Boeing vs. the NLRB: A Naked Power Grab by Radical Pro-Unionists

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) contends that President Obama’s chief of staff, Bill Daley, threatened and made coercive statements against Boeing employees.

You haven’t heard about these charges?

Daley was on Boeing’s board of directors when the company unanimously decided to open up a second assembly line for the 787 Dreamliner in Charleston, S.C. The NLRB argues this illegally violated the rights of Boeing’s unionized employees. The complaint against Boeing thus implicates Daley in any supposed wrongdoing — although the mainstream media has avoided mentioning this.

Of course, anyone familiar with the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) will tell you that the NLRB’s charges have no merit. Daley would have never got past White House vetting otherwise.

In short, Boeing made a legal business decision that unions opposed, and the NLRB is using this as a pretext to unlawfully expand its power.

Read the rest of this article at Pajamas Media.

A Short Response to the Innovation Ohio Report

“Ohio Teachers and Collective Bargaining: An Analysis”

By Matt A. Mayer, President of Buckeye Institute

First, we welcome Innovation Ohio to the public policy debate. Innovation Ohio joins the existing pack of progressive think tanks-Policy Matters Ohio, ProgressOhio, the Center for Community Solutions, Economic Policy Institute, and the Center for Working Class Studies-advocating for the same set of policies for Ohio. We will continue to do our best to keep up with these groups.

Next, we are perplexed that Innovation Ohio (and the Ohio Education Association), given the report?s findings that teachers make more outside of collective bargaining, does not support Senate Bill 5. Specifically, the report found that “the BLS data reveal that the more states erode teachers? rights to collectively bargain, the more it likely will lead, on average, to higher salary increases.” Perhaps they believe teachers would rather have more process than higher pay.

Finally, the report found that “Ohio?s kindergarten, elementary, middle school and high school teachers saw their salaries, on average, drop 3.8% between 2008 and 2009.” This finding, based upon a limited national survey, conflicts with the more comprehensive school district data from the Ohio Department of Education.1 The ODE data shows that, instead of pay cuts, teachers across Ohio saw their median pay increase from 2008 ($49,951.40) to 2009 ($50,557.50) by $606.00, or 1.2 percent. Ohio teachers? median pay rose even higher from 2009 to 2010 ($52,001.00), as the median pay jumped by $1,443.50, or 2.9 percent.

As the financial projections of the 613 school districts show, by 2015, 91 percent of Ohio?s school districts will reach severe deficits. Compensation packages will swallow 96 percent of projected revenues. With local taxes already high, homeowners across Ohio likely will not support increased operational tax levies. We look forward to seeing our friends on the left and the OEA provide solutions to this mounting crisis. For a district-by-district financial review, please see the easy-to-read charts at buckeyeinstitute.org/reports/school-districts.

1 Ohio Department of Education, District Data – Teacher Information 2008-2010, Interactive Local

Report Card Home (accessed on February 28, 2011) available at lrc.ode.state.oh.us/Downloads.asp.

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!

Poverty the Cause of Serious Emotional and Behavioral Problems Among Children?

During 2004-2009, approximately 5.1% of all U.S. children aged 4-17 years were reported by parents as having serious emotional or behavioral difficulties. Across all age groups, poor children (i.e., those living in families with incomes <100% of the poverty level) more often were reported to have serious emotional or behavioral difficulties compared with the most affluent children (i.e., those living in families with incomes ?400% of the poverty level). For example, among children aged 11–14 years, approximately 9.3% of poor children were reported by parents to have serious difficulties, compared with 3.5% of the most affluent children. (CDC, May 6, 2011)

Supporting the statistics above is research published in the American Journal of Preventative Medicine. The multi-author report titled “Effectiveness of Universal School-Based Programs to Prevent Violent and Aggressive Behavior” stated the following:

