Our guest blogger is Adam Jentleson, Communications and Outreach Director for the Hyde Park Project at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

Breaking news tonight: Wall Street loves the Employee Free Choice Act.

Today, Wall Street rallied behind news that the Employee Free Choice Act legislation was re-introduced to Congress by Rep. George Miller and Sen. Tom Harkin.

Buoyed by the prospects of greater unionization pumping billions of dollars into the hands of consumers and providing broad economic benefits, the Street swung sharply upwards, with the Dow closing up more than 379 points.

At least, by the logic of the financial prognosticators on cable news, this would be a reasonable conclusion to draw.

Today, the Employee Free Choice Act was introduced in Congress, and the right-wing misinformation machine has gone into high gear in an attempt to defeat the legislation.

The number one falsehood perpetuated about the bill is that it would eliminate the secret ballot in union organizing, posing a fundamental threat to democracy. In that vein, Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) claimed today that because “85 percent of Americans” believe “you ought to have to have a secret ballot for the formation of a union,” the Employee Free Choice Act shouldn’t be enacted:

We believe you ought to have to have a secret ballot for the formation of a union. That’s what the American people believe. 85 percent of American people believe that ought to occur. That’s the safest for employees.

Watch it:

So a vast majority of Americans believe in secret ballot elections. Great! They will still have that option under the Employee Free Choice Act. After all, the bill simply gives employees the choice of how they want to form a union — whether by secret ballot election or by signing cards of consent — instead of leaving the decision up to their employers. And if we’re getting into poll numbers, 73 percent of Americans also approve of the bill’s main provisions.

As Rachel Maddow asked last night, “have you guys actually read the bill? Because if the employees still want the election thingy, they can still do that”:

Do you want its Cliffs notes version? Here it is from the House Committee on Education and Labor. Quote, “The Employee Free Choice Act does not abolish the NLRB election process. That process would still be available.” [...] It does not abolish the secret ballot. People get a choice. It‘s pretty simple thing to explain actually.

It’s pretty remarkable that Price feels okay touting the opinion of the American people, while disapproving of legislation that would allow them to act on that opinion.

Today, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Rep. George Miller (D-CA) introduced the Employee Free Choice Act in both houses of Congress. The bill would give workers a fairer path to forming unions, affording them an opportunity to bargain for higher wages and better benefits.

Predictably, this has set off a swarm of lobbying, as business leaders, in conjunction with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, try to squash the legislation. The Chamber and and rest of the anti-Employee Free Choice lobby “have said they will spend about $200 million on advertising and lobbying to block the measure.” That’s $200 million dollars to ensure that workers can’t have a fair shot at earning better wages.

But if that $200 million was instead put toward raising workers’ wages to union levels, it could do a lot of good. In fact, about 85,091 workers could earn the union wage premium — the difference between unionized workers’ wages and their non-union counterparts on average — for six months with that money. The Wonk Room examined what percentage of employees working for some of the Employee Free Choice Act’s premier corporate opponents this number represents:

Just a few days ago, Burger King reiterated its opposition to the Employee Free Choice Act, citing the “significant implications” it could have on small franchises.

But what about the significant implications that higher wages and better health insurance could have for Burger King employees? Big business is betting that $200 million will ensure we never find out.

Read more

Our guest blogger is Robin Chait, Associate Director for Teacher Quality at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

Today, President Barack Obama outlined his education agenda in a speech to the U. S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. It’s a comprehensive agenda for reform that, if implemented, would have a profound impact upon the U.S. educational system and student achievement in this country. Obama clearly understands that America’s long-term prosperity depends upon a strong educational system.

He called for dramatic changes to improve the quality of education received by most students — we don’t have time for incremental reforms that lead to modest improvements. In particular, his focus on “recruiting, preparing, and rewarding outstanding teachers” is essential, because we know from research that teachers are the most important school related factor affecting student learning.

Obama’s strategies acknowledge that the ways we recruit, prepare, and compensate teachers are outmoded and put high poverty schools at a disadvantage. He talked about rewarding good teachers with more money for improved student achievement, while giving all teachers the support they need to be successful. He also insisted that teachers who are unable to improve after being given support be removed.

As the Center for American Progress has noted, these strategies are critical to attracting and retaining more talented teachers:

Retention incentives might include increases in pay, such as performance pay, and in responsibility, such as career ladders that provide teachers with additional responsibilities as they become more effective. And efforts to improve or replace ineffective teachers can take multiple forms—from teacher-led initiatives such as peer review, to rigorous evaluation systems that identify teachers who need additional support, to heightened standards for tenure or changes in tenure systems.

And while improving our educational system won’t likely help the immediate economic crisis, it is a critical investment in long term economic growth. As The Wonk Room has pointed out in the past, “since the 1970s, the U.S. educational system has rested on its laurels, and we are losing ground” to the rest of the world.

Obama’s education plan represents an important investment in both stronger schools and long term economic growth. And he understands that quality teaching is key to both.