Governor Romney’s Initiative To Protect American Workers:
Governor Romney Believes Hard Working Americans Have The Right To Not Pay Union Dues If They Do Not Belong To A Union. A bill working its way through the Iowa Legislature would allow public employee unions to charge union fees to nonunion workers.
? Governor Romney Believes This Legislation Is Bad Policy. Employees whether in the private sector or the public sector have a right to choose whether to contribute to a union. This bill would force tens of thousands of school teachers and city, county and state government employees to pay union dues, even if they don’t want to belong to the union.
? Governor Romney Believes A Worker Should Have The Right To Choose Whether To Join A Union. Governor Romney opposes legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives that would allow labor unions to organize businesses by taking away workers’ rights to a secret ballot election to determine unionization. This kind of legislation would open the door to union coercion, intimidation, and badgering by allowing unions to collect cards from workers in lieu of a secret ballot election.
Governor Romney Believes The Resources Of The Federal Government Should Not Be Used To Solicit Or Collect Dues For Politicized Organizations. As President, Governor Romney will work to overturn existing federal policy that permits automatic paycheck deduction for federal employees’ union dues.
Governor Romney Knows That With A Democratic Congress Beholden To Labor Unions, A National Right To Work Law Will Never Pass. Therefore, This Is An Issue That Is Being Dealt With On A State-By-State Basis. Governor Romney Encourages State Legislatures To Take The Lead And Support Right To Work Laws In Their States. Currently 22 states have Right to Work laws and many of them have seen exponential economic growth. Many states without Right to Work laws are struggling economically. Flexible labor laws allow states to attract trade and industry to their cities and towns and because of this, good, high paying jobs follow.
Governor Romney’s Record On Union Paychecks:
In 2003, Governor Romney Challenged A Program Allowing “State Employees To Contribute 50 Cents A Week From Their Paychecks Into Union Political Action Committees, Saying The System Unfairly Favors Unions That Support Democrats.” (“Romney Wants To Stop State Employees PAC Contribution,” The Associated Press, 8/5/03)
? The Boston Globe: “In a letter delivered yesterday to the director of the Office of Campaign and Political Finance, Romney’s chief legal counsel challenged the voluntary payroll deduction, which is used by about 12.5 percent of the state’s eligible employees. Administration officials say the program raises $435,000 per year for state employee union PACs, many of which opposed Romney in 2002.” (Joanna Weiss, “Romney Fights Union On PAC Contribution,” The Boston Globe, 8/5/03)
The Massachusetts Office Of Campaign And Political Finance Ruled That Unions Cannot Solicit Automatic Payroll Deductions On State Property Or Through State Workers. “The State Office of Campaign and Political Finance has rebuffed Governor Mitt Romney’s effort to ban automatic payroll deductions from state workers’ paychecks for unions’ political action committees. But in a partial victory for the governor, the office also ruled that the unions cannot solicit those deductions on state property or through state workers and must reimburse the state for costs associated with collecting the money.” (Rick Klein, “Mixed Response In Union Ruling Restrictions Given For PAC Deductions,” The Boston Globe, 9/12/03)
? Boston Herald: “Hats off to Gov. Mitt Romney for calling a spade a spade and putting a stop to public employee unions’ improper use of state resources for political purposes. OCPF should have put a stop to this flouting of state law long ago. But then again, no politician until Romney had the guts to ask them to.” (Editorial, “Closing A PAC Loophole,” Boston Herald, 9/14/03)
This was released by the Campaign today. One of things that distinguishes Romney from other candidates is that he has already begun to lay out concrete positions. Most of the other candidates are resting on the stilt legs of name recognition and image, with no sign of where they stand on important issues. Romney knows the presidential race needs to be raised to the level where policy initiatives are put forth and discussed at length, thus pushing our country in a better direction.
I would take the time to check out www.mittromney.com. It provides a wealth of information on his positions and achievements. It is tech savvy, but more importantly its high on content, not just bells and whistles. Also www.race42008.com is quoted at it here.
March 22nd, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Sweet post Jason. Policy platforms ought to be the red meat of this site.
