Latest stories

Florida House of Representatives advances public-sector labor bill

On March 4, the Florida House of Representatives passed legislation that would alter the process by which public-sector workers join, resign from, and pay dues to unions.

What does the bill propose? HB1 would amend Florida’s public-sector labor laws as follows:

  • Requires employees joining unions to sign membership cards. These membership cards must include the following statements:
    • Florida is a right-to-work state.
    • Union membership is not required as a condition of employment.
    • Union membership and automatic payroll deductions for union dues are voluntary.
    • An employee cannot be discriminated against for refusing to join or pay fees to a union.
  • Requires unions to revoke an employee’s membership upon the employee’s written request (unions cannot ask an employee why he or she is resigning).
  • Requires written authorization for automatic payroll deductions for union dues.
  • Provides that dues deduction authorizations are in force, unless revoked by the employee, for three years or until the ratification of a new collective bargaining agreement, whichever comes first.
  • Requires employers to verify dues deduction authorizations.

How did the House vote, and what comes next? The House voted 63-52 in favor of the legislation. Republicans cast all 63 yes votes. Forty-four Democrats and eight Republicans voted against the bill. Five members did not vote.

The bill now goes to the Florida State Senate, where it has been assigned to the Governmental Oversight and Accountability, Community Affairs, and Rules committees. A companion bill (SB804) was introduced in the Senate on Jan. 14 and referred to the Governmental Oversight and Accountability, Community Affairs, and Rules committees.

What are the reactions?

  • Support
    • Rep. James Grant (R), the bill’s sponsor, said, “This is about money, not a membership. This is simply a question of whether or not somebody’s paycheck can [have union dues] deducted.”
    • Rep. Josie Tomkow (R), who voted in favor of the bill, said, “HB 1 empowers workers to make decisions about their union membership. Should they want to join the union or leave the union, that decision must be protected and their rights as workers defended.”
    • Vincent Vernuccio, a senior fellow at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, said, “This bill simply protects public employees in Florida. It confirms that they want to be members of the union and they want to pay the union. It ensures that public employers have the necessary information to deduct dues from their paychecks.”
  • Opposition
    • Rep. Fentrice Driskell (D) voted against the legislation, saying, “One of the concerns that I have is potential intimidation. Could you imagine to have to go to your employer, and have to have your employer personally verify that you’ve signed an authorization for a deduction of dues – may create an environment where that type of intimidation can occur?”
    • Rep. Tina Polsky (D) also voted against the bill, saying, “There were teachers, firefighters, policemen, all the people we say we care so much about, all saying that this bill was rather insulting to them. Because they know how to revoke their membership. They know how to sign up for membership and dues.”
    • Stephanie Yocum, president of the Polk Education Association, said, “I describe it as a poor solution to a nonexistent problem because Florida is already a ‘right-to-work’ state, which means that people don’t have to join their union. We’re not beating people over the head to join, and people definitely know how to revoke their membership if they want to.”

What we’ve been reading

The big picture

Number of relevant bills by state

We are currently tracking 91 pieces of legislation dealing with public-sector employee union policy. On the map below, a darker shade of green indicates a greater number of relevant bills. Click here for a complete list of all the bills we’re tracking.

Union Station map March 6, 2020.png

Number of relevant bills by current legislative status

Union Station status chart March 6, 2020.png

Number of relevant bills by partisan status of sponsor(s)

Union Station partisan chart March 6, 2020.png

Recent legislative actions

Below is a complete list of relevant legislative actions taken since our last issue. Bills are listed in alphabetical order, first by state then by bill number.

