Card Check

Because it is very difficult for workers to form a union by going through the NRLB election process, the UAW and other unions now use an alternative technique known as “card-check recognition.” Under card check, the employer voluntarily agrees to recognize the union if the union presents signed union authorization cards from a majority of workers. In most instances, the authorization cards are validated by an outside person, such as an arbitrator or religious leader.

from the UAW’s Labor Law

Here’s another reform that seems minor to most– except those who don’t want workers to have any power– but that might make a huge difference in shifting the balance of power away from corporations. It’s also an example of how large-scale changes in the world– the decline in unionization in the United States– can be dependent on very small factors.

Actually, it’s not one small factor that led to the decline of unions, but many small factors. Among the most important, though, you would have to include the myriad of ways that it became increasingly difficult and complex to vote for a union at your workplace. As usual with the right wing, this ongoing attack on the things ordinary people need and want– good wages, health care, freedom of speech– is couched in the usual Orwellian patriotism.

The idea, generally, is that the less organized we are the more powerful we become. War is peace, too. Card check laws try to turn that around in a small way. Keep an eye on the (unfortunately named) Employee Free Choice Act, which, if it passes, might be a sign that things are turning a bit away from the bosses.

Mark Shuttleworth & Ubuntu

Ubuntu is a complete Linux-based operating system, freely available with both community and professional support. It is developed by a large community and we invite you to participate too!

The Ubuntu community is built on the ideas enshrined in the Ubuntu Philosophy: that software should be available free of charge, that software tools should be usable by people in their local language and despite any disabilities, and that people should have the freedom to customise and alter their software in whatever way they see fit.

These freedoms make Ubuntu fundamentally different from traditional proprietary software: not only are the tools you need available free of charge, you have the right to modify your software until it works the way you want it to.

from the Ubuntuwebsite.

Corporate Personhood

The directors of such [joint-stock] companies, however, being the managers rather of other people’s money than of their own, it cannot well be expected, that they should watch over it with the same anxious vigilance with which the partners in a private copartnery frequently watch over their own…. Negligence and profusion, therefore, must always prevail, more or less, in the management of the affairs of such a company.

Adam Smith, from the Wealth of Nations, as quoted in the Wikipedia entry, Corporations.

Giant corporations govern, even though they are mentioned nowhere in our Constitution or Bill of Rights. So when corporations govern, democracy is nowhere to be found. There is something else: when people live in a culture defined by corporate values, common sense evaporates. We stop trusting our own eyes, ears, and feelings. Our minds become colonized.

From the Program on Corporations, Law, and Democracy

Ideas about reform, like anything, go through fads and criticisms of corporations are becoming more common. It may well be that this is an artifact related to the usual Democratic Party populist rhetoric. It is interesting, though, to consider the kinds of reform that might have a lasting impact.

The Program on Corporations, Law, and Democracy has a good idea: deny corporations the legal personhood that is at the root of their power. Most people would probably be surprised to learn that over the last century courts in the United States have ruled that corporations have rights under the 1st and the 14th amendments.

The 1st amendment grants (corporations) the right to freedom of speech and assembly; the 14th covers (corporate) citizenship. (You can review the constitution here).

Health Care and the Campaign

Edwards Takes the Lead on Health Care

John Edwards jumped ahead of the other designated major candidates in proposing a detailed plan to get to universal coverage. (Representative Dennis Kucinich has put forward a universal Medicare plan, but the media have largely opted to ignore his candidacy.)

This is a serious plan. What I find most interesting (agreeing with Paul Krugman) is the proposal to create a public Medicare type system that any individual or employer can buy into. [Cheap political advice for the Edwards campaign: hype this item to the moon as a small business friendly proposal. Small businesses hate to deal with insurers who can raise their premiums by ridiculous amounts, especially if one of their workers develops a serious illness.] This sets up a head to head competition between the public system and private insurers. We should all benefit from this sort of competition.

–Dean Baker, American Prospect

I wanted to include this because I am feeling cautiously hopeful that, whatever else might happen, the next presidential cycle may well put single payer health care back on the national agenda. We are arguably about three or four decades behind the rest of the industrialized world on this issue, and the range of parties who would benefit ranges from the very poorest to the largest corporations.

So you would think that this is a no-brainier for both Republican and Democrat. One problem is that the idea of a single payer plan counters the myth of the efficiency of the private sector. “Streamlining payment though a single nonprofit payer,” Physicians for a National Health Program has notes, “would save more than $350 billion per year, enough to provide comprehensive, high-quality coverage for all Americans.”

What’s creepy, of course, is that the current neo-conservative brand of Republican seems too utterly disconnected from economic and social reality to get this, as the recent budget proposal indicates. “A consensus is developing among politically and ideologically diverse organizations and policymakers that all children should have health coverage,” writes Dave Lemmon of Families USA. “Not only is the President clearly out of step, but he is heading in the wrong direction.” Senators Clinton and O’Bama take note.