Why do the editors of the Wall Street Journal write so many editorials critical of Illinois’s state government? I mean other than it being the best example of a bad example, an object lesson. In their most recent complaint about the Land of Lincoln they call attention to the latest stupidity from the state legislature:
A famous Supreme Court quip is that the U.S. Constitution isn’t a suicide pact, but what about the Illinois constitution? After years of fiscal recklessness, the state’s credit ratings are a notch above junk. Yet the politicians in Springfield now want to add collective bargaining to the Illinois bill of rights, putting union power on the same footing as due process and religious freedom.
The House passed the idea Wednesday after the Senate approved it last week. The proposed constitutional amendment would guarantee a “fundamental right to organize and to bargain collectively,†including for better wages, hours, working conditions and a vague catchall of “economic welfare.†The amendment says that no law would be allowed to block labor agreements from “requiring membership in an organization as a condition of employment.â€
It’s obvious why they’re doing it—unions and particularly public employees’ unions are their most important supporters and foot soldiers.
It’s not entirely clear that the people of Illinois will go along with them. I would think that the points made by the editors:
Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Kentucky all have banned coerced unionization during the past decade. It’s a bad idea to lock Illinois into an uncompetitive policy for private workers. What’s worse is that the amendment could make it impossible for the state to tweak the public labor rules that are driving its unsustainable finances.
would be persuasive. They certainly are to me.