  • Florida H0001: This bill would require employees who wish to join a union to sign a membership authorization form. It would require unions to revoke an employee’s membership upon his or her written request. It would also require a signed authorization to deduct dues from an employee’s salary.
    • House approved March 4; transmitted to Senate and referred to Senate Governmental Oversight and Accountability, Community Affairs, and Rules committees March 5.
    • Republican sponsorship.
  • Maryland HB1134: This bill would grant collective bargaining rights to certain employees of the circuit courts and the District Court of Maryland.
    • House Appropriations Committee hearing scheduled March 3.
    • Democratic sponsorship.
  • New Hampshire SB448: This bill would require the state public employee labor relations board to certify a union as a bargaining unit’s exclusive representative if that union receives a “majority written authorization.”
    • Senate Commerce Committee hearing scheduled March 3.
    • Democratic sponsorship.
  • Virginia HB582: This bill would repeal the existing prohibition against collective bargaining by public employees.
    • Senate approved substitute bill March 5.
    • Democratic sponsorship.
  • Virginia SB939: This bill would permit local governments to recognize unions as bargaining agents for public-sector workers.
    • House requested conference committee March 3; Senate accepted request March 5.
    • Democratic sponsorship.
  • Washington HB2017: This bill would establish collective bargaining rights for administrative law judges.
    • Senate approved March 4.
    • Democratic sponsorship.


Washington Legislature refers constitutional amendment to 2020 ballot concerning the investment of Family Medical Leave and Long-Term Care Accounts

Senate Joint Resolution 8212 would allow funds in the Family and Medical Leave Insurance Account and the Long-Term Care Services and Supports Trust Account to be invested as provided by law. The amendment is the first measure certified to appear on the statewide ballot in Washington this November.

Currently, the Washington Constitution prohibits the state from investing funds into stocks or other methods of investment, limiting investment capabilities of the state to government and corporate bonds and certificates of deposit. Some other funds have been made exempt from that constitutional restriction, including the following:

  1. public pension and retirements funds;
  2. industrial insurance trust funds; and
  3. funds that benefit individuals with developmental disabilities.

In Washington, a legislatively referred constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds (66.67%) vote in each chamber of the Washington State Legislature during one legislative session.

Senate Joint Resolution 8212 was sponsored by Republican Senators John Braun and Mark Schoesler and Democratic Senators Steve Conway and Mark Mullet. The resolution was introduced on January 13, 2020. It passed in the Senate on February 19, 2020, by a vote of 45-3 with one Senator excused. The measure passed in the House on March 6, 2020, by a vote of 96-1 with one Representative excused. The four no votes the amendment received in the state legislature came from Representative Frank Chopp (D) and Senators Bob Hasegawa (D), Doug Ericksen (R), and Mike Padden (R).

The Washington State Legislature may refer constitutional amendments or state statutes to the ballot during the 2020 legislative session, which is set to run through March 12, 2020. Citizens may collect signatures to place proposed laws on the 2020 ballot as Initiatives to the People (ITPs), for which 259,622 valid signatures are required by July 2, 2020. Veto referendums targeting the repeal of bills passed in the 2020 legislature can also qualify for the ballot through signature petition drives.

A total of 60 measures appeared on the statewide ballot in Washington during even years between 2000 and 2018, of which, 58% (35) were approved and 42% (25) were defeated.



Costa and Cookingham advance to CA-16 general election

Incumbent Jim Costa (D) and Kevin Cookingham (R) advanced to the Nov. 3 general election for California’s 16th Congressional District, defeating two other candidates in the March 3 top-two primary. As of 10:00 a.m. PT on March 5, Cookingham had received 38.5% of the vote to Costa’s 37.5%, followed by Esmeralda Soria (D) with 18.4% and Kim Williams (D) with 5.6%. One Democrat and one Republican have advanced from the district’s primary in each congressional election since California’s top-two primary system went into effect in 2011.

Cookingham received the endorsement of the California Republican Party. Costa’s endorsers included Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D) and Kamala Harris (D), Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), and Rep. Adam Schiff (D). Soria was endorsed by civil rights activist Dolores Huerta, the California Labor Federation, and SEIU California. Williams received endorsements from Brand New Congress and Our Revolution.

Major race rating outlets rate the general election as Solid Democratic or Safe Democratic. The 2017 Cook Partisan Voter Index for this district was D+9, meaning that in the previous two presidential elections, this district’s results were 9 percentage points more Democratic than the national average.

All 435 House districts will be up for election on November 3, 2020, and the results will determine the partisan balance of the U.S. House in the 117th Congress. As of March 2020, Democrats have a 232-197 advantage over Republicans. If Republicans win 18 Democratic-controlled districts, they will win control of the House. If Democrats hold as many districts, they will maintain their control of the chamber.



