thoughts on Wisconsin (during the union brouhaha)

While Ann Althouse has been my go-to site for the latest on the governor/public union standoff, Daniel Foster at the Corner has written a post that examines the battle the state is facing to convince the public that what has been passed (Senate Resolution 11 – it takes some poking around  the Wisconsin Legislature site to find it) is a general good.  This boggles my mind, simply because the two key changes that are causing the most pain and pushback seem so obviously necessary and reasonable to me.

Those two changes are the limiting of collective bargaining and the change from mandatory dues collection to voluntary dues collection.  Reading the resolution, the collective bargaining changes simply change the duration and permanence of collective bargains (they expire yearly vs. every two years, and cannot be extended but must be revisited).  The voluntary dues change for me is the big win, and one that should be put before every person who says this change hurts union members.  There is nothing that will stop a union member from contributing, so why is it considered the loss of a right for the union member to decide not to contribute, especially if there are things that the union is doing that the member disagrees with?  My bet is an enterprising reporter would get colorful and enlightening responses if he posed that question to the protesters occupying the state house today.