Compulsory Irrelevance

The National Rifle Association (NRA) is an organization whose mission is to protect the Constitution’s second-amendment right “to keep and bear arms” against legislative or judicial encroachment. I am a member of the NRA because this right is important to me. However, as I was thinking about this today, something struck me. That fact is that the Constitution is important to all Americans, and not just the parts we like or personally find important. Since the Second Amendment is part of the constitution, the protection of it is vital. It’s really not fair that some people (NRA members) bear this burden for all the rest of us.

In other words, I realized that NRA membership should be mandatory for all Americans. I’ll readily grant that some Americans don’t agree with the NRA’s stance, and I’m sure that some Americans DO agree, but don’t think the NRA is effective. But that’s not important. What’s important is to ensure that the NRA obtains the resources it needs to fulfill its mission, as it sees it, and as it wants. After all, the NRA claims to advocate for all Americans. For this reason, I’ll go a step further and assert that NRA dues should be automatically deducted from paychecks. It would be an enormous headache for the NRA to take care of dues collection on its own. And imagine the compliance problem if people got their hands on their own money prior to paying their dues. Tasking the NRA with this is an unfair burden.

OK. Does that sound silly? Does it sound unjust? It should. It IS silly, and it IS unjust. But just as a quick test, please re-read the second paragraph, and replace “NRA” with “ACLU.” If the silliness factor either increased or decreased for you, I submit that your objectivity needs a brush-up. It’s hard, but crucial, to apply the same standard to issues with which we agree, as to issues with which we do not. Everyone struggles with that (or should).

Now for a much more interesting test. Read that paragraph one more time, replacing “NRA” with “Unions.” The bald fact is that for a very large number of Americans, the silliness factor falls to zero and this suddenly becomes totally reasonable. Why is that?

Let’s go back to the NRA for a moment. The only way the NRA can continue to exist is if it resonates with a sufficient number of people, and if it is effective in fulfilling its mission. Otherwise, no members, and no dues. I see nothing wrong with that. I think that’s exactly how it should be. And yet, the prospect of unions needing to meet these same criteria causes loud howls of impending Armageddon. What really got me into this line of thought was the spat in Wisconsin between the government and the labor unions, so let me zero in from all unions to public sector unions.

Organizations exist to promote causes. Let’s contrast two causes. The first cause is the protection of the American Constitution. The second cause is the maximization of labor costs at the government level, for the benefit of government employees and their union officials. If you had to compel membership and dues for one and only one of those causes, which do you think would have a more compelling call on you? I hope you would say the Constitution. It has a call on all of us--- many of us have sworn to uphold it as part of our vocation--- while the other cause is mere narrowly focused self interest. And yet the first cause, the one with a greater call upon us, is obviously ridiculous. Who would be so silly as to advocate mandatory membership in the ACLU or the NRA?

Tell me then: why are so many people so sold on the lesser cause? If it’s wrong to do that to people for the sake of our very Constitution, how does it become right to do that to people for a less compelling reason? It goes back to that objectivity thing, doesn’t it? Pretty hard to be all abstract and objective when it happens to be your paycheck, huh?

But you know what? I hope you would have rejected both options. The reason is that the First Amendment gives us freedom of assembly. It would violate the Constitution, and be very ironic, to force you into an organization whose purpose is to protect the Constitution. How much more does this apply to being forced into an organization whose purpose is merely commercial? Further, the Fifth Amendment prohibits the government from taking your stuff (say, money) for public use without compensation. Surely the government, therefore, can’t take your stuff for PRIVATE (that is, union) use!

Suppose we regressed back to the Constitution in this matter. Suppose that union membership and dues were purely voluntary? What’s the danger? If people only joined unions because they felt that they needed the protection, and if they only paid dues because they felt the dues were worth it, would the world end? Would serfdom ensue?

Think about the NRA. Do you think it’s effective? It’s probably the most effective organization in the country. The NRA almost always wins. And when the NRA loses, it tends to be somebody else’s Pyrrhic victory. It is elementary politics that you just don’t mess with the NRA. Pretty much the same thing is true of the ACLU, wouldn’t you say? And yet, the rules I’m talking about are EXACTLY the rules the NRA and ACLU play by. Don’t you think that’s a lot of WHY they are so effective? If they had a steady stream of free money, how complacent would they be? How much graft would be in the leadership?

If unions really have a reason to exist, then they don’t need compulsory dues, and they don’t need compulsory membership, PARTICULARLY in the public sector. But we see people herded en masse into unions whether they agree or not with the cause. And their dues are extracted from them regardless of whether they think the money is well used.

Self-evidently, unions don’t need to exist.

OK, I didn’t really mean that. (Got your attention though, huh?) What I mean is, if unions DO need to exist, then they DON’T need these anti-constitutional, tyrannical methods of compulsory membership and dues, and should drop them immediately. If unions can’t survive without being compulsory, they must be irrelevant. As long as these methods are employed, unions have no evident reason to exist. And people who howl about losing these methods are equally suspect. It works for the NRA and ACLU very well, thank you. What are you afraid of?