August/September 2012 Foundation Action

FoundationActionFoundationAction

2

3

4

4

5

IN THIS ISSUE

Vol. XXXII, No. 4 8001 Braddock Road • Springfield, Virginia 22160 www.nrtw.org August/September 2012

The bi-monthly newsletter of the National Right to Work

Legal Defense Foundation, Inc.

VICTORY: California Workers Beat SEIU at Supreme CourtNational Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation case sets sweeping new precedent WASHINGTON, DC – As the muggyWashington, DC summer heated up, sodid anticipation about several key U.S.Supreme Court cases at the end of theCourt’s term in June. Knox v. SEIU, acase argued by National Right to WorkFoundation staff attorney Jim Young,did not disappoint.

With the representation ofFoundation staff attorneys, DianneKnox, a courageous California civil ser-vant and lead plaintiff in the case, set anew precedent that has far-reachingimplications for America’s workers inthe future.

SEIU illegally seized political cash

In 2005, Knox -- then an AssociateGovernmental Program Analyst for theCalifornia Department of Rehabilitation-- and her nonunion colleagues wereblindsided by a Service EmployeesInternational Union (SEIU) “specialassessment” aimed at raising money todefeat several state ballot initiatives,including one measure that would haverequired union officials to receiveemployee consent before spending theirunion dues on political activism.

State employees who refrained fromSEIU membership were given no chanceto opt out of paying the SEIU’s politicalassessment.

Knox and eight other courageousworkers doggedly pursued a class-actionlawsuit on behalf of the over 36,000California state employees who wereillegally forced to pay into the SEIU’s so-called “Political Fight Back Fund.”

“The SEIU compelled manynonunion employees to make financialcontributions to an organization theyhad no desire to join or support,” saidKnox, who currently works for theCalifornia Managed Risk MedicalInsurance Board (MRMIB) as a regula-tions analyst. “That action violates abedrock principle of American democ-racy.”

“I did not (and still do not) agree withmany of their political stands,” contin-ued Knox. “Freedom of associationdoesn’t just mean the freedom to sup-

Union Officials Sic CollectionAgency on Public Defender

Workers Begin ExercisingRights Under Indiana’s NewRight to Work LawUniversity InstructorChallenges Illegal UnionCollections Racket

Supreme Court May TakeAnother Foundation CaseNext Term

See WORKERS WIN page 6

port groups or causes you believe in, italso means the freedom to withholdsupport from organizations you dis-agree with.”

Plaintiff Dianne Knox and Foundation President Mark Mix address the mediaafter oral arguments in the precedent-setting Knox v. SEIU case.

SEIU Bosses Hit with FederalProsecution for Rigged CardCheck “Vote”

2 Foundation Action August/September 2012

Rev. Fred Fowler Chairman, Board of TrusteesReed Larson Executive Committee ChairmanPatrick Semmens Vice President and Editor in ChiefRay LaJeunesse, Jr. Vice President and Legal DirectorMark Mix President

The Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employeeswhose human or civil rights have been violated by abuses of compulsory unionism. All contributions

to the Foundation are tax deductible under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Distributed by theNational Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Inc.

8001 Braddock Road, Springfield, Virginia 22160www.nrtw.org • 1-800-336-3600

Foundation Action

NOBLESVILLE, IN – With the help ofNational Right to Work Foundationstaff attorneys, trucker Robert Symondshas just become one of the first Indianacitizens to exercise his right to stop pay-ing union dues under the new IndianaRight to Work law.

On May 17, 2012, the contractbetween Teamsters Local 135 andSymonds’ employer, IndianapolisHaulage, expired and a new contractwas agreed upon. Under Indiana’s Rightto Work legislation, contracts enteredinto after March 14 – when the law wentinto effect – must respect employees’right to refrain from the payment of anyunion dues. Despite the fact thatSymonds resigned his union member-ship and revoked his dues check-off,Teamster officials initially told him hewouldn’t be able to stop paying duesuntil November 2012.

Symonds responded to this obstruc-tionist tactic by sending a letter to hisemployer, requesting they comply withIndiana law and immediately stop

deducting dues from his paycheck. OnJune 29, Teamster officials sentSymonds a letter indicating they wouldhonor his request to immediately stopdeducting union dues.

