A recent paper by Jeff Vincent, research director of the Division of Labor Studies at Indiana University, grossly misrepresents the facts about Right to Work laws and the economic and moral arguments that have been made in support of enacting such a law in Indiana.

In seeking to undermine the powerful economic case for an Indiana Right to Work law, Vincent ignores the uncontroversial fact that living costs, both pre-tax and after-tax, are significantly lower in Right to Work states. Analyses from varied sources that account for living costs indicate that real earnings, household incomes, and disposable incomes are higher in Right to Work states than in non- Right to Work states. Data in a study by two U.S. Census Bureau researchers show that the aggregate real poverty rate is lower in Right to Work states than in non-Right to Work states.

Another key problem with Vincent’s paper is that it downplays, almost to the point of ignoring altogether, the importance of economic dynamism in assessing business climate. By his bizarre assessment, it is the very non-Right to Work states that are suffering the biggest net losses of young job-seekers to outmigration to Right to Work states that have the best “business climates” in America.

Finally, Vincent’s critique of the moral case for Right to Work laws ignores the fact that all Right to Work proponents seek is equal treatment under the law for employees who favor and employees who oppose unionization. Vincent apparently believes opponents of unionization deserve less freedom than proponents.

Type	Attachment
	Misdirection and Misrepresentation.pdf