Michigan Votes Forum

You people have no shame, have you!!?? This a blatant effort to divert tax dollars to a partisan ideological union already identified as guilty of campaign contribution irregularities! Today we are watching SEIU-14 busloads of them - invade private property and terrorize the adolescent son of a banker as a method of intimidation obviously condoned by the Democratic Party! Two weeks ago, we watched the same type of 'union' cause the death of 3 bank employees by fire in Greece!! They baracaded the doors and set afire!! You people are guilty of TREASON!!

 I couldn't have said it better than the last post myself!

Enough, stop trying to steal our money!

Wonder how much the SEIU is throwing towards this democrat's political machine?  Will be interesting to read his political contribution disclosure in the future.  Hasn't the union machine killed enough jobs in Michigan?  Unions are no longer needed with all the EEO and Civil Rights laws already in the books.  All this bill will do is pad the SEIU's checkbook with the residents of Michigan writing the check.  The legacy costs of this bill will burden many future generations of this great state.  I'm sending my email notice to all in my contacts and hopefully they will do the same.  Want to bring Michigan back to where it was?  Two words - REMEMBER NOVEMBER!!

The time has come for all good men to pick up their arms and remove the tyrants that have taken over our Government. This bill is just another way of trying to get another 34,000 union votes in November. You that have been in charge have ursurped the authority that has been given to you, and you have sucked the lifeblood out of the people of Michigan. It is time to recover for Michigan and all of those that have been in charge should be tried for crimes against the people. You have forgotten that the people are the masters of the Constitution and we allow you to govern us. You forgot hat the laws are for the people and by the people. You have put big business before us. We are not going to forget this. WE ARE COMING FOR YOU NOVEMBER 2ND....... AMERICA IS RISING!

We the people, do want to be unionized. Get out of our pockets.

 SMC, I could not agree more. Well said. Our so called leaders in government think that they know better than you, and want to control your life. Smaller government, more freedom, and a promotion of greater personal responsibility. All of which our "leaders" are against, as they want to control our lives as if they are some kind of little god deserving of power over the people. A great resource to help fight our increasingly tyrannical government is at   www.patriotpost.us

Unions protect the working man and woman and give us voice. Only fools believe we can defend ourselves as individuals against the power of corporate America.

Any politician who supports this should be dragged out into the light of day for all their constituents to see who they "do business" with.  This is shameful robbery from powerless people caring for their loved ones and the citizens of the state of Michigan.

And just exactly how does a union "protect" people from the big bad corporations?   Last time I looked, all the unions in this country do now is protect the jobs of union staff and leaders.  Oh sure, once and awhile a union will save the job of a regular rank and file member for appearance sake.

I'd like to see an independent poll of union members to see how many union workers in the private sector feel their union does one d@mn thing for them.  And I'd love to see that same poll of these personal assistants!  ha! 

Unions "protect" workers by giving them a collective voice to bargain for better working conditions, better wages, and the respect they deserve. Unions played a major role in establishing Unemployment Insurance, Workmen's Compensation, Social Security, and Civil Rights. The middle class has thrived in this nation, (until recently) in good part because of unions.

I'd like to see a poll of union members also, especially here in Michigan, where the UAW workers were the envy of workers around the world for better than 60 years, until bad management and globilization destroyed the local auto industry.

So what have unions done for anyone (besides their officers and staff) lately?  Is that the best you have?  A list of social programs established fifty or more years ago with tangential union support?    Can you discuss the merits of this legislation without resorting to the tired old union talking points that have no basis in fact?

The "middle class" thrived in this country during a period of expansive industrial growth post WWII when the rest of the world was either still developing, still in conflict or rebuilding and the US worker had no global competition.  In other words, unions thrived because the US economy could sustain ever higher wages and benefits.  Crediting union leaders for the growth of the middle class is like crediting the fleas for a well fed dog.  

I believe we are all aware of what unions claim to do for their members -- collectively bargain for better working conditions, wages, benefits -- the question is if they actually follow through on those claims TODAY.  As for respect -- few employers out there disrespect their workers the way the typical union staffer or officer disrespects union members.  Respect?  How does one feel more "respected" if after paying hundreds a year in dues you can't even get a phone call returned and have no control or idea how your dues dollars are being spent?  How respected do you feel when you find out your hard earned dues dollars are being spent on lavish parties, 100K+ no nothing executive toadies and cronies and PR campaigns?   How does one feel "respected" to be forced to join and support a radical political organization in order to keep one's job or receive state support for caring for a loved one?  