“Unsurprisingly, Teamster bosseswere reluctant to give up on theirforced-dues privileges,” said PatrickSemmens, Vice President of theNational Right to Work Foundation.“That’s why Foundation staff attorneysstepped in to help Robert Symondsassert his rights.”

Symonds’ experience reflects anopportunity thousands of Indiana work-ers will have in the coming months.Under Indiana’s Right to Work law,forced-dues contracts between unionsand employers entered into prior to thelegislation’s passage are still valid. Asthese contracts expire or are modified,Indiana workers who have been forcedto pay union dues as a condition ofemployment will now be able to refrainfrom paying any dues at all.

Foundation helps protectHoosiers’ Right to Work

Unfortunately, union officials oftenignore or actively subvert state Right toWork protections. That’s whyFoundation attorneys are working hardto bolster Indiana’s new Right to Worklaw at the state level. Two Foundation-assisted employees, Douglas Richardsand David Brubaker, recently filed com-ments with the Indiana Department ofLabor, urging state DOL officials to rig-orously enforce Right to Work protec-tions. The employees’ comments alsoask that new enforcement regulationsmake it clearer that union bosses will beheld accountable for violating Hoosieremployees’ Right to Work.

“We’re happy to report that RobertSymonds has stopped paying dues to aunion he no longer belongs to,” saidSemmens. “However, Foundation attor-neys will remain vigilant to ensure thatIndiana’s Right to Work law is being fol-lowed to the letter.”

Robert Symonds, pictured here withhis wife, is one of the first Indianaworkers to assert his Right to Workwithout being forced to pay tributeto union bosses.

Workers Begin Exercising Rights Under Indiana’s New Right to Work LawWith the help of Foundation attorneys, employee cuts off union dues despite Teamster bullying

to uphold the U.S. Supreme Court's long-standing precedent that disallows unionofficials from pushing most universityprofessors into union ranks.

Foundation staff attorneys filed thebrief with the NLRB in a case involving aCommunications Workers of America(CWA) Local’s attempt to organize profes-sors at Point Park University in Pittsburghand ultimately force them to pay uniondues.

In their brief, Foundation attorneysargue that universities do not fit the indus-trial model of the National LaborRelations Act (NLRA) – the federal lawgoverning private-sector labor relationsfor non-managerial workers – a conclu-sion that the U.S. Supreme Court upheldin NLRB v. Yeshiva University (1980). InYeshiva, the Court reasoned that facultymembers are endowed with “managerialstatus” at most universities and removedthem from the scope of the NLRA.

“Desperate for more forced dues, BigLabor organizers have resorted to pushingunwilling college professors into unionranks,” continued LaJeunesse. “That’s whyFoundation attorneys are fighting this lat-est coercive tactic at the NLRB.”

August/September 2012 Foundation Action 3

LANSING, MI - With free legal assis-tance from National Right to WorkFoundation staff attorneys, a temporaryinstructor at Central MichiganUniversity (CMU) has spurred a stateprosecution against a local union forviolating her First Amendment rights.

Nancy Rusch of St. Louis filed acharge with the Michigan EmploymentRelations Commission (MERC) againstthe Union of Teaching Faculty (UTF)for illegally confiscating union duespayments from her and her coworkers'paychecks without following federal dis-closure requirements.

Because Michigan does not yet have aRight to Work law, nonunion employeeslike Rusch can still be forced to payunion dues just to keep their jobs at theuniversity. However, Rusch cannot berequired to pay union dues or fees foractivities unrelated to workplace bar-gaining, such as union boss politicallobbying and members-only events.

Union bosses ignore work-er’s procedural rights

In the Foundation’s Chicago TeachersUnion v. Hudson victory, the SupremeCourt ruled that union officials mustprovide public workers with an inde-pendently-audited financial breakdownof all union expenditures. This proce-dural safeguard helps inform workers ofwhere their forced union dues and feesare being spent and makes it a little lessdifficult for employees to opt out of pay-ing dues unrelated to workplace bar-gaining. Despite this requirement, UTFofficials ignored Rusch’s repeatedrequests for information about theunion’s financial outlays.

After Rusch filed her charge in mid-April, MERC investigated the chargeand issued a complaint against the UTF

union in early July. A hearing todetermine the union’s culpability isscheduled for later this summer.

