What: All Issues : Labor Rights : Rights of Individuals in the Workplace : (H.R. 1) On an amendment that would have eliminated all funding ($283 million) for the National Labor Relations Board, which was established to protect workers’ rights and promote productive negotiations between labor and management. This amendment was offered to legislation funding the federal government (such bills are known as “continuing resolutions, or “CRs”) through September 2011, and cutting $61 billion in federal funding for many government programs. (2011 house Roll Call 75)
 Who: All Members
[POW!]
 

To find out how your Members of Congress voted on this bill, use the form on the right.

(H.R. 1) On an amendment that would have eliminated all funding ($283 million) for the National Labor Relations Board, which was established to protect workers’ rights and promote productive negotiations between labor and management. This amendment was offered to legislation funding the federal government (such bills are known as “continuing resolutions, or “CRs”) through September 2011, and cutting $61 billion in federal funding for many government programs.
house Roll Call 75     Feb 17, 2011
Progressive Position:
Nay
Progressive Result:
Win

This was a vote on an amendment by Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) that would have eliminated all funding ($283 million) for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which was established to protect workers’ rights and promote productive negotiations between labor and management. This amendment was offered to legislation funding the federal government (such bills are known as “continuing resolutions, or “CRs”) through September 2011, and cutting $61 billion in federal funding for many government programs.

Price urged support for his amendment: “…I rise on my amendment, which identifies an agency that can only be described as anti-worker and anti-business and anti-jobs…. It is the National Labor Relations Board. It's a New Deal relic charged with conducting elections for labor union representation and investigating unfair labor practices….So my amendment is very simple. At a time of crippling national debt that destroys jobs, my amendment would defund the NLRB and save the American taxpayer $283 million….So a vote for this amendment would be a vote for America's job creators, and we would work to defund an agency whose time has really, really passed.”

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) opposed the amendment: “The NLRB has been in existence for 75 years. Its functions are to protect the rights of workers to unionize or not unionize; to promote peaceful, productive relations between labor and management….Why do we want to throw out the entire system with nothing to replace it? If the amendment were adopted, what would take the place of the NLRB in determining workers' preferences about unionization? If workers are fired for joining a union, where would they go for a remedy?”

The House rejected this amendment by a vote of 176-250. Voting “yea” were 176 Republicans. All 190 Democrats present and 60 Republicans voted “nay.” As a result, the House rejected an amendment that would have eliminated all funding ($283 million) for the National Labor Relations Board, which was established to protect workers’ rights and promote productive negotiations between labor and management.

Issue Areas:

Find your Member of
Congress' votes

Select by Name