Yeah, I'd like to see that union member poll, UAW included.... starting with the day care workers.  

Which begs another question -- how are the dues collected from day care workers and home personal assistants being spent on them?  IF they don't need business reps and don't file grievances....and most of them don't even know they're in a union ... how are those dues being spent?  Where are they going and for what?  

BarbaraBrown:

A list of social programs established fifty or more years ago with tangential union support?    Can you discuss the merits of this legislation without resorting to the tired old union talking points that have no basis in fact?

Can you discuss and explain your objection to this legislation without condemning all unions? And that list of social programs is pretty important to a large segment of our population. Unions had much more than a tangential part in establishing them.

The middle class thrived post WWII because of unions. Being employed in a thriving economy is no guarantee of a thriving middle class. China being a good example. No unions, no middle class.

BarbaraBrown:

 As for respect -- few employers out there disrespect their workers the way the typical union staffer or officer disrespects union members.

Seems to be a habit, your generalizations and anecdotes. Tell me how much the Massey Corporation and BP respected their workers. The ones who died because of the companies policies of profits over safety.

BarbaraBrown:

How does one feel "respected" to be forced to join and support a radical political organization in order to keep one's job or receive state support for caring for a loved one?  

No one is forced to join a union, or support a political organization, radical or otherwise. That is patently untrue. Union dues are used to fund the unions efforts to represent it's members at the bargaining table. The benefits won at the bargaining table far outweigh the price of dues.

China?!  Here's a thought -- China has no middle class because it's not a free market capitalist economy, the GOVERNMENT owns everything and that government is totalitarian.  Seriously, China?!  How ignorant are you of basic economics?

And let me be certain I understand -- you are generalizing that because SOME corporations and companies endanger their workforce then therefore ALL workers must be protected from their evil employers by benevolent union bosses?

And oh please stop with the garbage about union dues ONLY going to represent workers at the bargaining table!  Seriously, are you that poorly informed or that bald-faced a liar?  You and I both know that when organizers are knocking doors for candidates all their expenses -- hotels, cars, gas, salaries, per diems -- are reported as "representational activity".  You and I both know that at least 70% of any unions man hours, administrative costs and overhead are going towards political action and the other 30% to actually representing members.  You and I both know that no one measures a business rep's performance by how well they negotiate a contract (unless they get political donation check off written in!) or how many jobs they saved with the grievance process.  No, reps are evaluated by how many political donation cards they drag in and how many workers they turn out for political phone banks and every rep is reported as 100% "representational."

your lies might work on those who don't understand how unions really work but they surely won't work on anyone who does! 

As for dues versus benefits gained in bargaining -- well, that would depend on the union and the contract.  So, what are these personal care workers getting for their six million bucks?

Hey, here's a thought -- why don't you and all your union buddies go over to China and unionize them?  Sounds like they need the whole middle class thing way more than Michiganders.  Besides, with the highest union percentage in the country, why should we be selfish with all the union goodness?  Shouldn't it be spread around?  

And on that middle class thingee you're all so proud to take credit for -- where do you figure small business owners and independent contractors and non-union professionals fit in there?  Do we ALL have unions to thank for our middle class life styles?  Because I'm a small business owner and I make about as much as a union plumber...so I was just wondering how that all works....

Maybe small business owners need a union!  Oh wait...you guys are already on that, aren't you.... whereever you can con someone else out of their hard earned dollar...

Oh yes, and I can discuss why I object to this legislation without condemning all unions.

1. these are not employees of the state or any state agency.  The state says they aren't, the agencies the unions "bargain" with say they are not.  These are independent contractors who are "employed" by their clients/customers.

2. only a small fraction of these people "voted" for their union contract.  A larger number signed a card saying they wanted a union with no one witnessing their signatures, no information from an employer and no opportunity for debate.  

3.  unlike a traditional union, these people have no opportunity to decertify their union because they have no common work site in which to exchange their views or dissatisfaction with their union.  In reality they are being held captive to a "vote" they cannot amend.

4. There is no evidence that even a small percentage of their dues are going towards enforcing or bargaining their "contract".

