it. And I expected the company I worked with to sell their side as well as the union to do the same. I have no doubt that companies and unions have crossed the line and I would like my vote to be private so neither can harm me.
So the answer to possible delays is to throw the election out? Remarkable. The only argument for this is that the efforts to harrass, intimidate yada yada from each side will balance somehow. Card check replaces a proper election with a process that can be gamed by the unions in a way impossible via secret ballot. The gap issue is a separate issue and does not invalidate secret ballot. It should be possible to code in a remedy. But card check is problematic in both directions.
Exactly. Unions like card checks because they can bully people into signing the cards, whereas they can’t intimidate people who are casting secret ballots. Union tactics have always been rather thuggish; a sizable fraction of people will sign the card out of fear of being harassed (or worse) if they refuse.
I’ve personally been through this.
My company actually has a great relationship with the hourly union. The problem is some stupid salter tried to organize us salaried engineers. Sure, we had grievances, and lots of people signed cards just to get management’s attention. The company followed every letter of the law. It was we employees who had to come up with the battle plan against the union, and attempt to follow every letter of the law in making it clear that we were not sponsored by the company. For example, Kinko’s for copies instead of the office copier. Personal email instead of the company system. And so on.
The cards were signed in secret. More than 50% had already signed before the company even knew what was happening. If that had meant “instant union” then I and the other opposing forces wouldn’t have had a chance to make our non-union campaign. Union cards aren’t meant to mean “unionize me”; rather, they’re meant to express an interest in an NLRB election.
Current proposals are a majority, so it could be 50.002%. 
It would be 50% plus one, rather than 51%. 