So, the so-called "Liberal Media" is getting all persnickety about the passage of a bill by the Massachusetts State House that would restrict the collective bargaining rights of local government employees. As Massachusetts is a Blue State, folks are getting all "Et Tu Brute?" on the issue.
I have no problem calling myself a socialist yet despite my affinity for the likes of Marx and William Morris, I believe the conflation of labor unions with public sector unions serves to undermine the legitimacy of labor unions.
For one, public sector unions have a tendency to do things like this.
No to mention, public sector unions facilitate the power of "moneyed interests." Why?
Like moneyed interests, public sector unions have an incentive to suppress voter turnout.
In place like Philadelphia and other "Blue" jurisdictions, public sector unions (and their families) constitute a significant voting bloc. More often than not, they possess sufficient numbers to control the outcome of down the ballot elections. In off-year/low-turnout elections, public sector unions have sufficient numbers to control the outcome of elections.
Consider Philadelphia. Despite having a population of approximately 1.5M, it is not unusual for the total number of votes cast in off-year elections to be somewhere around 100,000. In the election that saw Seth Williams become Philadelphia's District Attorney, 104,133 votes were cast in the primary election.
Philadelphia's four public sector unions represent approximately 20,000 workers.
That number does not include family members of current workers, retirees and family members of retirees. Throw in those persons and we end up with an estimate of somewhere between 40,000 to 80,000 (possibly even more) Philadelphians who's interests are directly tied to the fate of public sector unions.
With that many voters, it is in the interest of public sector unions to ensure low voter turnout.
In low-turnout elections (non-Presidential), candidates supported by public sector unions will inevitably win.
The fact that they sometimes don't likely speaks to the fact that voter suppression tactics likely end up being overbroad thereby resulting in not only the suppression of voters who are not be aligned with the interests of public sector unions but also the members of the public sector unions themselves.