Today, The Wall Street Journal had a story entitled "Unions Push Issues in State Capitals". The story told a tale of unions trying to move legislation that advances "card check" protections and similar measures that would make union organizing more fair.

   What struck me were the last two paragraphs of the story:

The state efforts face stiff headwinds. "There is a noticeably less friendly mood in the country toward unions," said Gary Chaison, a professor of industrial relations at Clark University in Worcester, Mass.

In the Nov. 3 elections, Republicans won the governorships of Virginia and New Jersey against Democratic opponents who were supportive of union issues.

   Those two assertions are, in my view, false and entirely irrelevant. First, there is not a harshening of the mood towards unions–the entire basis of that assertion comes from one quote from one person, without any accompanying information or data.

   Second, the story tried to draw a connection that does not exist between the election results in two states and the support for unions. Jon Corzine lost his election because of a whole series of problems in the state, some of his own doing (or lack of response to) and some entirely out of his control. The Virginia race had nothing to do with union issues–the Democrat ran a lackluster campaign and there is no evidence I saw–zero–that made any reference to any support the Democratic candidate had from unions, or his stance on union issues, having any effect on the race.

   You can analyze all you want–but it would be nice to have some evidence to back up the analysis.