Ron May: Winner of the Puckysrevenge Liar of the Year Award

   The Right-to-less supporters certainly are a confused bunch.
   In a 1999 article, Representative Ron May (R-Colorado Springs) said, "we should take this opportunity to restore freedom of choice to Colorado workers and help attract good, high-paying jobs by passing the Colorado Right to Work Act of 1999."
    Then this year, a representative from the Small Business Association testifying in front of the House Business and Labor Affairs Committee stated that this state needs a right-to-less law basically because he can't afford to pay the higher wages won in a union contract.   A ranch owner in Colorado used the same argument in his testimony to the committee.
    It seems the politicians tout a right-to-less law as the prime magnet to attract high-paying jobs to the state, while the business owners who provide the labor want it to keep wages down. And for once, the business owners have it right.   Good job.
    That's what right-to-less laws do.   In 1998 the Bureau of Labor Statistics, an arm of the Department of Labor, released the a state by state breakdown of average earnings. Not one Right-to-less state was above or equal to the U.S. average of $31,908.   On the other hand, of the ten states with the lowest yearly earnings, seven are right-to-less states.
    In another telling category, the percentage of increase of yearly pay from 1997-1998, the statistics were even.   Nine out of 21 Right-to-less states (42%) and 12 out of 29 free bargaining states (41%) were at or above the U.S. average of 5.1%.   Washington and Colorado, two free-bargaining states, were at the top of this category by a wide margin.
    Some of our state reps are being awakened to the right-to-less lie.   Two state representatives who have historically voted for the measure jumped ship and voted against it this past year.   Other than that, the vote in the state House was the same as it had been in 1999, which means there is still plenty of convincing to do.
    These two reps stated that they were flooded with emails, letters and phone calls and couldn't vote for right-to-less because of their constituents adamant stance against it.   This proves that getting involved does make a difference and that we can change the opinions of our elected officials.
    All labor has ever said about right-to-less is that it will hurt the paychecks, safety and benefits of the American worker.   The corporate PR machines have cranked out numerous different opinions since the right-to-less idea was initially proposed by the National Association of Manufacturers in 1946 and they still can't get it straight between them.

SOLIDARITY