The End of Agency Fees

Mike Antonucci:

Having read the entire Janus v. AFSCME ruling, along with the dissent, and withstood the torrent of press releases, tweets and commentary that people have been saving up for months in anticipation, I find there is little to add. Now we just have to watch what happens.

Today I posted NEA’s 2017 state-by-state membership numbers, which should give you some sense of the union’s baseline. Its 2018 numbers will be slightly higher, and by this time next year we will have a good sense of whether the membership decline will be slow and steady, or precipitous.

There was one facet of the Supreme Court decision I would like to highlight. AFSCME attempted to make a case that it was in the public interest for government unions have a “secure source of funding.” Justice Kagan referenced it several times in her dissent.

It is understandable that AFSCME and its allies would try any argument in an uphill battle. But it seems to be a very strange stance for a union to have – that government has a duty to financially prop up a private enterprise.