Harder and Howze advance to CA-10 general election

Incumbent Josh Harder (D) and Ted Howze (R) advanced to the Nov. 3 general election for California’s 10th Congressional District, defeating four other candidates in the March 3 top-two primary. As of 5:50 p.m. PT on March 4, Harder had received 39.8% of the vote to Howze’s 37.5%. The only other declared candidate with more than 10% of the vote was Bob Elliott (R) with 14.2%.

Major race rating outlets rate the general election as Lean Democratic or Likely Democratic. The 2017 Cook Partisan Voter Index for this district was even, meaning that in the previous two presidential elections, this district’s results were within 1 percentage point of the national average.

All 435 House districts will be up for election on Nov. 3, 2020, and the results will determine the partisan balance of the U.S. House in the 117th Congress. As of March 2020, Democrats have a 232-197 advantage over Republicans. If Republicans win 18 Democratic-controlled districts, they will win control of the House. If Democrats hold as many districts, they will maintain their control of the chamber.



February 2020 breakdown of state legislative party membership: 52.3% Republicans, 46.8% Democrats

February’s partisan count of the 7,383 state legislators across the United States shows 52.3% of all state legislators are Republicans and 46.8% are Democrats, which is consistent with January 2020.

Ballotpedia tallies the partisan balance of state legislatures at the end of every month. This refers to which political party holds the majority of seats in each chamber. Republicans hold a majority in 59 chambers, and Democrats hold the majority in 39 chambers. One chamber (Alaska’s state House) has a power-sharing agreement between the two parties.

Altogether, there are 1,972 state senate and 5,411 state house offices. Republicans held 3,859 state legislative seats—1,084 state senate seats (down one seat from January) and 2,775 state house seats (up four seats from last month). Democrats held 3,455 legislative seats—874 state Senate seats (consistent with January) and 2,581 state House seats (up three from last month). Independent or third-party legislators held 34 seats. There were 35 vacant seats—a decrease of six vacancies since January.

At the time of the 2018 elections, 7,280 state legislators were affiliated with either the Republican or Democratic parties. There were 3,257 Democratic state legislators, 4,023 Republican state legislators, 35 independent or third-party state legislators, and 68 vacancies.

Additional reading:



SCOTUS issues opinion in case concerning the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)

On March 3, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its ruling in Kansas v. Garcia, a case concerning the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA).

In the case, Ramiro Garcia, Donaldo Morales, and Guadalupe Ochoa-Lara were each convicted of identity theft in Johnson County, Kansas. They each appealed their convictions to the Kansas Supreme Court, arguing the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) preempted their prosecution. On appeal, the Kansas Supreme Court reversed the three convictions. The State of Kansas appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The questions presented before the Supreme Court of the United States were:
1. Whether IRCA expressly preempts the States from using any information entered on or appended to a federal Form I-9, including common information such as name, date of birth, and social security number, in a prosecution of any person (citizen or alien) when that same, commonly used information also appears in non-IRCA documents, such as state tax forms, leases, and credit applications.
2. Whether the Immigration Reform and Control Act impliedly preempts Kansas’ prosecution of respondents.

In a 5-4 opinion, the court reversed and remanded the Kansas Supreme Court’s decision, holding that the Kansas statutes under which Garcia, Morales, and Ochoa-Lara were convicted are not expressly preempted.

Justice Samuel Alito delivered the opinion of the court. Justice Clarence Thomas filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Neil Gorsuch joined. Justice Stephen Breyer filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan joined.

Additional reading:



SCOTUS takes up case questioning ACA’s individual mandate

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a case in its October 2020-2021 term concerning the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). The case, California v. Texas, is consolidated with Texas v. California, and came on a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.

In 2010, President Barack Obama (D) signed the ACA into law. The ACA established requirements for individuals to have health coverage and instituted fines for those without coverage.

In 2018, 20 states filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas challenging § 5000A of the ACA and claiming the law was unconstitutional. U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor ruled the law was invalid.

On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled § 5000A was unconstitutional and remanded the case. A group of states petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for review, arguing (1) the respondents did not have the legal right to challenge the law and (2) the law was not unconstitutional.

SCOTUS will consider the following three issues:
(1) Whether the plaintiffs have established Article III standing to challenge the minimum coverage provision in § 5000A(a). The minimum coverage provision, also known as the individual mandate, requires individuals to have “minimum essential coverage.”