5. This legislation was written by the unions only to benefit these unions with a state government that they politically control.  The taxpayers (or "employers") will have no ability to rescind this set-up once these unions have been "codified" even when a different governor is elected. This is a naked attempt to cement these union funding streams in place so no matter what the unions will get their "dues"".  

So, the House snuck this through yesterday doing the bidding of leftist radical SEIU.  Now the state is one step closer to making permanent the siphoning off of almost 7 million a year in tax dollar to a union so it can then turn that money around and buy more Lansing politicians with it -- money that was originally intended to provide for poor families taking care of disabled loved one.   Not to mention the few million dollars the state will waste on a useless shell agency, the MQCCC, that exists only as a cover for the movement of that money from the DHS budget to SEIU.

SEIU has duped the AARP and disability groups with phony "white papers"  into supporting this legislation, or bought them off with back door donations.

Here we all are struggling to keep the state afloat and the House is authorizing close to 10 million a year only to fatten up some union wallets.  It should be criminal and anyone who voted for this should become a target for conservative forces in the fall.  

 Jason Allen's Senate Bill still lives on in the "House". He sold these people out for a lousy $2000 campaign contribution from the SEIU. Now he thinks he deserves a promotion to US Congress. He and his kind actually think we are too ignorant to see what they are doing to us. Let's prove them wrong at the ballot box !!!

OK, so I read a bunch of the hyperbole and other rhetoric being thrown around on this website ... then I went to michiganlegislature.org and looked up the House Analysis of this bill ... then I actually downloaded a copy of the bill and (novel thought) read it. I suggest many of you do that.  NO WHERE in the bill does it say anything about unionizing workers, "authorizing unionization" of workers and that sort of thing.  Guess I'm confused as to where Mackinac Center (which runs Michigan Votes) is getting its information.  The bill talks more about a registry and other things to benefit seniors.  If this site is supposedly supposed to give people ACCURATE information -- then why is it misleading people about this legislation.

Don't just believe the hype (on either side) -- go to michiganlegislature.org and read the bill for yourself people!

I read the bill and it doesn't say anything about unions. I hate when people from the far right and far left try to confused "AVERAGE VOTERS." This bill will help seniors who receive homecare, and it has nothing to do with unions. Maybe you people should READ THE BILL!!!

Don't believe the union staffers who are now swarming this thread -- legally this bill makes permanent the MQCCC so it can continue to function as the "employer" in the union "contract" with SEIU that allows "dues" to be deducted from personal assistants' checks.  If the MQCCC is not made permanent in this way it will be a simple stroke of the pen for the next Republican governor to do away with the MQCCC and with it the union "contract".    That's why this has all suddenly become so urgent this year, to protect the MQCCC scam once it's fairy god mother Granholm is out of office.  

THAT WHY there is so much language in it about the MQCCC being able to make contracts!  As far as the AARP and the rest they are being DUPED into supporting this with the same straw man arguments stated above -- that this is all just about improving care.  The entire unionization angle/scam is hidden but it's still there! 

 I don't know a lot about politics but I do know a lot about home care and I know you're sounding more and more like a paranoid conspiracy theorist. I know for a fact home care workers had a chance to vote because I filled out a ballot and mailed it in! Not sure how you call that being forced...and also, I didn't know the first thing about home care when I got started. All I knew was that my dad needed someone to care for him and that I needed a steady income. The MQCCC helped me get training and learn more about the field I was getting into - doesn't sound much like a shell corporation to me.

 Barbara's right that there is a lot of urgency for this bill.  In the last few years, Michigan has eliminated the single point of entry, the office of long term care supports and many other programs to help people stay in their homes.  We need this bill so that no politician can take away anymore from people like my sister.  I'm glad that the AARP and others are supporting this bill.  We need to make sure that our rights can't be taken away with "the simple stroke of the pen."

Spent some more time digging on this ... found references that one of the main folks opposing this bill are something called the Michigan chapter of the National Private Duty Association.   Had to spend some more time to figure out who they are: owners of private home care agencies. 

Now I'm starting to get the drift on this. 

The Home Help program is, no doubt, big bucks -- and expected to be even more.  Problem is, the way the program seems to be set up now ... folks get to choose whomever they want.  Under private agencies, they "assign" you someone.  Big difference.