March 22nd, 2007 at 5:42 pm
You would never see anything remotely like this from a democrat…Hats off to Romney.
March 22nd, 2007 at 5:48 pm
Why can’t any of the other candidates articulate a plan for this and other things?
March 22nd, 2007 at 6:29 pm
THe problem Romney faces, besides his flip-flopping, is in laying out plans this early in the game,
arguments can become stale, old, and tired. Now, personally, I’m not sure why one would take the time
to clearly articulate “workers rights”? Although it is important, there are certainly 9 or 10 other things
I would like to hear governor Romney articulate besides stopping unions, which aren’t really a threat
any longer. Governor Romney, what about:
-Iran?
-Social Security?
-Medicare?
-Iraq?
-Health Care?
-College Tuition rates?
How about we lay out clear-cut “plans” for these things before we climb the mountain known as “workers rights”??
March 22nd, 2007 at 6:35 pm
Your in luck, Romney has given pretty in depth positions on Iran and Health Care. Not to mention a good talking of ideas on Iraq.
I am sure the other topics will be handled shortly.
In one sentence though you say it’s a problem but in the very next sentence you ask for more. Which is it?
March 22nd, 2007 at 7:10 pm
Romney’s always been incredibly anti-union. He declined the invitation to attend the IAF union conference because of that opposition. He continually talks about teachers unions destroying education. I think it’s incredibly refreshing to hear Romney articulate issues on such gorgeous specifics. As I’ve said before, Romney needs to use this stage in the campaign in the same way Clinton used the equivalent time period in the 92 cycle: play the policy wonk. Becoming both the charming candidate, and the policy wonk was an incredibly effective tactic then, and it’ll likely be just as effective today; especially with Romney’s background.
March 22nd, 2007 at 7:50 pm
“in depth positions on Iran and Health Care. Not to mention a good talking of ideas on Iraq”
Now, I am a frequent visitor to mittromney.com. I watch “Mitt TV” and I read all the campaigns press releases. However, I have yet to come across anything new or “fresh” with regards to Mitt’s positions on Iraq and Iran. In all honesty, I like Mitt’s ideas regarding restricting Iran’s access to international banking/finance organizations. However, the upcoming UN “sanctions” on Iran, now with the help of Russia, are supposed to do just that.
Regarding Iraq, what has Romney, or any other candidate for that matter, said about Iraq that doesn’t sound exactly like it came from the White House? Does Mitt have a plan if the “surge” fails? Do he have a plan it it succeeds? Moreover, whenever the Governor speaks about Iraq, he doesn’t exactly convey a sense or thorough grasp of the overall situation, either on the ground in Iraq, or in the overall strategic context of the War on Terror.
Health Care, I think Mitt’s Health Care plans in Massachusetts are at least a starting point, because frankly, no other Republican has anything substantive to go off of. (Maybe Huckabee’s ARKids, but not really). However, its one thing to offer affordable health care to a small state like Massachusetts, but its another to say that same plan will work for all 300 million Americans. I dont know, and frankly I dont think either does Gov. Romney. There are already reports of huge budget short-falls because Romney’s office drastically under-reported on the numbers of eligible recipients who would file for coverage. (Boston Globe).
So, short of his plan in Massachusetts, which certainly is a start but nowhere near a model for the nation, what has Governor Romney said on the main issues of the day that hasn’t been said before? As far as I can see, nothing.
March 22nd, 2007 at 7:58 pm
Geoff,
1. Iran, Looks lik you got what you asked for, you just don’t think it’s enough, but it is certainly more than any other GOP candidate has offered.
2. Iraq- Romney as not offered a plan, and frankly it would probably not be a good idea to do so, considering the place we are in with them, but he has made many comments including supporting the sirge and the need to back the president despite his failures.
3. I think he has said the Mass health plan is not a model for the nation, but a beginning point. Which is actually what all of his policy initiatives are, and something no other candidate has taen the time to do.
After reading your comments I don’t know quite what your beef is with Mitt or my post. It sounds like you are getting the most of what you want out of Mitt.