(2) Whether reducing the amount specified in § 5000A(c) to zero rendered the individual mandate unconstitutional.

(3) If so, whether the individual mandate is severable from the rest of the ACA.

Additional reading:



Statewide filing deadline passes in Nebraska

On March 2, the filing deadline passed for non-incumbents to run for elected office in Nebraska. The filing deadline for incumbents previously passed on February 18. Candidates filed for the following offices:

U.S. Senator
• Incumbent Ben Sasse (R) filed to run for re-election.

U.S. House Districts 1, 2, and 3
• Every incumbent filed to run for re-election.

Nebraska State Senate (25 seats)
• The incumbent did not file to run for re-election in Districts 9, 11, 19, 29, 31, and 45.

Public Service Commissioner
• The incumbent filed to run for re-election.

State Board of Education (4 seats)
• The incumbent did not file to run for re-election for State Board of Education Districts 3 and 4.

Ballotpedia is also covering retention elections for the following judicial offices:
• Nebraska Supreme Court (2 seats)
• Nebraska Court of Appeals (2 seats)

Finally, Ballotpedia is covering local elections in the following areas:
• Lancaster County
• Omaha
• Elkhorn Public Schools
• Millard Public Schools
• Norris School District 160
• Omaha Public Schools
• Ralston Public Schools
• Waverly School District 145
• Westside Community Schools

The primary is scheduled for May 12, and the general election is scheduled for November 3, 2020.

Nebraska’s statewide filing deadline was the 14th to take place in the 2020 election cycle. The next major party statewide filing deadline is on March 6 in Georgia.

Nebraska has a Republican state government trifecta. A trifecta exists when one political party simultaneously holds the governor’s office and majorities in both state legislative chambers, or in Nebraska’s case, the unicameral Nebraska State Senate.

Additional reading:



Georgia filing deadline is March 6

The major-party filing deadline to run for elected office in Georgia is on March 6, 2020. In Georgia, prospective candidates may file for the following offices:

• U.S. Senate (2 seats: 1 special election and 1 regular election)
• U.S. House (14 seats)
• Georgia Public Service Commission (2 seats)
• State Senate (56 seats)
• State House (180 seats)
• Georgia Supreme Court (3 seats)
• Georgia Court of Appeals (7 seats)

Ballotpedia is also covering local elections in the following areas:
• DeKalb County, Georgia
• DeKalb County School District
• Fulton County Schools
• Henry County Schools
• Muscogee County School District
• Savannah-Chatham County Public School System
• Cherokee County School District
• Clayton County Public Schools
• Cobb County School District
• Forsyth County Schools
• Gwinnett County Public Schools

The primary is scheduled for May 19, a primary runoff is scheduled for July 21 if needed, and the general election is scheduled for November 3, 2020. If needed, a general runoff election will be held on December 1, 2020, for state races and on January 5, 2021, for federal races.

Georgia’s statewide filing deadline is the 15th to take place in the 2020 election cycle. The next statewide filing deadline is on March 9 in Montana.

Georgia has a Republican state government trifecta. A trifecta exists when one political party simultaneously holds the governor’s office and majorities in both state legislative chambers.

Additional reading:



New Hampshire House special election scheduled for Tuesday

A special election is scheduled for March 10 in the Merrimack 24 District of the New Hampshire House of Representatives. Kathleen Martins (D) and Elliot Axelman (R) are competing in the special election, and voters will have until 7 p.m. local time to cast their ballot.

The seat became vacant on December 13, 2019, when Dick Marple (R) passed away. He served in the state House from 1999 to 2000, 2002 to 2006, and 2014 to 2019.

Merrimack 24 is a multi-member district with four seats. The three other seats in the district are all currently held by Republicans. Martins ran in the 2018 general election for one of the four seats, but she placed fifth in the race and was 113 votes behind Marple.

Democrats control the state House by a 233-164 margin with one Libertarian member and two vacancies. New Hampshire has a divided government, and no political party holds a state government trifecta. A trifecta exists when one political party simultaneously holds the governor’s office and majorities in both state legislative chambers.

As of March, 33 state legislative special elections have been scheduled for 2020 in 15 states. Between 2011 and 2019, an average of 77 special elections took place each year.

Additional reading: