consultants are sandburs

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association



The image is from here, related links here and here, the latter item beginning:

The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing a case called Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association. The lawsuit is backed by the Center for Individual Rights, a front group for wealthy anti-union extremists. If five justices side with them, it could turn America into a “right-to-work” nation for public employees.

With union cohesion under attack per that case, and with SD35 DFL candidate Roger Johnson on record pro-union, it should be clear where Johnson would be on any questions concerning Friedrichs.

Johnson, however, (who I favor for the SD35 seat), is not a single issue candidate by any measure, as is unequivocally clear from his campaign website issues page:

http://www.rogerjohnsonforsenate.com/issues.html

Also very important in terms of Roger getting matching funds for the cycle between the primary and the final ballot of Feb. 9 so that he can fund mailings and signs without personally carrying the entire costs, the gentleman's DONATE page:

http://www.rogerjohnsonforsenate.com/donate.html

Finally, News, where Roger defines his motives in announcing his candidacy and gives some background:

http://www.rogerjohnsonforsenate.com/news.html

An earlier Crabgrass post touching upon the Friedrichs case, here, has grown a comment thread. In it, Roger's main opponent in the weeks-away election, Republican Jim Abeler, is mentioned. Readers may recall that Abeler was favored here before the GOP primary when Aplikowski and he were on that ballot side, where it was then clearly stated that ultimately DFL candidate Roger Johnson was favored overall but that he had no primary opponent. Given that history, and an intention to be be fair to Abeler and to in no way go negative against him now, the most appropriate thing to do is to give the link back, note mention of Abeler, and let readers pursue the post and comment thread and linked materials, to hone their own opinions.

One loose thread still:

Center for Individual Rights:


An organization for which there is background online information here, here and Wikipedia, here. (The left-side image is from the first of those three links, and there it is captioned to link here.) While an impression of CIR as scum sucking bottom feeders in the lake of reason is justified, a differing opinion is possible.

Readers again are urged to link to and read Roger Johnson's issues page. There is much there that level-headed working people and middle management executives can find there with which they could easily agree.

No comments: