Only with a worker's express consent should a corporation or labor union take that worker's money and use it for politics.

The bill forbids corporations and unions from taking money from employees and then using that money for political activities -- unless the employee first gives express, written consent for such political uses.

The bill defines "political activities" to include carrying on propaganda, attempting to influence legislation, and intervening in any political campaign or political party. This definition is derived from §501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Whenever an employee gives express, written consent for the political use of his or her money, that authorization will remain in effect until revoked but may be revoked at any time.

The Politics of Consent

The Paycheck Protection Act is premised on the simple, all-American truth that money must not be taken from a person and put to political purposes unless that person gives consent. It was Thomas Jefferson who declared that "to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical."

The Paycheck Protection Act does not "codify" the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Communication Workers of America v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988). The bill does address some of the issues that were raised in Beck, but the bill is a simple, necessary fence that keeps corporations and unions away from workers' pocketbooks -- unless the workers have given their consent.

Current law can be difficult and confusing and reactionary. For example, many workers have money taken from them without their consent and then they must petition to get it back. This bill is a proactive, pro-worker initiative that will help individuals regain control of their own paychecks -- and of their own politics.

TOP	1997 PUBLICATIONS	1998 PUBLICATIONS	MAIN PAGE