Pols see infrastructure as key

Federal Agencies are controlled by the President through appointments, hiring and whatnot. Thus when an executive order of this manner is stated, then it is logical to state my affect, thus why the trade organization has expressed their concern.

While the order is union-friendly, it is not an order "stating that all federal funds going to construction jobs must use union workers."

To quote the order directly:

"Accordingly, it is the policy of the Federal Government to ENCOURAGE executive agencies to CONSIDER requiring the use of project labor agreements in connection with large-scale construction projects in order to promote economy and efficiency in Federal procurement." (capitalization mine).

If the order had been meant to rquire union workers it would have said so. But it doesn't.

We're all entitled to our own opinion, but not our own facts. As far as the UNC education....geez, we just can't seem to agree on anything, can we?

Just read it and you must be incapable of reading through his KOOL-AID rhetoric as it is precisely how I described it. You can thank UNC-CH for my education.

Blogs are not facts necessarily.

Obama Issues 4th Union-Friendly Executive Order
Friday, February 06, 2009
By Staff, Associated Press

Washington (AP) - President Barack Obama has issued an executive order backing the use of union labor for large-scale federal construction projects.

The order encourages federal agencies to have construction contractors enter project labor agreements. Those agreements require contractors to negotiate with union officials, recognize union wages and benefits and abide by collective bargaining agreements.

Obama's order restores a Clinton administration rule that was rescinded by President George W. Bush.

It is the fourth union-friendly executive order that Obama has signed since he's been in office.

This is what the AP wrote on the matter...

Facts are facts and the statements I made are completely true and substantiated by these article...Thanks for playing

As for my statistics...here you go...The Associated Builders and Contractors has already come out against the executive order. The organization claims that union-only project labor agreements increase construction costs between 10% and 20%. It also says that it discriminates against the 84% of construction workers that chose not to join a labor union.

http://sev.prnewswire.com/construction-building/20090206/DC6802106022009-1.html

CitizenOpinionated:

Your statement about the presidential executive order is simply untrue. If you care to do so, you can read the actual executive order at http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/02/obama-exec-orde.html

Spending money on infrastructure might be well served during these tough economic times, but I am extremely worried about a recent Executive Order that has not been highly touted in the ranks of the media. Pres. BHO made an executive order stating that all federal funds going to construction jobs must use union workers. Facts show that 84% of the construction industry in not unionized, thus only a select few would be eligible or the remainder would have to join a union. Union workers will raise the cost of each project by 10 to 20%.

Is this truly the best bang for our buck, during this these economic times?