“Over the last 25 years, youths aged 10 to 17 years, who constitute less than 12% of the population, have been involved as offenders in approximately 25% of serious violent victimizations.[3] Homicide and suicide, respectively, are the fourth and fifth leading causes of death among children aged 5 to 14 years, and the second and third leading causes of death among people aged 15 to 24 years.[4]

“Risk factors for youth violence include low socioeconomic status (SES), poor parental supervision, harsh and erratic discipline, and delinquent peers.[5] Delinquent youths commonly have other problems as well,[6] including drug abuse, difficulties at school, and mental health problems (as indicated by being in the top 10% of the distribution of externalizing and internalizing symptoms in the Child Behavior Checklist[7]). These youths are threats not only for the direct harm they may cause, but also because they may play roles in the socialization of other potential delinquents.[8]”

Yet, the Columbine High School massacre was perpetrated by youth from upper-middle class backgrounds. So were many other youth who killed their peers. The same was true of those Arab-Muslims who perpetrated the 9-11 attack. Growing up in a violent drug culture will obviously influence a child’s emotions and behavior and school programs may help prevent some children from succumbing to it. However, it is parents, relatives and close family friends who have the strongest influence.

If society would reform the political economy for the common good, most poor families would no longer be poor. Emotional and/or behavioral problems resulting from financially induced stress of many parents would wane. The emotional and behavioral problems of many children would subside as well. Even though economic status is not really the answer to those problems, alleviating stress related issues is at least part of the solution.

Liberals seem to see welfare socialism as the needed reform, and conservatives see less government bureaucracy that comes with welfare and more free market initiatives as the appropriate reform. It is doubtful that either have the right solution.

Planned Parenthood Ignores Fetal Pain; Goes After Personhood Amendments

Planned Parenthood and the ACLU have filed an appeal to the State Supreme Court against Mississippi’s Personhood Amendment, Amendment 26, despite numerous rulings against them.

In July of 2010, Planned Parenthood and the ACLU filed suit to disallow Mississippi voters from voting on the Mississippi Personhood Amendment. In October, the lawsuit was rejected. The Court decision read “Initiative Measure No. 26 has received more than the required amount of signatures to be placed on the ballot and the Constitution recognizes the right of citizens to amend their Constitution.”

Now Planned Parenthood and the ACLU have appealed to the State Supreme Court, a decision made especially conspicuous by Planned Parenthood’s recent refusal to challenge various “Fetal Pain” bills. According to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, one abortion in 2010 would have been prevented by the Fetal Pain bill. By contrast, Mississippi’s Personhood Amendment 26 would make all abortion illegal by recognizing the personhood rights, first and foremost the constitutional right to life of all children, born and preborn.

This is not the first time that the ACLU and Planned Parenthood have tried to stop Personhood USA – numerous lawsuits have been filed, albeit largely unsuccessfully, in an attempt to stop Personhood USA and its state affiliates.

“Of course we expect Planned Parenthood and the ACLU to continue their unholy alliance in attacking personhood bills and amendments,” explained Keith Mason, cofounder of Personhood USA. “They are terrified that abortion will be made illegal. Planned Parenthood, with the help of the ACLU, is fighting for their ‘right’ to kill children for profit.”

Personhood Amendment 26 states, “The term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.”

“Personhood Amendments and bills nationwide merely recognize that all human beings are people,” continued Mason. “Recognizing that all human beings have rights is a sentiment the ACLU should be fighting FOR, not against. Instead, the ACLU has teamed up with Planned Parenthood to ensure that Planned Parenthood’s deep pockets are protected. It is outrageous that the billion dollar abortion industry’s bottom line is more important to them than over one million innocent human lives taken every year by abortion.”

Personhood USA’s amendments and bills recognize that every human being is a person, and every person has a right to life. Personhood amendments and bills protect every child, no matter their size or age.

Visit the Personhood USA website to learn more about its mission and Petition to the Ohio Legislature.

Ohio Case Roe v. Planned Parenthood is Resolved — What is There to Hide?