March 22nd, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Geoff,
By the same logic, one could say that cutting taxes in NYC is nothing like cutting taxes at the federal level, so we should not credit Giuliani with his performance as Mayor. You are determined to find a fault with everything Romney does. Either he doesn’t offer details enough, or he offers too many details too early. Measure every politician by what they accomplished with what they were dealt.
And by the way, those “huge budget short-falls” the Boston Globe was gleefully reporting somehow haven’t turned out that way. More recent updates show that Romney’s plan is working better than he anticipated ($175 basic coverage as opposed to an estimated $225, compared to a pre-Romney of $400).
March 22nd, 2007 at 8:13 pm
Murphy,
“Measure every politician by what they accomplished with what they were dealt.”
But somehow Romney-Bots can’t practice what they preach. All other candidates, such as Giuliani who did in fact cut taxes, crime, well fare rolls. Etc. etc. Are too “liberal” and not judged by their record. Interesting how hypocrisy works.
“By the same logic, one could say that cutting taxes in NYC is nothing like cutting taxes at the federal level, so we should not credit Giuliani with his performance as Mayor.”
This is by far one of the most ridiculous things I have read on this site. If you think cutting taxes is even in the same ball park on the “difficulty scale” as providing the American citizen with affordable, adequate health care coverage; then I’ll have what your drinkin!! You are comparing apples and basketballs.
Jason,
“After reading your comments I don’t know quite what your beef is with Mitt or my post. It sounds like you are getting the most of what you want out of Mitt.”
Again, I specifically asked, what has Gov. Romney said that’s new and not been said before? From your rebuttal, I can tell that you subliminally agree. Obviously, if he has been this beacon for “fresh, new and innovative ideas” you would have been able to list them. The absence of such a list suggests that, maybe Gov. Romney isn’t the great leader yall believe him to be.
The main issues in the next election will be:
1. Iraq
2. Health Care
3. Iran/War on Terror
Now, when Gov. Romney starts speaking with some authority on these issues, i.e. providing real substantive answers, maybe he can start playing with the big boys in the polls.
March 22nd, 2007 at 8:14 pm
Like an idiot, I meant to say subconsciously.
March 22nd, 2007 at 9:33 pm
Geoff
Lets look at where Romney has offered up some plans:
1. McCain Feingold
2. Economic Growth and Leadership
3. 5 step plan to prevent a nuclear Iran
4. Romney’s idea to let foreign students who earn degrees in this nation stay after graduation, as offered up in the post above here.
5. Romney’s 10 piece platform which is beginning to take shape through his speeches and policy briefings.
6. Health Care, he his plan in Massachusetts shows the underlying principles he will use in a health care platform: free market approach with personal responsibility. It’s not expresley figured out yet, but I wouldn’t expect to at this stage in the game.
My challenge to you Geoff is to instead of trying to belittle the governor, come up with a candidate who has offered something more substantive than this. I am willing to wait wait. When you do I will be able to take this comment by yourself a little more seriously:
“Big Boy’s?” What is this “Karate Kid?”
March 22nd, 2007 at 9:36 pm
If one can’t tackle the problems of rescuing budgets and creating affordable health care in his own state, how can such person be competent to succeed with these endeavors on a federal level?
Romney has done both which should make him a formidable candidate.
March 22nd, 2007 at 9:41 pm
Geoff,
Romney supporters generally give Rudy credit where he is due w/r/t crime and welfare rolls. Cutting taxes too, with the caveat that he did it by loading NYC with twice as much debt as he provided tax cuts. In fact, it’s the record that people primarily cite when taking Giuliani to task, whereas quite a few people on this site make all sorts of character judgements about Romney based on no evidence, and often get their facts plain wrong. So I really have no idea what you’re talking about.
This is hilarious. I didn’t say anything of the sort. In fact, I don’t think cutting taxes (like Giuliani did in NYC by borrowing money) is nearly as impressive as providing affordable adequate health coverage (like Romney did in MA without raising taxes). If you’d like, pick something else…like Rudy’s reduction of welfare rolls. I was simply pointing out that you seem to be unwilling to give Romney credit for accomplishing something in MA, simply because the same exact program would not work on the national scale.
