KINDER'S COMMENTARY: EFFORTS WILL BE MADE TO LIMIT UNION DUES-COLLECTION METHODS

Recently we have seen increasing activity in political campaigns by the small-business community. The National Federation of Independent Business represents these folks in a highly effective manner in the halls of your state Capitol and in Washington, D.C., as well.

It's about time, because the special interests on the other side -- principally the personal-injury lawyers of the trial bar, plus Big Labor -- have long been quietly active, and you have to give them credit: They never quit. I have long said that the outsized influence of the trial lawyers is the biggest untold story in Missouri politics. That is another column for another day. Today, we'll examine what will prove one of the biggest battlegrounds of 1998: A bold attempt to limit the power of Big Labor bosses to extort dues from their members to fund the causes those bosses support, whether the worker likes it or not.

"Every day American workers have money taken from their paycheck without their permission by labor union bosses who then spend the money on politics," says Americans for Tax Reform president Grover Norquist. This un-American practice is targeted by Norquist, who leads an effort to pass laws or initiatives in all 50 states that would make it illegal to collect or spend union dues for political purposes without the approval of union members. The measures would outlaw the practice of automatic paycheck deduction from workers' checks, with the money going into the union political coffers.

Exhibit No. 1: The state of Washington. When an amazing 70 percent of voters approved this "payroll protection" initiative two years ago, the unions had to resort to soliciting personal donations from their members and contributions plummeted. How much? The results were astonishing: Says nationally syndicated columnist Don Feder: "The number of public employee union members willing to donate to their union political fund plunged from 40,000 to 82. Similarly, the number of public school teachers who gave to their union's political fund abruptly fell from 45,000 to 8,000.

For Big Labor, far worse news than this is on the way in 1998. Backers of a proposed Campaign Reform Initiative in California have qualified this same "payroll protection" measure for the June ballot in the Golden State. Backed by Gov. Pete Wilson and an army of activists in the field, this payroll protection act looks to enjoy the same overwhelming support in California that it had in Washington. Big Labor is so spooked by it that they plan to spend $20-25 million to defeat it, and even this may not be enough. For comparison, consider that Big Labor's direct donations for all congressional elections nationwide amounted to $50 million last year, while they spent $32 million on a targeted TV blitz in their unsuccessful attempt to win back Democratic control of the U.S. House.

With the success in Washington and California, efforts are under way to qualify similar measures for the ballots in Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, Ohio, Florida, Michigan and Colorado. Missouri may be joining them. In at least some states where Republicans control both the House and Senate and the governor's mansion, look for these laws to pass and be signed into law this year. At the federal level, such amendments will be offered to pending legislation.

Nothing can stop an idea whose time has come, right? Keep your eye on these payroll protection initiatives in 1998.

~Peter Kinder is assistant to the president of Rust Communications and a state senator from Cape Girardeau.