By Sen. Bruce Tutvedt Since the 2008 elections, we’ve seen a battle at both the state and federal level over the power of organized labor and its effort to forcibly unionize workers. Big Labor has found a president who will carry its water, pushing legislation and enacting regulatory changes that favor union bosses over workers and job creators. The extent of their influence became all-too apparent in the national controversy that culminated with Obama’s labor relations board prohibiting a Boeing manufacturing facility from being located in a state not favored by Big Labor. But high-profile event is just the tip of the iceberg—President Obama’s three years in office have been defined by his efforts to pay back union bosses for bankrolling his 2008 campaign, having spent half a billion dollars to get him elected. The recent recess appointments of two union allies to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)—in direct defiance of the Constitution—is just the latest example of the giveaways. Previous to that, Obama’s labor board authorized the formation of “micro-units” or small collective bargaining units which will result in severe discord in places of work with various unions working against each other in search of enhanced benefits with the employer stuck in the middle. The increased costs associated with managing multiple labor contracts is bad news for Montana businesses. The unelected government bureaucrats at the NLRB have also decided to close the amount of time over which union elections take place, hurrying the process so labor bosses can ambush business owners and provide them little to no time to respond. Even concerns about the integrity of the election proceedings can no longer be raised until after the vote has taken place. That creates a situation where a collective bargaining unit can be formed before the employer even has any real chance to meaningfully address the unionization of his or her business. Since 2007, Big Labor has been working feverishly to enact the Employee ‘Forced’ Choice Act (EFCA), which eliminates the secret ballot and allows government to dictate contract terms to employees and employers. Since Congress rejected this deeply flawed bill, Obama’s friends in the labor movement have decided to co-opt executive agencies like the NLRB and have them enact EFCA by fiat. At the state level, the resurgent push for right-to-work laws has been a bright spot for employee rights even though labor bosses have fought it every step of the way. There is no debate that the economies in right-to-work states have outpaced Montana’s in the past decade. Thankfully, workers and business owners also have allies in Congress who have successfully opposed some of these forced unionization schemes. For instance, the Employee Rights Act, introduced by Senator Orrin Hatch, would be a big help for Montana workers who want to fight forced unionization. This legislation requires that unions hold a recertification vote every three years. Currently, new workers may be required to join a union they don’t want and may never get a chance to vote on the issue. As we recently saw with the dispute over union contracts at an Albertson’s in Kalispell, union bosses will do whatever they can to maintain an advantage and keep union dues flowing into their pockets. It certainly didn’t help workers that labor friendly bureaucrats at the NLRB swooped in to bail out the union bosses. There are other pieces of legislation that have been introduced as well such as the Representation Fairness Restoration Act. It would disallow the formation of “micro-units” preserving the integrity of the workplace. And recently, the U.S. House passed the Workforce Democracy and Fairness Act in a bipartisan vote. The legislation would prohibit “ambush” elections for taking place and prevent “micro-units” from being created. Of course, legislative efforts to help workers and business owners fight the encroachment of Big Labor will find resistance by President Obama and other recipients of labor’s largesse in Congress. That’s why it’s so important we hold our elected officials to account and ask them to tell us where they stand on these issues. I hope we can count on our Congressional delegation to stand up for workplace fairness. It’s time our elected officials to tell Montanans whether they support home state workers or will kowtow to out-of-state labor bosses. Senator Bruce Tutvedt represents Senate District 3 in Kalispell. He is the chairman of the Senate Taxation Committee.

