Michigan’s Right-to-Work Law passed 10 years ago in 'heated' lame-duck session
Thousands of union members & their supporters showed up at the State Capitol to protest the legislation.
In years past, the Michigan Legislature’s lame-duck sessions—occurring after the General Election—were often busy, even heated affairs.
This situation occurred for various reasons.
In some cases, legislators felt emboldened to push more controversial proposals in the aftermath of the election, given that the reaction of voters was no longer posed an immediate concern. Another motivation was that, for those lawmakers departing due to retirement or term limits, the clock was ticking on whatever measures they hoped to get passed before they rode off into the sunset—creating a sense of urgency. There was also the knowledge that any proposed legislation still pending at this late date would die when that session ended, meaning the process had to start over again when the new Legislature convened in early January.
Given that Republicans have controlled both the House and Senate for the past 12 years, with Rick Snyder being governor for eight of them, the busy pace and heat were mainly their doing. But they’d had some practice in previous years when the GOP ruled during parts of John Engler’s gubernatorial tenure.
The leadership, having the majority in their back pocket, pretty much knew what could or could not be passed during the lame duck and how the governor might react—either signing the bill or vetoing it. As to the latter, in some instances that didn’t matter, the passage being intended as a symbol rather than realistic expectation.
Also, the next session, while often bringing back many of the same actors, presented an uncertainty as to what might happen. Something the future is known to do. So, better to ‘take the bird at hand.’
The most controversial lame-duck session of recent memory came in 2012 (ten years ago this month) when Republican leaders in the House and Senate, encouraged by special interest groups, decided to introduce a Right-to-Work law. Gov. Snyder, who tended to take more moderate stances than the rest of the Grand Old Party in Lansing, had initially not favored making it a priority, but then changed of his mind. He pledged to sign a bill if the House and Senate could agree on a version. Snyder explained his reversal by pointing to the rejection by voters of a ballot proposal to install collective-bargaining rights in the state constitution, adding that this new law would give workers “freedom of choice.” There were also claims that making Michigan a Right-to-Work state would help create more jobs and improve the economy, a possibility that appealed to the business-oriented governor.
That collective-bargaining ballot proposal had been initiated by a coalition of unions. Had it passed, it would have voided existing and future laws restricting workers' ability to organize unions, or to negotiate and enforce collective bargaining agreements, including employees’ financial support of their labor unions.
For the unions, having fought over the years for the right to organize and to have collective bargaining, a combination they felt had improved the lives of workers with better wages, benefits, and working conditions, this Right-to-Work law—coming on the heels of the failed ballot proposal—seemed to threaten those gains and the notion of “Solidarity forever.”
There were, of course, political calculations at play in the debate that were not lost on anyone. Unions tended to support Democratic candidates, while many business groups—including the Michigan Chamber of Commerce—favored the Republican side. Since the new law would no longer require workers to join the union and pay dues as a requirement for employment, the union’s revenue and influence would be weakened—and by extension the Democrats’ election chances—while the Republicans and their business allies would have a stronger hand.
Or so the conventional wisdom went.
In an effort to sway Gov. Snyder and any Republican lawmakers who might waver, as well as to demonstrate their outrage and flex some political muscle, the unions organized a protest at the State Capitol on Dec. 11, 2012.
I decided to attend this event and write a report.
There were an estimated 12,000 demonstrators who showed up, along with a handful of people who supported the legislation. The latter group had set up a pair of tents on the Capitol lawn to serve as headquarters. I remember several signs being carried around with the picture of the governor superimposed on a rat.
A parade took place on Michigan Avenue, starting a few blocks east of the Capitol building and ending at the statue of Austin Blair, Michigan’s Civil War governor, that stands at the entrance of the grounds. The line-up consisted of the union locals in attendance. I watched as each of them passed by, carrying a banner with the name of their local on it. Afterwards, they milled about the area, most of them listening to the assorted speakers, a few getting into debates with those who favored the bill, and some taking a more aggressive approach in attempting to disrupt the legislative proceedings.
During the afternoon, someone cut the ropes supporting the two tents on the lawn, with each side accusing the other of this vandalism. The seemingly minor episode, however, made major headlines in the media. Symbolism, at times—which is what this represented—can come in unexpected forms. Who cut the ropes? Union thugs or conniving right-to-work supporters? Choose your side.
Two days later, with the House scheduled to vote on the measure, hundreds of demonstrators attempted to enter the Capitol, with police deciding to put the building under a lockdown. The Democratic lawmakers, being otherwise powerless to prevent passage of the bill, walked out of the chamber in protest of the lockdown.
Armed with a court order, the demonstrators re-entered the building later that day and then watched as the House passed the bill, followed soon after by the Senate.
The decision to push the bill through in the lame-duck session, which apparently had not been expected, coupled with Gov. Snyder’s change of mind, prompted the then Michigan Senate Democratic Leader, one Gretchen Whitmer, to make the following statement:
"These guys have lied to us all along the way. They are pushing through the most divisive legislation they could come up with in the dark of night, at the end of a lame-duck session and then they're going to hightail it out of town. It's cowardly."
Well, another election has come and gone. For Michigan, it was a landmark one, given that for the first time in nearly 40 years both chambers of the Legislature will be controlled by the Democrats. And, as is well known, that Senate Minority Leader is now governor and was just re-elected to a second four-year term.
They call it a trifecta—precisely what the Republicans enjoyed in 2012.
With that reality in play, nothing much happened during the this year’s lame-duck session. To borrow a line from T. S. Eliot, it ended “not with a bang, but a whimper.” Any sense of urgency was offset by the fact that the new majority can introduce its own bills, with an expectation of success, once the new Legislature is sworn into office in a few weeks.
While there is debate about whether it should happen or not, with Republicans and business groups arguing to keep the status quo, a bill that would repeal the Right-to-Work Law seems likely.
An interesting turn-of-events—to say the least.
Steve Horton is a mid-Michigan journalist and editor-publisher of the Fowlerville News & Views.