Union organizing

(Presumably, the Democratic lawmakers who sponsored this 2000 legislation have no problem with labor unions using mandatory dues from their members for political purposes, but that’s a matter for another day.)

Instead, the businesses must set up separate accounts to fund any campaigns against labor organizing movements.

A few years back, trade groups representing California hospitals, manufacturers and high-tech businesses challenged the law. They lost by a 12-3 vote at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Now, it appears, the U.S. Supreme Court may take up the case. The justices on Monday asked the Bush administration to weigh in on the appeal by the California business groups.

The case will likely be decided based on technical issues involving whether the California law conflicts with the National Labor Relations Act. But another salient issue is whether governments can attach strings to the taxpayer funds they dole out like candy at Halloween.

In fact, the 9th Circuit’s decision to uphold the California law was based on the concept that states have broad discretion to dictate how their handouts are used.

This debate, of course, is largely symbolic. Money is fungible. A creative CFO can ensure that various accounts never co-mingle even though the taxpayer subsidies are enriching the corporation’s overall bottom line.

But for the California companies taking this issue to the Supreme Court, it might be instructive to consider this: If you don’t like the law, get off the taxpayer dole.