Follow POL on Twitter With Washington, D.C. momentarily poised between the last month's epic battle over the as-introduced version of the Employee Free Choice Act (which appears to have fallen short of the votes needed to break a GOP filibuster) and the widely expected next-round epic battle (over some stripped-down version or "EFCA-light" that might command enough votes), we had trouble choosing between two good recent columns on the subject, one by Manhattan Institute senior fellow Diana Furchtgott-Roth and the other by veteran political columnist Michael Barone. So we've reprinted both.
New (double) featured column: Furchtgott-Roth and Barone on EFCA
Related Entries:
- New teeth for federal contractor regulation?
- Labor law reform without EFCA?
- "Don't Buy Specter's EFCA 'Compromise'"
- EFCA vs. employers' speech
- "Card-Checked: The Game"
- "Card check comes to campus"
- EFCA "compromise", the latest round
- "The Impact of Card Check on the U.S. Economy"
- F. Vincent Vernuccio, "A Primer on the Employee Free Choice Act's Arbitration Provision"
- State of play on EFCA
- WSJ: "Blinding arbitration"
- Mail-in union balloting
- _What_ employer advantage?
- A card-check Twitter scam
- EFCA : new footwork needed
 |
| Isaac Gorodetski Project Manager, Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute igorodetski@manhattan-institute.org |
 |
| Bridget Carroll Press Officer, Manhattan Institute bcarroll@manhattan-institute.org |