I'm thinking this whole opposition is just a big smokescreen on behalf of these Private Duty folks to swoop in and take away people's rights, and ride off into the sunset with a lot of cash in their pockets.

Like I said in my first post: check the facts yourself.  Profiteers come in a lot of forms.

First off I find it fascinating how suddenly three new forum members, one supposed care giver, one supposed grateful relative and one supposed concerned citizen all found this thread, almost like they worked together or something.  Weird.

No one is arguing that these care givers had a CHANCE to vote, the question is how fair and democratic was the election.  And mail in elections are notoriously easy to fix, especially when the issue up for consideration is running unopposed!  Tell me this, Sara.  When you were making your decision on how do vote did you speak to anyone representing a "vote no" point of view?  Did you receive any "vote no" information in the mail?  Did you have the opportunity to talk together as a group with your fellow care takers about this without a union person present?

You say the MQCCC helped you get trained -- where?  when?  and how many other people were in your class?

Whoa, hold on there Indy.  Sounds like you might be confused about your "rights".  None of us has the "right" to a government program.  ( even the one's that actually do something with our tax money besides funnel it to a union!)  And this bill doesn't protect your sister's benefits or the Medicaid budget or any other programs that directly benefit your sister.  This bill only protects the MQCCC. (so it can keep functioning as an "employer" to collect "dues" to send to the "union")  

So help me out here -- do you know the annual operating budget of the MQCCC?   Can you share with us the specific services provided by the MQCCC?  Can you share with us exactly how many people have taken advantage of these services?    Can you help us understand what percentage of even the dues paying "members" of this "union" have ever received any service from the MQCCC?  Do you think 5%?  10%?  Has any INDEPENDENT organization (one not associate with the union or the governor's office) ever done a cost analysis of the MQCCC to see if there might be a more effective use of the money spent to operate it?

Because the tax payers of Michigan might want to do the math on this one, like exactly what are they getting for the money spent on the MQCCC.

Hey SV, sounds like you and Indy there share some similar confusion about your "rights".  I guess being smart and/or independent can still leave one a little misinformed.   To be clear on this -- GOVERNMENT SERVICES ARE NOT A RIGHT although many people do seem to confuse rights and a sense of entitlement to more and more government programs!

And I'm not quite sure I understand how private duty home care businesses are taking away your rights by providing a service that places a pre-screened, fully trained home care aides in a client's home -- a full-time professional home care aide with health care insurance, a retirement plan and paid time off.  And any reputable home care business works hard to fit their employees to their clients and the client can most definitely still choose their home aide!  

So I guess my first question would be (as with any government program) who would do all the wonderful things outlined in this bill (training, mentoring, registration, retention)  more cheaply and better?  Business?  Non-profits?  Oh, I see.  The government.  

 And nothing about this legislation even demands the MQCCC  do any of those things to keep its funding, it only says it can.  So just what we need in Michigan -- another office full of state employees run by a board of cronies accountable to (gulp) the governor with a mandate to do nothing but spend tax payers' money and sign contracts.  

Sec. 9. (1)  

"(f) Subject to legislative authorization and department

implementation, establish the wages and other economic benefits of

providers."

and

  Sec. 8. (1)

"(f) Make and enter into contracts, agreements, or instruments

necessary, incidental, or convenient to the performance of its

duties and execution of its powers, duties, and jurisdictions under

this act with any federal, state, local, or intergovernmental

government agency or with any other person or entity, public or

private, upon terms and conditions acceptable to the council.

     (g) Solicit, receive, and accept gifts, grants, labor, loans,

contributions of money, property, or other things of value, and

other aid or payment from any federal, state, local, or

intergovernmental government agency or from any other person or

entity, public or private, upon terms and conditions acceptable to

the council, or participate in any other way in a federal, state,

local, or intergovernmental government program."

 Thanks for the comments "Barbara".  I guess I don't know the answers to your questions.  Here's what I do know.  My sister deserves good care (yes I'd even say she has a right to it).  I guess the taxpayers of Michigan would be glad to know that she doesn't cost the state more money by going to a nursing home.  I am glad that she gets the care she needs delivered by someone she chooses.  I guess I'm just an average person that doesn't have the time to sit on blogs all day I just know that over and over again both Democrats and Republicans always cut services to the disabled and I'm kinda tired of it.

It seems like you have a personal interest in this too.  Do you stand to profit from this in some way?

Wow Barbara, you seem to know a lot about the private home care agency world ... hmmmmm.  Me too.

Actually, when I talk of rights -- I was talking about the right to choose who comes into your home and puts their hands on you in providing care.  That, to me, seems like a basic right -- and one that doesn't always get preserved when you're talking about home care agencies and the way they operate by "assigning" people to homes and such.

You seem to try and claim that home care agencies provide their services cheaper and better ... but some questions for others to consider: 1.) If it's so much cheaper and better, than why are home care agencies paid twice as much per hour as individuals providing the same kind of care?   2.) What is the premiums or overhead that home care agency owners skim off that money (many times Medicaid or Medicare -- the same kind of government dollars Barbara rails against)?   3.) Why are there virtually no regulations that dictate how these home care agencies operate when it comes to reporting on the quality of the care they provide?  

I'm not saying government is the answer necessarily in all cases -- but for Barbara to try and claim that private home care agencies, whose sole focus is profit and largely operate outside of any oversight, is ... that just doesn't pass the smell test, folks.

I'm not sure how this particular bill addresses any of your concerns.  It doesn't protect cuts in services to the disabled, it doesn't even guarantee the pay of those who take care of them!    And how does it prevent your sister from getting the care she needs in her own home from the person of her choice?  If she knows someone she wants to care for her then she can just hire that person to care for her and Medicaid will pay them.  And if she doesn't know someone she'd like to care for her, she can call up a private agency and they can send out professionals to care for her until she finds someone she's comfortable with.

I don't see how another government agency, that pulls money from the tax dollars set aside to help the less fortunate would help your sister.  Should the cost of this program come from a tax increase?  Or should DHS cut back or eliminate another program?  Do you have any suggestions for how to PAY FOR a new government agency?  

As for my personal interest in this, I'm mad as hell that in order to provide care for others I have to belong to a union.  The MQCCC is not my employer, I'm hired and fired and paid by the families that hire me to take care of their family members.  I didn't ask for a union, I don't believe in unions, I don't need or want a union, this union isn't going to get my job back if a client unfairly let's me go and the "election" was totally rigged.   And I'm mad as hell that money owed to me is going to SEIU and it's leftwing political agenda.  And I'm a TAX PAYER and BUSINESSWOMAN who resents all your attacks here on small business like mine!  

So I educated myself on this and I'm going to fight like hell against this scam being pulled on Michigan taxpayers! 

PEOPLE CAN CHOOSE WHO COMES INTO THEIR HOME TO CARE FOR THEM NOW WITHOUT THIS BILL, CAN'T THEY?  People can hire their family or friends to care for them, just like they have decades, and Medicaid will pay for it.  Now THAT'S freedom to chose.  What this bill is setting up is a government run registry where if you want to care for your family member you will have to register with the MQCCC and ask the state's permission to care for your own child!  This is just more Big Government, more government intrusion in our private affairs, more SEIU leftist meddling in our private lives.  

Home care agencies, to start, are insured so in the event of an accident the patient is covered.  They also provide health care insurance and workerman's comp for their employees who also qualify for unemployment benefits.  In other words, home care agencies are EMPLOYERS who provide JOBS and being a responsible employer costs more than independent providers, UNTIL YOU FACTOR IN THE COST OF EXTRA GOVERNMENT.  

As for regulations of the industry I would like to see that myself to prevent fly by night outfits from undercutting and taking away patients from legitimate business like my own.  I don't see how this bill does that.  

And I'm very offended for how you categorize all the small business owners like myself.  We provide these much needed services because we CARE FOR PEOPLE.  I have a successful business but I'm not getting rich off it!  But I do get a lot of satisfaction from helping others.   And I shouldn't have to join a union to continue to keep my business!  This is all outrageous!  

This bill could force us onto a GOVERNMENT RUN REGISTRY if we want to care for a family member in our homes!  This is an outrage!  

 This registry does not FORCE people to register to provide care.  This registry was created years ago to help those that NEED it choose the right provider.  Sadly, not everyone has loved ones that are able to care for them.  That's why we have this registry, that way people can find the right match for them.  This is good PUBLIC policy created by we the people.  It's about FREEDOM to stay in our homes and FREEDOM to choose our providers.  I am glad we have the registry.

