Is this the new issue? Maybe, but it has less chance of becoming law in the next two years than the horrific Employee Free Choice Act ever had. This Red State poster wants to ramp up and bludgeon "teh unions" now that votes can be forced by anti-labor forces in the House. What a waste of time. Such legislation will not get through the Senate, much less past a Presidential veto. Realistic reform might take hold if rational discussions were undertaken by both sides. Yes, the penalties for flagrant violations of the NLRA should be enhanced, even where real remedies might chill an employer a bit in its efforts to remain non-union. But in return, big labor must be willing to back off card check and permit fair secret ballot elections to determine if an un-coerced majority of workers want a union or not. No union should be imposed on a workforce without majority support established by a secret ballot determination of the majority's will.

Jane Hampsher at Firedoglake has a good post on the politics of EFCA, starring Harry, Arlen and Rahm.

"Third generation union organizer" Mike Elk's piece confirming EFCA is dead started it by suggesting the EFCA battle is one with larger themes and objectives than, uh, EFCA. Then came the crying "fowl" in this post by J. Justin Wilson claiming the EFCA fight is war by proxy in "a larger conflict about political sway, public opinion, and economic ideology." One is forced to pause here and consider whether Wilson is referring to Galliformes or  Anseriformes, or as is likely, neither, but I digress. Elk retorts at Firedoglake calling Wilson "the corporate version of that creepy hit man from No Country for Old Men." Elk's position? Wilson, tool of Wall Street, needs to continue destroying unions to continue destroying the economy. You can't make this stuff up . . .