Life Legal Defense Foundation (LLDF) is pleased to announce that the Ohio case, Roe v. Planned Parenthood, Case No. A0502691, Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas, has been “resolved and dismissed,” according to a statement by the attorney for the plaintiffs, Brian Hurley (Crabbe, Brown & James LLP).

Resolution of the case comes just months after a major blow to Planned Parenthood’s (PP) defense on the applicability of Ohio’s informed consent statute. Judge Jody Luebbers ruled that the doctor for PP of Southwest Ohio breached her legal duty by not having an “informed consent” meeting with Jane Roe 24 hours in advance of her abortion, and by failing to obtain written informed consent from Jane and at least one of her parents since Jane was a minor at the time.

In addition to the lack of informed consent, the plaintiffs sought compensatory and punitive damages against PP for failure to comply with their statutory duty to inform Jane Roe’s parents of her intended abortion. Jane, at age 14, had been impregnated by her 21-year-old soccer coach, also the man who brought her in for the abortion. Instead of notifying Jane’s parents, as required by Ohio law, PP phoned the sexual predator. PP’s failure to notify Roe’s parents and to gain informed consent resulted in Jane not only undergoing the abortion, but also in the continued cover-up of the sexual abuse, demonstrating a disturbing trend in PP clinics: disregard for the health and wellbeing of women and children.

“Resolution of this case must have been an act of desperation on the part of PP,” states Dana Cody, LLDF’s President and Executive Director. “They went, in a matter of months, from litigating every inch of their defense to a sudden willingness to resolve the matter. I would speculate that had PP gone to trial there would have been too much exposure of how they do business. After all, they are currently experiencing public outrage over their apparent willingness to cover up the sexual exploitation of children. What more might they have to hide?”

LLDF commends Brian Hurley for his tremendous work on Roe. His diligence and perseverance continues in another Ohio case, Fairbanks v. Planned Parenthood, case no. A0901484, Hamilton County, Ohio, where Mr. Hurley is representing Denise Fairbanks. The claims include PP’s failure to report statutory rape by Ms. Fairbanks’ father when at age 16 she was taken to PP for an abortion. The complaint states that although she informed PP staff of the abuse, they did not report to local law enforcement, and for more than a year she continued to suffer abuse that PP could have prevented by simply complying with the law.

Life Legal Defense Foundation was established in 1989, and is a nonprofit public interest law firm composed of attorneys and other concerned citizens, committed to the sanctity of human life. LLDF provided support for Jane Roe’s case and continues to provide assistance in Ms. Fairbanks case.

Source: Christian Newswire, April 27, 2011.

Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack to Address Area Tea Party Tomorrow Night

Miami County Liberty presents former Graham County Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack. sheriff mack will be speaking tomorrow May 10 starting at 7 p.m. at Club 55, 845 West Market Street in Troy, Ohio. Everyone is welcome and admission is free.

Some topics Sheriff Mack will be speaking about are:

* Rights the Constitution actually guarantee
* Importance of not allowing our means of self-defense to be taken from us
* Dangers of giving government too much power
* How remaining strong as individuals and families keep us strong as a nation
* How sheriffs can protect us from all enemies, both foreign and domestic

Also – we will be training and organizing for the collection of signatures to put the Health Care Freedom Amendment on the ballot this November. Ohioans should have the right to choose – Obama’s government-control plan or NOT!

For more informatiom visit www.miamicountyliberty.org

Johnson & Johnson’s Sales of Cancer-Causing Birth Control Pills Comparable to Tobacco Industry’s Corporate Greed, Says Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

“Real hatred of women involves their exploitation through sales of cancer-causing hormonal contraceptive steroids,” Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer.

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer condemns Johnson & Johnson’s and its shareholders’ decision to continue selling cancer-causing birth control pills to young women instead of protecting their lives and striving to reduce breast cancer rates.

On April 28, 2011, Dr. Chris Kahlenborn, a medical adviser for the Coalition, presented a resolution at a shareholder’s meeting on behalf of a shareholder, Human Life International. The resolution proposed a change in J&J’s policy – that it would not discriminate in employment against breast cancer survivors, including those voicing opposition to the sale of the pill. Shareholders rejected the proposal after J&J’s board sent a message saying they “did not believe the resolution is necessary.”

World Health Organization scientists’ research and a meta-analysis in Mayo Clinic Proceedings show the pill is associated with cancers. [1,2] Use of the pill has been linked to the deadly triple-negative breast cancer. [3]

Kahlenborn’s testimony is available here.

“Over 260,000 American women will be diagnosed with breast cancer (in situ and invasive cases) this year,” said Mrs. Malec. “J&J’s corporate greed is comparable to that of the tobacco industry. How does J&J CEO William Weldon sleep at night?”

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is an international women’s organization founded to protect the health and save the lives of women by educating and providing information on abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer.

References

1. Cogliano V, Grosse Y, Baan R, Secretan B, El Ghissassi F. Carcinogenicity of combined oestrogen-progestagen contraceptives and menopausal treatment. Lancet Oncology 2005;6:552-553.

2. Kahlenborn C, Modugno F. Potter D, Severs W. Oral contraceptive use as a risk factor for premenopausal breast cancer: A meta-analysis. Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2006;81(10):1290-1302. Available at: .

3. Dolle J, Daling J, White E, Brinton L, Doody D, et al. Risk factors for triple-negative breast cancer in women under the age of 45 years. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18(4)1157-1166. Available at: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/download/Abortion_Breast_Cancer_Epid_Bio_Prev_2009.pdf

A Letter To Our Elected Representatives

Dear Officeholder,

As a citizen I wish to thank you for your willingness to step forward and serve in public office. It must be challenging to voluntarily place oneself under intense scrutiny in order to run for political office. I do take your role as a leader very seriously, so please bear with me as I share with you some of my concerns and criticisms.

When you chose to protect and preserve our Republic , there was an implicit understanding that you would give your very best to confront and resolve the many problems facing us today. One of the basic elements of problem-solving is to stop the problem from becoming worse when attempting to resolve the issue. In my view, you and your colleagues continue to fail in this regard. Despite all the rhetoric about “directions” and “paths,” our future continues to grow more ominous. Pay to play politics and back-room deals which are so apart of our defunct government will NOT restore the limits of Constitutional government. Commitment to the founding principles and the devotion to your Oath of office will. You cannot serve two Masters. Either you serve at the will of varied special interests or you serve the highest law of the land, the Constitution of the United States.

When you, the representative maintain that fidelity to the Constitution, you do not wander into the thickets of irresponsible spending and the eroding of our individual rights. Every time a public servant strays outside the constitutional limitations, we the citizens lose our liberty, property and our inalienable rights guaranteed to us by our Creator. You must remember that government does not produce anything of value. Government is merely a redistribution mechanism, and indeed, an inefficient one at that. The Founders recognized that for a nation to prosper the citizens must enjoy the maximum amount of freedom allowable for a civil society. Have you and your colleagues not learned what America’s Founding Fathers proclaimed? They painstakingly avoided a democracy and built a constitutional republic. The difference between these two forms of government are paramount in restoring America’s greatness and maximizing individual liberty.

Many people who enter public office want to do “good.” Yet when they drift beyond the articles set forth by the Constitution, the “good” often becomes anything but. Your Oath, if taken seriously, compels you to strict adherence to the Constitution, not to forage far and wide while looking for any and all social ills to heal here at home or abroad. Government has proven to be an incredibly flawed instrument, and for you to assume that government is the best vehicle for correcting deficiencies in the social structure is wishful at best and delusional at worst. Famous frontiersman and representative from Tennessee Davy Crockett learned this valuable lesson. During a visit to his district he stopped to speak to a man plowing his field. What transpired was a lesson all elected representatives and voters should take note of. “It is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it” said the man taking a moment from his work. Knowing that Colonel Crockett had “stepped beyond the limits of his Oath,” the gentleman politely informed Crockett of why he would not be voting for him in the upcoming election. He told him, “I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in honesty and firmness to be guided by it.” Needless to say, Crockett learned a valuable lesson. I would encourage everyone to read “Not Yours to Give” from “The Life of Davey Crockett,” by Edward S. Ellis.

Perhaps I am wrongly casting you among those who have grossly abused their power and their Oath. If so, I apologize, but I along many whom cannot speak for themselves as of yet, do insist that you stand firm, to speak loudly and forcefully, to resist EVERY usurpation of our liberties and immediately restore the Founders meaning to our legislatures. Even if you are not actively engaged in the undermining of our Constitutional government, you cannot comply with or ignore those who are. Your sworn duty, before God and the citizens, is to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. Meekly allowing others such as NATO; the United Nations; The Federal Reserve; The Council on Foreign Relations and a host of other “unaccountables” to run roughshod over our freedoms while confiscating our hard-earned wealth without bellowing in protest means that you are at the very least underestimating the resolve of Patriotic Americans, or at worst complicit to treason by levying war against the very documents that serves to protect our way of life.

Our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, and the amendments known as the Bill of Rights are the life-blood of Liberty and what separates America from all others . The very least you can demand of your colleagues is fidelity to its own governing documents. Claims that our Constitution was meant to be a “living document” or that judges may interpret them as they please, are fraudulent and incompatible with our form of government. In a free society, government is restrained and political power is of less importance. It is only in an environment of freedom that man is capable of achieving his full potential. And it is you the office holder who must understand these ideals while respecting the limits placed upon you by your Oath, that we can once again shine with brilliance in a world of tyranny.

By Andy Myers

Bio: Andy Myers is a former U.S. Army Paratrooper who served with the 1st Special Forces Group. He is the Defense Policy Analyst for the Ohio Freedom Alliance and works to educate others on the great American principles of individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a non-interventionist foreign policy.

Ohio’s Public Union Collective Bargaining Reform (SB 5) Issue

If you drove down Dayton Avenue last Sunday, you may have noticed the traffic in and out of the Fraternal Order of Police parking lot. You may have also noticed the little sign inviting the public to sign the union-initiated referendum petition against Ohio Senate Bill 5. This is the recently passed law forbidding public employees from striking and limiting collective bargaining.

Notice, the bill does not end collective bargaining. Rather, it places considerable restrictions on the procedures and content of public union bargains. It also includes limits on employee benefits such paid sick leave, accrued vacation days, and the percentage of employer contribution to employee health care. The new law even prohibits public employers from paying employee pension plan contributions.

Offensive to members of NEA is the end of mandatory time off as sick days and the end of tenured contracts. The new law requires school boards to provide the specific number of paid sick days thus ending mandatory time off. Except for teachers with existing tenured contracts, the law ends continuing contracts.

In addition to reductions of benefits and certain perks, the new law will make public employees earn increased salaries. That is, the SB 5 makes employee pay based on merit not union seniority, time of service, or statutory pay scales. To unions, that is probably the most grievous evil of all.

SB 5 provides two additional benefits for taxpayers: public employers are now able to modify an existing bargaining agreement when such is in fiscal emergency or fiscal watch, and the new law prohibits a bargaining agreement from limiting a public employer’s ability to privatize operations.

It appears public union collective bargaining reform (SB5) law is meant to bring public employee pay and benefits in-line with the public sector. By doing so, the cost of government will be reduced.

Whether or not public employee unions get the required signatures to place the new law on the November ballot, the next reform on the public agenda should be the hierarchical reduction of government spending and subsequent taxation.

See a complete analysis of SB 5 at http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/analyses129/s0005-ps-129.pdf