By David Bailey
Aug 3 (Reuters) – A proposed referendum that would enshrine
the right to collective bargaining in Michigan’s state
constitution is too complicated for the ballot, the state’s top
legal official said, dealing a major blow to the labor
movement’s campaign for the measure.
Attorney General Bill Schuette, a Republican, said in a
legal analysis obtained by the Detroit Free Press and published
on Friday that Michigan ballot measures are limited to 100 words
and the implications of the proposed measure are so numerous
that it would be impossible to communicate them.
“Just to give a single word to each constitutional and
statutory alteration would require double the allowable words,”
Schuette wrote.
A coalition of unions, supporters of the “Protect Our Jobs”
measure, submitted petitions with nearly 700,000 signatures,
twice the number needed, to get the measure on the ballot.
Petition challenges must be filed by the close of business Aug.
8, and a decision whether to place it before voters by a state
election board is expected by mid-August.
The coalition includes the AFL-CIO labor federation, the
United Auto Workers and the Michigan Education Association.
In an analysis prepared at Governor Rick Snyder’s request
and dated July 20, Schuette said the proposed referendum could
limit or eliminate parts of 18 provisions in the state
constitution and 170 state laws, and raises fundamental
questions about the future control of private and public
employment in Michigan.
In addition to publishing the analysis, The Free Press
posted a copy on its website.
The union organizers responded quickly Friday. “Silencing
the voice of all voters on the basis of a faulty legal argument
defies the spirit of democracy and protections offered to
citizens by our constitution,” Dan Lijana, spokesman for the
petition organizers, said in a statement.
DIVISIVE ISSUE
Snyder’s spokeswoman, Sara Wurfel, said the governor had not
taken an official position and sought the attorney general’s
opinion because there have been many questions about what the
measure would and would not do.
“He has been pretty clear all along that he believes
measures like this have a tendency to be divisive and we
actually already use collective bargaining in Michigan and have
a long history of doing so,” Wurfel said.
Only a handful of states, including Florida and Missouri,
protect union activity such as collective bargaining in state
constitutions, while 23 states have “right to work” laws that
bar employers from requiring workers to pay fees for union
representation. Snyder is also on record opposing a “right to
work” law.
Earlier in 2012, Indiana became the latest state to adopt a
“right to work” law and the first in the industrial Midwest.
Unions also suffered a setback in Wisconsin earlier this
summer when Republican Governor Scott Walker survived a recall
election prompted by a new state law he championed that severely
reduced the power of public-sector unions such as teachers.
The Michigan ballot measure would cripple efforts to pass a
“right to work” law in the state, which has been hit hard by the
decades-long struggles of Detroit-based automakers.
Critics say the Michigan measure would discourage businesses
from bringing new jobs to the state and encourage some to leave.
Experts say the proposal likely would increase voter turnout in
the fall presidential election.
The United Auto Workers union is a significant though
diminished political force in Michigan following heavy job
losses in the auto industry.
Unions also are asking Michigan voters to repeal a law that
widened the powers of state-appointed emergency managers to cut
spending in municipalities and school districts deemed to be
experiencing a “financial emergency.” Such spending cuts have
resulted in the loss of union jobs among teachers, police
officers and firefighters.
The Michigan Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the
emergency manager law repeal question should be on the
ballot.
That law has been used to take over more than half a dozen
financially ailing cities and school systems in the state in
recent years and to void union contracts.
