The spectacularly misnamed Employee Free Choice Act looked to be cruising toward a victory in the U.S. Senate until Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., had an epiphany.

The bill would essentially strip workers of the right to decide by a secret ballot if they want to have union representation. It would trigger union certification once a majority of employees checked a form saying they wanted to create a bargaining unit. The fear: that union organizers would pressure workers to make a very public declaration through the card check, whether or not they truly wanted a union.

If the company couldn't negotiate contract terms in 120 days with the new union, mandatory arbitration would kick in. That requirement would eliminate incentives to negotiate in good faith during the 120-day period and could impose terms that put an impossibly high cost burden on the company.

The House passed the card-check bill two years ago, but it foundered in the Senate. With the election of more pro-union Democrats in 2008, the bill looked to be on the verge of succeeding. It was organized labor's top priority going into this year and President Barack Obama signaled he would sign it.

But then Specter was struck by a fit of common sense.

Democrats had counted on the Pennsylvania Republican to give them a filibuster-proof 60 votes in the Senate. Specter, though, recently announced that now, when the country is in a deep economic downturn, "was a particularly bad time" to add a "burden" on employers that "would result in further job losses."

Yes, this is a job-loss bill. It's also a bill that perverts the notion that you have the right to protect the secrecy of a vote you cast.

Federal law now establishes that after 30 percent of a workforce expresses interest in union representation by checking a card, then workers hold a secret election on whether to set up the union. Labor and management have an opportunity to campaign before the balloting.

Under the Employee Free Choice Act, the moment that 50 percent of the workers check off the box, the union would be certified. No election would be held. Then the 120-day clock would start ticking toward arbitration.

It wasn't entirely clear that Demo-crats would have 60 votes in the Senate with Specter's support, but Senate leaders acknowledge that, without him, they can't pass this law. That's a relief, particularly to the owners of small and medium-size businesses.

Labor unions tend to be concentrated in government workforces and larger businesses like the auto companies. (That's one big reason why U.S. automakers have had a notoriously difficult time competing with foreign makers that run plants in the United States.)

The fear felt by smaller, struggling businesses was that the card-check and arbitration rules would bury them in higher costs.

Thanks to Specter, Democrats are going to have to look for compromise.

When Specter announced he wouldn't support this bill, he criticized the nation's labor laws. Fair enough. There's room for negotiation to deal with unreasonable delays in union certification elections, giving union reps adequate access to workers during campaigns, and toughening penalties when labor or management tries to intimidate workers.

But any labor law revision must preserve the secret ballot and avoid the strict arbitration timeline.