Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2107-2109)
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 9, 1998
Democratic Rights for Union Members Act of 1998 - Amends the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 to allow a trusteeship (for authorization control of a union) to be authorized only after a fair hearing either before the executive board or another body provided by the constitution and bylaws of the labor organization. Requires a labor organization to show by clear and convincing proof that the continuation of the trusteeship is necessary for an allowable purpose in order to prevent it from being presumed invalid in specified proceedings under the Act and having its discontinuance decreed, automatically 18 months after its authorization. Authorizes the court, if the labor organization makes such a successful showing for continuation, to dismiss the complaint or retain jurisdiction of the cause on such conditions and for such period as it deems appropriate. Requires, upon dissolution of a trusteeship, the previously elected officers of the local union to be reinstated or a new election promptly held. Directs a court to supervise such an election if it has ordered an election after it has dissolved a trusteeship. Requires elections at least once every four years, by secret ballot among members in good standing, of officers of intermediate bodies, such as general committees, system boards, joint boards or joint councils who engage in negotiation, administration or enforcement of collective agreements, or exercise control over the finances or other major functions of local unions. Allows officers of other intermediate bodies to be elected by representatives of such members who have been elected by secret ballot.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.4770 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.4770 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.4770 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.4770 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.