“Union bosses are deliberatelykeeping rank-and-file workers in thedark to keep their forced-dues gravytrain going,” said Ray LaJeunesse,Vice President of the National Rightto Work Foundation. “To preventsimilar abuse in the future, Michiganneeds to make dues payments com-pletely voluntary by passing a Right toWork law.”

Big Labor takes aim atcollege campuses

Meanwhile, aggressive union oper-atives have set their sights on privatecolleges and universities for futureorganizing drives. That’s why theNational Right to Work Foundation isnow defending professors’ freedom ofassociation at the National LaborRelations Board (NLRB).

Foundation attorneys have justfiled an amicus curiae (“friend of thecourt”) brief with the NLRB asking it

University Instructor Challenges Illegal Union Collections RacketMichigan union officials face legal action for violating educator’s disclosure rights

Foundation staff attorneys helped one Central Michigan University instructorassert her disclosure rights against recalcitrant union officials.


ALBUQUERQUE, NM – With free legalassistance from National Right to WorkFoundation staff attorneys, a publicdefender from the Alamogordo office ofthe New Mexico Public DefenderDepartment has filed a state chargeagainst a local government union forwrongfully charging her with failure topay union dues for the past five years.

Nancy Fleming filed the charge withthe New Mexico Public Employee LaborRelations Board against the AmericanFederation of State, County, andMunicipal Employees (AFSCME) NewMexico Council 18 union for illegallytrying to confiscate forced union duespayments from her paycheck withoutnotifying her that she was in the union’smonopoly bargaining unit and whilerefusing to follow federal disclosurerequirements.

Governor set stage forunionization of publicdefenders

In 2003, former New MexicoGovernor Bill Richardson recognizedAFSCME Council 18 as the monopolybargaining agent of the state’s publicdefenders. AFSCME Council 18 unionofficials never asked Fleming if shewanted to be a member or pay dues tothe union. In fact, Fleming didn’t evenknow the union claimed to “represent”her.

Because New Mexico does not haveRight to Work protections makingunion affiliation voluntary, workers whorefrain from formal union membershipmay still be forced to pay part of union

Government Union Officials Sic Collection Agency on Public DefenderEmployee unaware of union officials’ so-called ‘representation’

Supreme Court May Take Another Foundation Case Next TermPam Harris’s challenge to the forced unionization of homecare workers held over until Fall 2012WASHINGTON, DC – Following theNational Right to Work Foundation’slandmark legal victory in Knox v. SEIU,the Supreme Court issued an order thatpostpones until next term a decisionwhether to hear another Foundationcase. Instead of granting or denyingreview in Harris v. Quinn, a case thatchallenges the forced unionization ofpersonal homecare providers in Illinois,the High Court asked theAdministration’s Solicitor General tosubmit a brief on the issues presented.

The Harris case challenges a schemepioneered by disgraced former IllinoisGovernor Rod Blagojevich and expand-ed by his successor, Governor PatQuinn. Under executive orders signedby both governors, personal homecareworkers were designated as “publicemployees” solely for the purpose of

union organizing, a move that has sinceforced many unwilling care providersinto forced dues-paying ranks.

In fact, Service EmployeesInternational Union (SEIU) andAmerican Federation of State, County,and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

union bosses are now competing toacquire monopoly bargaining controlover thousands of other Illinois home-care providers.

Pam Harris, the lead plaintiff in thecase and a personal care provider to herdevelopmentally-disabled son, had thisto say about the governors’ forcedunionism scheme last November:

“My primary concern is that some-one else will be telling me how to bestcare for my son. Union dues would be adeduction from what we have availableto provide for my son’s needs. And thenI would be giving my money to a unionto exercise their political muscle onissues I may vehemently disagree with.”

With the help of Foundation staffattorneys, eight Illinois homecareproviders are challenging theGovernors’ executive orders on the

Shakedown: New Mexico union offi-cials are having collection agenciesharass unsuspecting workers forfailing to pay for unwanted unionboss “representation.”

See COLLECTIONS RACKET page 7

See CARE PROVIDER UNIONIZATION page 8

Pam Harris’s case against the union-ization of Illinois care providers willhave to wait until next year.

me they would be back tomorrow.”The NLRB Regional Office subpoe-

naed records from SEIU and foundmerit to Felter’s charges. The RegionalDirector then authorized the issuance ofa complaint against SEIU and hospitalofficials for forcing the workers toaccept an unwanted union in the work-place by rigging the card check vote.

