Anti-Middle Class “Right to Work” Amendment Bad for Working Minnesotans, Bad for Business
In a seemingly unending stream of constitutional amendments, State Senator Dave Thompson & Representative Steve Drazkowski held a press conference to publicize an anti-middle class amendment that would force union workers to pay for their non-union co-workers’ representation.
“This is yet another desperate attempt from Senator Thompson, Representative Drazkowski, and out of state special interests to publicize a bill that has bi-partisan opposition in the Legislature,” said Minnesota AFL-CIO President Shar Knutson. “Minnesota consistently outperforms anti-middle class ‘Right to Work’ states like Mississippi and Alabama. Why would anyone want to enact something that is bad for working people and bad for business?”
Facts about Minnesota vs. Anti-Middle Class “Right to Work” States:
- Minnesota’s December unemployment rate was 5.7%, the average unemployment for states with anti-middle class “right to work” laws was 7.5%.[1]
- Minnesotans earn more than people in anti-middle class “right to work” states. Median annual Minnesota personal income is $31,445. Personal income drops to $26,381 in anti-middle class “right to work” states.[2]
- 9.6% of Minnesotans do not have health insurance. The uninsured rate shoots to 16.6% in anti-middle class “right to work” states.[3]
- Minnesotans are more educated, with 91.6% of adults with a high school diploma and 31.5% with a college degree. In anti-middle class “right to work” states, 81.5% of the adult population has completed high school and 21.4% have a college degree.[4]
[1] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics, http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/lauhsthl.htm
[2] U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2008. Table B20017
[3] Kaiser Family Foundation, Kaiser State Health Facts, http://www.statehealthfacts.org. Calculated by the Urban Institute and Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured estimates based on the Census
[4] U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2008. Table B15002
