I’ve noticed a correlation between Forced Unionized States, Blue States and Two-Party-Consent-States.
1. GROUP #1 – Forced Unionized States = Blue States:
Currently, there are 28 “Non-Right-to-Work-States” (Forced Unionized), and all of them are Blue (democrats). The question of WHY is rhetorical. Apparently, these Forced Unionized States (particularly in public sector) are forcibly being used as collection agencies to garnish union dues from government workers. And these garnishments are reportedly being used by the unions to finance democrat candidates.
2. Group #2 – Two Party Consent States:
According to AAPS listing, there are 12 “Two-Party-Consent-States”. A “2-Party-Consent-State” requires that all parties must consent to conversations being recorded. Coincidentally ALL 12 “Two-Party-Consent-States” are also blue. All “2-Party-Consent-States” except for 2 (Florida & Nevada) are forced unionized. Yep, Florida and Nevada are the odd balls in this group. I think the Unions that are set up in 2-party-consent states has something to do with this self-serving law. Lets say, the government union in NY is trying to shake down the city for more money; and tells the worker to not plow snow in front of folks houses. Obviously, the union boss will NOT consent to being recorded. So what proof would the worker have that the unlawful order ever occurred.
CONCLUSION:
Florida & Nevada, which are right-to-work states, may turn red (albeit they both are under the 2-party-consent rule). Florida, unlike Nevada would probably be the 1st to change to a 1-party-consent rule. Reason being is that Florida is located too close to other red 1-party-consent states that have right-to-work laws. Also, it may be a challenge for Nevada to dump the 2-party-consent rules due to brothels & gambling activities. Yep, Nevada would be in a bind on this one considering that its a right-to-work state.
If the forced unionized states would get rid of the 2-party-consent rule, it may give workers confidence to blow the whistle (with proof) on union bosses. Also, to get rid of 2-party-consent rule would be closer step to getting “right-to-work” law.
| One Party Consent States | Two Party Consent States | |
| Alabama | New Mexico | California |
| Alaska | New York | Connecticut |
| Arizona | North Carolina | Delaware |
| Arkansas | North Dakota | Florida |
| Colorado | Ohio | Maryland |
| District of Columbia | Oklahoma | Massachusetts |
| Georgia | Oregon | Nevada (see other statute) |
| Hawaii | Rhode Island (see case law) | New Hampshire |
| Idaho | South Carolina (no statute, see case law) | Pennsylvania |
| South Dakota | Vermont | |
| Indiana | Tennesee | Washington |
| Iowa | Texas | Illinois |
| Kansas | Utah | |
| Kentucky | Virginia | |
| Louisiana | West Virginia | |
| Maine | Wisconsin (see other statute) | |
| Michigan (see other statute) | Wyoming | |
| Minnesota | ||
| Mississippi | ||
| Missouri | ||
| Montana | ||
| Nebraska | ||
| New Jersey | ||
Relevant Links:
ArleneArmy 