Meanwhile, Chapman and SEIU offi-cials were in the midst of negotiating acontract which almost certainly wouldhave included a provision to force theworkers to pay union dues as a condi-tion of employment.

However, the NLRB will now prose-cute the union and hospital if they donot agree to a settlement that includesrescission of the union’s representation-al status at Chapman.

“Marlene Felter’s courageous standagainst SEIU union thugs shows thatcard check organizing schemes like thisaim to force workers into union’s forced-dues-paying ranks, even when theemployees want nothing to do with theunion,” said Mark Mix, President ofNational Right to Work. “This furthershows why California needs to makeunion affiliation completely voluntary.by passing a Right to Work law.”


Marlene Felter’s courageous standdefeated SEIU organizers’ attemptsto force her and her coworkersunder union boss control.

ORANGE, CA – Officials from a majorService Employees International Union(SEIU) healthcare affiliate and anOrange, California hospital are facinglegal consequences for coercing andintimidating hospital workers to surren-der to union boss control.

With free legal assistance from theNational Right to Work Foundation,Chapman Medical Center employeeMarlene Felter of Costa Mesa filedcharges with the National LaborRelations Board (NLRB) after SEIUHealthcare Workers West and hospitalofficials colluded to illegally rig a unionorganizing “vote” to pave the way for theSEIU to claim to “represent” her and herco-workers.

SEIU thugs given free reinto intimidate workers

In the agreement, company officialsgranted union operatives access to com-pany facilities to conduct a coercive“card check” organizing campaign andwaived the right to have a federally-supervised secret ballot election todetermine whether employees wished tobe unionized.

“It is just ludicrous,” said Felter, amedical coder in the financial depart-ment who has been with the hospital’sparent company since 1982. “[The com-pany] said the SEIU can come in andorganize [workers without notice].”

“SEIU organizers were calling peopleon their jobs and showing up at people’shomes at 9 o’clock at night,” addedFelter. “They would block people intheir homes and driveways. How theygot our cell phone numbers I don’tknow, but we’ve received numerous callsfrom different numbers.”

In response to the union’s coercivetactics, a majority of hospital workerssigned cards, letters, and petitions stat-

ing that they did not want the SEIUbosses’ so-called “representation.”Instead of respecting the employees’wishes, Chapman Medical officialsaccepted SEIU officials as the workers’monopoly bargaining agents after arigged “card count” was held.

Courageous workers takestand against union thugs

The situation came to a boiling pointin late May, when hospital workers hadto call the police to remove SEIU organ-izers from the hospital cafeteria.

“They would sneak in at the back-door and sit there in the cafeteria withno name badge, trying to organizeworkers in the cafeteria,” explainedFelter. “SEIU [organizers were] in thecafeteria all morning and throughoutlunch… [and] refused to leave whenapproached.”

“It was necessary to call the police forremoval, in which they still refused,”added Felter. “When they left they told

Newsclips RequestedThe Foundation is always on

the lookout for articles onunion bosses’ bad behavior.Please clip any stories thatappear in your local paper

and mail them to:

NRTWLDFAttention: Newsclip Appeal

8001 Braddock RoadSpringfield, VA 22160

Supporters can also emailonline stories to [email protected]

SEIU Local Hit with Federal Prosecution for Rigged Card Check “Vote”Workers stand up to corrupt union agreement with hospital to coerce them into dues-paying ranks

The five Justices also hinted that theymay be open to reconsidering othercases in which the Court previouslyupheld union bosses’ extraordinarypowers to require employees to opt outof giving them forced union dues forpolitical activities -- opening the doorfor a greater expansion of freedom forAmerica’s workers.

University of California Irvine LawDean Erwin Chemerinsky has calledKnox “a major change in the law” and“the biggest sleeper case” of the SupremeCourt’s 2011-2012 term.

“Over the course of many years,Dianne Knox has never faltered in herefforts to hold union bosses accountablefor illegally confiscating nonunionemployees’ dues for political activism,”continued Mix. “The Supreme Court’sprecedent-setting decision in Knox isthe culmination of her hard fought bat-tle – and a total victory for America’sworkers.

“Of course, this victory was onlymade possible through the dedication ofindependent-minded workers like Knoxand her colleagues, National Right toWork Foundation staff attorneys, andthe Foundation’s generous supporters,”concluded Mix.


