Few regular readers of this site need to be convinced about the harm "right to work" (for less) policies, which are at the core of the Republican Party's agenda, have on working families. I just wanted to point to a recent op-ed piece by Indiana AFL-CIO Pres. Nancy J. Guyott that puts some rhetorical ammunition in our belts in the fight against right to work laws.

In her piece, Guyott writes:

More people live in poverty in right-to-work for less states, 19.1 percent compared to 16.6 percent in all other states.



Poverty is increasing more rapidly in right-to-work-for-less states, rising 7.4 percent in a decade in those states compared to 6 percent rise in all other states



Though median household incomes fell, on average, throughout the country during the failed policies of the Bush administration, families in right-to-work-for-less states today have $6,184 a year less in income compared to their counterparts in all other states.



More people live without health insurance in right-to-work-for-less states, 16.7 compared to 13.5 percent for people living in the remaining states. The number of people without health insurance in right-to-work-for-less states is rising nearly 70 percent faster than in other states, 3.2 percent compared to 1.9 percent from 2000 to 2009.



Similarly, a 2006 study by Indiana University's Division of Labor Studies found that Hoosier workers could see a drop of 16 percent in weekly wages, if Indiana takes the low-road right-to-work-for-less strategy.

Lower wages, higher poverty rates, less access to healthcare – and as she also notes elsewhere in the article, anti-union laws have NOT created job growth – mean higher profits for corporations – the same corporation who at the drop of the hat will still outsource to other countries. They do not mean higher living standards for working families or stronger, more stable communities.

Simply put, anti-union laws mean more social problems and fewer resources to fix them. This is the Republican Party's agenda.