On Sunday, Washington Post reporter Alec MacGillis posted an article titled “Five Myths About the Labor Union Movement.” His five myths included:

1. Organized labor is in inexorable decline.
2. Unions are bad for economic growth.
3. Labor laws are not the issue — economics are.
4. The Employee Free Choice Act would radically reshape the job market.
5. Unions have the Democrats in their pocket.

MacGillis then attempts to “debunk” these myths. However, writing for OpenMarkets.org, Ivan Osorio rips MacGillis’ efforts at debunking. Osorio effectively dissects MacGillis’ “proof” and sustains the truth inherent in the “myths.” Among the points made by Osorio,

Point 1: “A sure sign of an industry being economically moribund is its having to rely on government to survive, which is exactly what organized labor is doing by relying on public sector membership to keep its numbers up. This is not a “shift,” but a retreat away from the market.”

Point 2: “It’s worth noting the weakness of the pro-unionization argument he cites, which relies on arguing causation from coincidence, in both time and location. Economic growth occurring at the same time as increases in union membership does not prove causation one way or the other.”

and

“MacGillis notes, rightly, the enormous stress that public sector unions have put on state budgets. This is a major problem that could seriously harm the greater economy by fostering an environment of high taxes, poor public services, and future policy uncertainty.”

Point 3: “The New Deal-era NLRA not functioning as it was intended is irrelevant to the significance of economic changes regarding the state of organized labor today.”

Point 5: “Events over the past year suggest that Obama and some of his fellow Democrats have pursued union-friendly policies that have proven unpopular among the general public…According to the Center for Responsive Politics, during the 2008 election cycle, 12 of the top 20 (and six of the top 10) campaign donors were unions, which gave nearly exclusively to Democrats.”

I won’t address point 4 here – if you’ve been reading INK for very long, you know the facts about this “myth.”