Workers’ case takes longjourney to Supreme Court

A federal district court ruled in 2007that the SEIU was required to provide anotice to nonunion employees about theassessment, allow them to opt-out ofpaying into the union political fund, anda refund of monies spent on union poli-tics with interest.

However, SEIU lawyers appealed tothe U.S Court of Appeals for the NinthCircuit, which issued a 2-1 decisionreversing the lower court’s ruling inDecember 2010. On June 27, 2011, theUnited States Supreme Courtannounced it would review the NinthCircuit’s ruling and eventually set aJanuary 2012 date to hear arguments.

“Allowing the Ninth Circuit’s rulingto stand would have established a verybad precedent undermining stateemployees’ First Amendment rights andencouraging union bosses to extractmore forced dues for politics fromnonunion workers,” stated Mark Mix,President of the National Right to WorkFoundation.

On June 21, 2012, the Courtannounced its decision in Knox. In a

major victory, the Court held 7-2(Justice Samuel Alito, joined by ChiefJustice John Roberts, and JusticesAntonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, andClarence Thomas; and concurred in byJustices Sonia Sotomayor and RuthBader Ginsburg) that the SEIU violatedthe First Amendment by charging polit-ical fees to nonmember California stateemployees without notice and opportu-nity to opt out.

Precedent could lead tofuture victories

Even more significantly, a 5-4 Courtmajority also ruled for the first time thatunion officials must obtain affirmativeconsent from workers before usingworkers’ forced union fees for unionpoliticking, stating “when a public sec-tor union imposes a special assessmentor dues increase, the union must pro-vide [a notice of the purpose of theassessment or increase] and may notexact any funds from nonmemberswithout their affirmative consent” –ironically the very thing the SEIU hier-archy tried to prevent in Californiawhen it forced nonmember employeesto pay into their political assessment.

“This aggressive use of power by the SEIU to collectfees from nonmembers is indefensible”

Workers Win Important New Precedent at Supreme CourtContinued from page 1

Key Quotes from Justice Alito’s Majority Opinion in Knox

“Unions have no constitutional entitlement to the fees ofnonmember employees.”

“By allowing unions to collect any fees from nonmembersand by permitting unions to use opt-out rather than opt-inschemes when annual dues are billed, our cases have sub-stantially impinged upon the First Amendment rights ofnonmembers.”

“Requiring objectingnonmembers to opt outof paying the noncharge-able portion of uniondues… represents aremarkable boon forunions”

One of the most effective ways to assist the National Right to Work LegalDefense Foundation in its battle to combat compulsory unionism abuse is tomake a planned gift now!

There is no way to know what the federal tax structure will look like even sixmonths from now, but there are areas of certainty you can depend on. Yourplanned gift to the tax deductible Foundation will generate tax savings and pos-sible lifetime income for you and your family. Here are a few ways to help theongoing strategic litigation and education programs of the Foundation:

CChhaarriittaabbllee LLeeaadd TTrruussttAA GGiifftt ttoo tthhee FFoouunnddaattiioonn nnooww,, rreettuurrnn ooff pprriinncciippaall llaatteerr..

- You can make a significant ongoing gift to the Foundation;- Your gift can be part of a plan that helps ensure future economic security foryou and your family because the principal may be returned to you or your estateat the end of a pre-determined amount of time;- You may be able to provide your heirs with a greater inheritance than wouldotherwise be possible; - You can reduce or actually eliminate income, estate and gift taxes now and infuture years with a Charitable Lead Trust.

CChhaarriittaabbllee RReemmaaiinnddeerr TTrruusstt RReecceeiivvee iinnccoommee nnooww,, pprroovviiddee aa ggiifftt ttoo tthhee FFoouunnddaattiioonn llaatteerr..

- Increased income for low-yielding assets;- Reduction or elimination of capital gain, estate or gift taxes that could other-wise be due upon death;- Diversification of your investments and the potential for tax-free growth ofassets;- Creation of a source of needed income for your family, parents, or other rela-tives you designate in your trust.

We sincerely hope you will consider making a planned gift to the Foundationtoday. It is the best “investment” you can make to ensure the Right to Workmovement has the resources it needs to fight the battle against forced unionism.Please contact Ginny Smith, Director of Strategic Programs for the Foundation,at 1-800-336-3600, ext. 3303 if you have any questions.