By Will Deschamps This month marks the 200th anniversary of when Governor Gerry of Massachusetts signed a bill that redistricted the state to benefit his political party. One of the odd-looking districts in the Boston area was said to resemble a salamander, and so the first “gerrymander” (Gerry + salamander) was born. This manipulative method of political gamesmanship continues to this day, including right here in Montana. As Montana undertakes the process of legislative redistricting, the Democratic Party has put out a proposed map that would even make Governor Gerry blush. With the use of sophisticated computer software and your political voting preferences, they have put out a map that will maximize their chances in legislative elections – whether majorities voted for them or not. We obtained a small sample of the projections the Democrats have made about their own map. In the 19 districts where we saw the Democrats’ estimated numbers, there was a majority of Republicans voters. However, they carved bizarre lines which allowed Democrats to win up to 58% of the seats, with Republicans only winning as few as 42%. How are they able to do this? According to their own figures, the Democrats generally under-populate districts that lean their way through the use of deviation. Republican leaning districts are generally over-populated. In addition, they put just enough Democrats in most of their districts to guarantee victory so they can spread their voters out over a larger area. Finally, they ignored county lines and city limits in areas like Butte, Anaconda and the city of Helena in order to draw bizarre legislative lines that overwhelmed rural and suburban areas with urban voters. That is why there are slightly more Republican voters in this 19 district snapshot, but the outcomes favor Democrats. Folks, that is classic gerrymandering. We believe the public is sick and tired of politics as usual. Montanans do not like the idea of government officials using election results and voting data to manipulate future election outcomes. There is a better way. Montana’s current redistricting commission adopted criteria that are part of our state constitution, along with additional criteria that will be helpful in developing legislative boundaries that will reflect Montana values. Those criteria include population equality with maximum 3% deviation, compact and contiguous districts, protection of minority voting rights, respecting existing political subdivision lines, communities of interest and traditional neighborhoods. Republicans on the commission have opted to use maps developed by non-partisan legislative staff as starting points for this final phase of redistricting. As they hear legitimate suggestions from the public, they will bring forward amendments to make those changes. That is how the process should work. Note that there is no Republican party map. There is only a Democrat party map, and maps produced by non-partisan state employees. We do not want to rig the system to our own advantage. We seek only a neutral playing field in this. We oppose all districts drawn by partisan operatives, of whatever party. This spring, the commission will travel the state to hear from you – the voters. Hearings will be in Missoula, Pablo, Kalispell, Helena, Butte, Bozeman, Billings, Lewistown, Crow Agency, Wolf Point, Miles City, Havre, Great Falls, and Browning. More information on these meetings is at www.leg.mt.gov. If you cannot attend one of the hearings, feel free to send your comments through email to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . If you oppose gerrymandering boundaries just for the sake of political gains, please send in your comments to the commission. We need real representation for Montanans, not political manipulation. Will Deschamps is Chairman of the Montana Republican Party.

Continue reading: Democrats gerrymandering Montana

OPINION

By WILBUR WOOD - For The Outpost

I’m late for class, jogging, short-cutting across a mowed lawn in front of the School of Journalism. A window squeaks open and the unmistakable voice of the Dean, Nathan Blumberg, roars out a second story window: “BARBARIAN!”

Astonished, I plop down on the ground, speechless, chagrined, then leap up and disappear into class. It is the early 1960s. The dean is, at that time, a man who believes that people should walk on the sidewalks, not upon the carefully tended lawns, at the University of Montana. He sees a reason for rules, even as he openly questions many of them.

Continue reading: Blumberg always skeptical of corporate press

EDITOR’S NOTE: Nathaniel Blumberg, former dean of the University of Montana School of Journalism, died Feb. 14 at age 89. This recollection was written by James Oset, retired copy desk chief for The Billlings Gazette.

Story and photo - By JAMES OSET - For The Outpost

No one could ever walk away with a feeling of indifference after a conversation with Nathaniel Blumberg. Knowledgeable and sagacious, Nathaniel always made a deep impression on those who met him and those who knew him.

A masterful teacher of journalism, he deeply delved into history, current events and political issues. He was, in my mind, a scholar’s scholar, insisting on accuracy in speech, writing and thought. Forever curious about everything, Nathaniel also possessed an almost childlike sense of wonder.

He developed deep and lasting bonds with most of his students. If you were a friend when you were in school, you remained a friend for life.

Nathaniel was a tough teacher, always insisting on academic excellence. He approached his work much like an Army drill sergeant training new recruits. He would give you holy hell for a dumb mistake but then offer a big pat on the back and great praise when you corrected yourself.

Continue reading: Nathaniel Blumberg: tough but compassionate

EDITOR’S NOTE: In 1991, Nathaniel Blumberg launched the Treasure State Review of Journalism and Justice, an occasional critique of journalism here and elsewhere that appeared until 1999. This excerpt from the first issue explains why.

Back in 1958, a little more than a year after I arrived as dean of the University of Montana School of Journalism, I founded the first journalism review in the United States – the Montana Journalism Review. It seemed to me at the time that the American press, watchdog of the government under our Constitution, needed a watchdog itself. Three years later the Columbia Journalism Review was established, to be followed by others. Hardly any survive.

   Now, in the first year of the last decade of the 20th century, it is clear that the news media in Montana and the United States more than ever require some concentrated surveillance. The time has come for another attempt to establish a review, and this time it is a review not only of journalism but of what under our system of government is the ultimate goal of journalism: Justice.

   The citizens of our state and our nation deserve something better than what we have received from many publishers and editors, reporters and correspondents, columnists and commentators, politicians and bureaucrats, lawyers and judges.

Continue reading: Blumberg asks: Why now?