Literally none of this is true.
Rest assured, Ron, that I always give your ideas all the consideration they deserve. :-)
Single large donors aren’t limited. They contribute to SuperPACs …
Yes, obviously. They are limited in what they can give individually to a given politician. Everyone knows that.
they are hollow shells that don’t actually prevent coordination.
I would be all in favor of strengthening laws that make the PAC donations more “blind” to the politicians who receive them.
Meanwhile, unions have been kneecapped by anti Union state level laws across the country, have had their membership steadily decrease for 40 years, and no longer have the resources to play at the level of the Koch brothers.
Although there is some merit to those thoughts, the bottom line here is that union members, like anyone else, expect to get value back for the money they provide from their dues. If a state (a) adopts right-to-work, AND (b) the union worker believes he or she gets good value for their dues, then (c ) the union will not see any substantial drop in membership. People aren’t stupid, after all.
BUT, if the worker looks at that $30–$50 bucks a month in dues (or whatever it is) and thinks to themselves “these people don’t do shit for me”, then they’ll drop out. Simple. A 21st century union needs to provide value commensurate with what they charge. No more government protections.
Anecdote: The IBEW down here in Houston has taken to advertising on sports radio. Wisely, they are not advertising for membership; they are advertising to employers, selling the fact that when you get a union worker, you’re going to get somebody who is trained, will show up on time, will do a good job, will have their work inspected at the end of the job by a grizzled electrician veteran, the job will be done on schedule, and THEREFORE they are worth the extra hourly rate they charge. That’s a winning value proposition down here.
They are becoming a 21st century union. Nobody on the conservative side of the spectrum has any problem with that whatsoever. In fact, I am cheering for them here in Houston to do well with their campaign, and I am one of the people who cheer when a state goes right to work, also.
The result is predictable. Both major parties are now captured by special interest money. Both get a large percentage of their warchests from the same basic sources. And the voters are only choosing the kind of social policy they want. The economic and foreign policies are fixed by the donors. Both parties behave essentially the same.
Good God. I agree with Ron on this one. Somebody check and see if hell froze over. :-)