As with any planned gift, we encourage you to contact your estate attorney ortax advisor to help you and your family achieve your financial goals.


dues to keep their jobs. However, federalcase law requires union officials to informnonmember workers of the amount ofunion fees they must pay and how themoney is spent.

Starting in January, Fleming began toreceive notices from a collection agencythat the union reported her delinquent inpaying union dues dating back to 2006.

Right to Work would negateunusual union boss power

New Mexico is unique among forcedunionism states in that it allows unionofficials to report workers not makingunion dues payments to local collectionagencies. Unfortunately, this quirky law isripe for abuse, allowing collection agen-cies to harass unsuspecting workers forfailing to pay union dues even if they donot know their workplace is unionized.

“AFSCME union bosses are charging anunsuspecting worker for ‘representation’she did not even know existed until a col-lection agency repeatedly harassed her fordelinquent payments,” said PatrickSemmens, Vice President of the NationalRight to Work Foundation. “Thanks tobiased federal and New Mexico state laws,union officials are the only private indi-viduals who can claim to ‘represent’ some-one and then demand payment from themas compensation. Moreover, it is virtuallyimpossible to know how widespread thisproblem is in New Mexico.”

“To prevent these types of forcedunionism abuses in the future, NewMexico should immediately pass a Rightto Work law,” added Semmens. “Makingunion affiliation and dues payments com-pletely voluntary is the quickest way toclose this loophole and ensure workers areno longer bamboozled into paying forunknown and unwanted union boss ‘rep-resentation’.”

Collections RacketContinued from page 4

Make a Planned Gift to Combat Forced Unionism

grounds that forcing them to affiliatewith a union and subsidize union activ-ities violates their rights to free expres-sion and association.

Illinois home careproviders still stuck inlegal limbo

The High Court’s latest move keepshope alive that the Justices will take thecase next term and indicates heightenedinterest in the issues presented.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Courtinstructed the Obama’s SolicitorGeneral to submit a brief discussing thelegal issues involved. This comes on theheels of an earlier order from the Courtasking the State of Illinois to submit asimilar brief on the case.

Unfortunately, Pam Harris and thou-sands of other Illinois homecareproviders remain stuck in legal limbountil the Supreme Court makes a finaldecision regarding their challenge.Meanwhile, aggressive union organizershave copied Blagojevich’s forced-union-ism blueprint in states like Michigan.

“We hope the Supreme Court willuphold the constitutional rights of PamHarris and thousands of other hard-working homecare providers, next term”said Ray LaJeunesse, Vice President ofthe National Right to Work Foundation.“Big Labor has already resorted to simi-lar organizing campaigns in other states,which means even more personal careproviders’ rights are now at risk.”

Dear Foundation Supporter,

In this issue of Foundation Action, you’ll read about some of the latestFoundation-assisted cases – and victories – helping victimized employees againstunion bosses at some of the most powerful unions in the United States, including theTeamsters, AFSCME, and the radical SEIU.

These unions have something in common besides their illegal attacks onindependent-minded workers. Big Labor’s top bosses are 100 percent committed tore-electing Barack Obama.

“President Obama, this is your army,” Teamster union chief Jimmy Hoffa, Jr.proclaimed last Labor Day.

“We must work our hearts out to re-elect President Obama,” newly-electedAFSCME top dog Lee Saunders insisted at the union’s June convention.

“SEIU’s agenda is my agenda,” Obama promised on the campaign trail in2007 – and he’s more than delivered on that promise. It’s no wonder the SEIU unionbosses were among the first to publicly endorse Obama’s re-election.

But you and I both know that rank-and-file workers – even union membersthemselves – often don’t support Big Labor’s radical political agenda.

In fact, our poll just before the midterm elections showed that the vastmajority of union members oppose the union bosses’ political spending binges. 80percent of union members said they support the Right to Work principle.

As election season heats up, workers across the country will find they’vebeen forced to subsidize electioneering they personally oppose. And we’ll be ready totake their cases, thanks to the continued support of concerned citizens like you.

Sincerely,

Mark Mix


Message from Mark MixCare Provider Unionization

continued from page 4

PresidentNational Right to WorkLegal Defense Foundation

“My primary concern isthat someone else will be

telling me how to bestcare for my son.”

Documents

August/September 2012 Foundation Action