Geoff, just out of curiosity. Who are you supporting? Who’s your dog in the race?
March 22nd, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Sorry I realize my links on 2 and 3 are broken
2.
http://www.mittromney.com/News/Press-Releases/Detroit_Economic_Club_Excerpts
3.
http://www.mittromney.com/News/Press-Releases/Iran_Herzliya_Conference
I would also add his promise to restrain government spending:
http://www.mittromney.com/News/Press-Releases/Restraining_Government_Spending
March 22nd, 2007 at 11:14 pm
On Iran:
“First, we must continue tighten economic sanctions.”
-That’s precisely what the first round of UN sanctions aimed to do. However it was watered down severely by the Russians due to their interests at Bushehr. The upcoming second round of sanctions will also aim to tighten already existing economic sanctions on Iran.
“Second, we must impose diplomatic isolation of Iran’s Government.”
-As far as I can tell, that’s what we’ve been doing. We haven’t had diplomatic relations with Iran since the Revolution and we have been engaged in attempts to isolate Mr. Ahmedenejad ever since he took power. However, as with the Russians and the Chinese, states are sovereign actors and free to deal with who they wish.
“Third, Arab states must join this effort to prevent a nuclear Iran.”
Well, the fact that Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey have all recently announced that they will pursue “peaceful nuclear technology” tells me that they are very much involved in trying to create a viable Sunni nuclear deterrent. But, the recent meeting between Saudi King Abdullah and President Ahmendenejiad certainly helps.
Fourth, we must make it clear that while nuclearization may be a source of pride, it can also be a source of peril. The military option remains on the table.
-As stated by the Vice President about every 45 seconds, the military option is still very much on the table.
Fifth, our strategy should be integrated into a broader approach to the broader Muslim world.
-No offense to the Governor, but no duh! Its not like we’re just grabbing at straws.
My over all point is this: These are the 5 main points of Romney’s “Iran Plan”, that Romney fans on this site tout as “new and fresh”. Obviously, these are things we are already doing but he talks about it like he just thought about it.
To win in 2008 Republicans will need NEW, FRESH, INNOVATIVE answers to America’s biggest problems: Iraq, Iran, Health Care, College Tuition, Medicare. These are the things average Americans really care about. Continuing to talk about Americans being “over taxed and over regulated” and nominating judges who “wont legislate from the bench” doesn’t resonate with Joe six pack in Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, Michigan etc. etc.
March 22nd, 2007 at 11:21 pm
“My challenge to you Geoff is to instead of trying to belittle the governor, come up with a candidate who has offered something more substantive than this.”
It has nothing to do with belittling Governor Romney. Obviously, I’m not a fan, but questioning his statements, record, and proposed policies isn’t my idea of belittling. I just try and point out some real flaws in his policy proposals, Iran being the most obvious to anyone who reads a paper once a week.
Health Care is another story. Like I have said in the past, his Massachusetts plan is a starting point. I’m no Health Care expert, but providing 300 million people with affordable, market based packages is probably pretty hard.
But it just amazes me how Romney fans do nothing but drink the Kool-Aid. I mean, I have never heard Jason or Murphy or cwpete say anything criticizing Romney. You can’t just take whatever he says at face value. You have to challenge what candidates say at every turn and hold their feet to the fire. Even if it means burning your own guys feet. Because if you don’t, your just another party tool.
March 23rd, 2007 at 6:24 am
FIX the formatting and I’ll read it and comment
March 23rd, 2007 at 7:23 am
Gamecock,
The formatting comes out fine on my computer. I don’t know what to tell you.
Geoff,
You still haven’t come up with a candidate who has a more comprehensive plan.
The belittling is what you do with your karate Kid statements. Now, how about it? Tell me a candidate who has proposed anything, let alone something like what Romney has done.
March 23rd, 2007 at 2:48 pm
Great, let’s see US wages driven down even further without any job protections….DUH!