Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OKNancy

(41,832 posts)
Mon Feb 6, 2012, 08:03 PM Feb 2012

Senate approves long-stalled aviation bill

http://nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/06/10332167-senate-approves-long-stalled-aviation-bill?google_editors_picks=true

The Senate voted Monday afternoon to approve a House-passed bill aimed at improving the nation’s aviation infrastructure and modernizing air traffic control systems. The bill would provide more than $60 billion in funding through fiscal year 2015.
The Senate voted 75 to 20, ending a streak of 20 short-term funding extensions for the Federal Aviation Administration since 2007 as Democrats and Republicans struggled over a longer-term bill.

The House passed the bill last week on a vote of 248 to 169, with most Republicans voting for it and most Democrats voting against it.

A last-minute change in the bill, negotiated by House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, made the vote on the measure into a litmus test of support for organized labor.
Democrats were critical of the provision in the bill that they said weakens the ability of unions to try to organize workers in the aviation and railroad industries.

More at the link
2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Senate approves long-stalled aviation bill (Original Post) OKNancy Feb 2012 OP
I am confused by the report rurallib Feb 2012 #1
It depends what "union Busting" means karynnj Feb 2012 #2

rurallib

(62,406 posts)
1. I am confused by the report
Mon Feb 6, 2012, 08:23 PM
Feb 2012

did 25+ Dems vote for that union-busting bill or was it changed at the last minute?

karynnj

(59,501 posts)
2. It depends what "union Busting" means
Tue Feb 7, 2012, 01:00 AM
Feb 2012

The original House language wanted to count all non-votes as "NO". The rewritten language - that the unions also hate - raises the % needed from 35% to 50%. This will make it far harder to organize a company. ( To get a vote, they need 50% asking for it. That is tough to do. However, if they get the vote - and all the people who signed vote for it - they win. Caveat - this view comes from what the MSNBC shows said.) It does seem better than the earlier language. I assume there are people here who have been union leaders and have much more understanding.)

This was a conference vote. It was agreed upon by the conferees from both Houses. I suspect that in the Democratically controlled Senate, the problem is this may have been the best they were going to get and this is a must past bill. The bill funds a lot of jobs in transportation. These things are the cost of the people electing a Republican House.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Senate approves long-stal...