On the recordMarch 19, 2015
I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott). Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen of the House, I rise in very strong opposition to this resolution, and I urge every one of my Members to oppose this resolution. We considered a Paycheck Fairness Act, a card check bill which said that if the unions got the signatures of a certain percentage, that they could move ahead and be organized, subject to an election. There was a hue and cry about, that was undemocratic, that there ought to be a requirement for an election. A number of people came into my office, and I said, Well, I think we can accommodate that. We will make sure there is a requirement that--as every one of us can do--you can get the names of the voters, you can get their addresses, you can even get their history of voting, and you can perhaps call them on the phone. We can all do that in elections. But the fact of the matter is--and everybody on this House floor knows it--procedurally, so many employers who do not believe that they are going to prevail take the steps of delaying and delaying and delaying. They want elections tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow. Mr. Speaker, what the NLRB is trying to do with this rule is to make sure that there is an election, that it is fair, and that it will be held in a timely fashion. I hope this House defeats this resolution.…