Do we really need a new expensive state agency right now just to run a registry?   Wouldn't a charity or health care organization do a better job of helping people find the right provider than the government?    

Let me be sure I have this right -- you want the taxpayers to permanently fund a new state agency to maintain a registry that already exists?   And the sole purpose of this registry is for the government to help those who need a home help aide to find one?  

Is this some new function of government?  Creating "registries" to match service providers with people looking for a particular service?  So what's next -- state run "registries" to help people find the "right match" in a dentist or a lawyer?    

 Read all the comments, interesting.....I personally talked to Jason Allen regarding this bill.  He claims innocence regarding the forced unionization of home healthcare workers, but then turned around and said that that "language" had been removed from the bill....yeah right.  Since most of you claim to have read the bill and understand it (again yeah right) then explain to me the last secton of that bill...Mr. Allen couldn't....I asked him, read it to him again, asked again, read it to him, yet again and he still did not know what the heck was wrote (intentionally broad, vague and open to interpretation to those "in power").

Barbara and others who wrote in against this bill, you are correct this was a "forced unionization" coup, having the state of MI set up another "dummy corporation" to collect those 6 million plus union dues from the home care workers (most of those workers receive their pay from the State which means, your money, my money will be filling those union caufers.) Well SEIU, we've got your number and guess what? Your buddy Allen will be looking for a private job after November because he won't win the seat to be our Congressman. He is a career politician who takes money from SEIU and others and hides his donations in his multiple accounts. The rest of you SEIU members writing in support for this bill, you are nothing but sheeple following the socialist agenda set forth within your union.

The SEIU has already scammed the state out of $30M!  It has been collecting $7M a year since 2005 through this MQCCC scam -- money allocated for helping the disabled that the SEIU uses only to buy more "helpful" politicians like Allen!  (and push through more scams like this in the future I'm sure)

Hey Robin!  Thanks for confronting Allen on this bill.  Garcia did the same thing -- he was all for forced unionization of private contractors (and another useless government agency) before he was against it.  And as long as only the unions know about all this those are the only calls the politicians are getting.  I'm sure they have union people calling up members scaring them into believing that without this bill they will lose all their pay.   My friend who is in day care got a call about all this last week.

Thats why we all need to get the word out somehow on what these bills are really about!  We need to be pressuring our state senators! 

The only reason they are pushing this bill now is because if (when I hope!) a Republican becomes governor in January he will do away with the MQCCC and the MHBCCC.  (The MHBCCC is the other union created shell state agency that serves as the signer on a UAW/AFSME "contract" to authorizes dues collection from day care providers. )   Between the two scam agencies and the dues deductions, this unionization scam is already costing Michigan taxpayers over $20M a year and growing.

 Sorry Barbara.  I keep reading this bill (the actual bill) and it does not say anything about anything that you're talking about.  I think that a registry, training and all of the other good stuff in this bill is needed.  You may not but you should argue the facts of the bill not your own personal agenda.  Just sayin.

Sure.  Let's pretend for a moment that this isn't really about forced unionization and the siphoning off of tax payer dollars to a union so it can push it's radical leftist ideology.   Let's pretend this is just about a registry and training personal home aides as you say.

So, in this economy, you want to create a new state agency with twenty or so employees, and an office space and other overhead, for the purpose of creating a registry so Medicaid recipients who need help in their homes and who don't know someone already who can provide that care for them can get a referral?  Do I have that right?  And you also think it's the tax payers responsibility to train those aides when there are private companies in place already able to do that?  

And you think that's a good use of tax dollar right now?  While we are laying off state troopers and talking about early prison release, cutting back on everything and higher taxes already?  While the state is going bankrupt you think we should pay for a new government program that could just as easily be set up with the United Way or some other disability group?  

Have you seen this article?  http://www.mackinac.org/13138  Notice how the private sector has lost 70 times more jobs during this recession than the public sector in Michigan.    And you want to make government bigger?  

 It makes sense now Barbara.  You seriously just referenced a Mackinac Center policy paper (it's not an article)? So now we know where you're coming from.  Please use real data when making arguments and not thier propoganda.  These guys that run that place are ripping off Michigan taxpayers everyday.  I got no use for businessmen that hide their agenda behind "policy center".  We may not agree on this issue but we should all agree not to use talking points when making our arguments.