If you're looking for unbiased commentary on the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), FOX Business Channel is probably not the best cable network to watch. This afternoon, Illinois' own Rep. Phil Hare had the unenviable task of debating the merits of the bill with one of the station's daytime hosts. Despite being battered with a slew of confusing poll numbers and corporate talking points, Hare gets through it and makes several salient points along the way. Watch:

A few things to note: In his introduction, the host makes the common claim that EFCA "would kill the secret ballot for union elections." As we've pointed out repeatedly, this is inaccurate. EFCA would preserve the two unionization option: an election (the so-called "secret ballot") or majority sign-up (the so-called "card check" process").  All the bill would do is allow workers, rather than employers, to choose which method they want to use.  This would greatly diminish the intimidation and delay-tactics that all too often characterize the employer-controlled election process.

As Hare says, it "levels the playing field for working men and women."

Using a poorly-framed 2004 question from Zogby, the host goes to assert that there's no rank-and-file union support for card check. Again, this is preposterous. Not only are union members organizing furiously in favor of the bill, a majority of Americans told Gallup this month that they favor a "new law that would make it easier for labor unions to organize workers."

The Fox host then rolls out a standard corporate canard, using Wal-Mart as his example. "We all know that if Wal-Mart unionizes, their prices will soar," he says, adding that "labor costs are the biggest part of any balance sheet of any corporation in the world."

A 2007 study (PDF) by the University of California at Berkeley rebuts this argument. In response to the 2006 fight over Chicago's big box living wage ordinance, the researchers found that if Wal-Mart were to hypothetically comply with a $10-per-hour minimum wage and then pass all of their increased costs on to consumers, the average impact on a Wal-Mart shopper would be quite small: 0.9 percent of prices, which works out to $0.36 per shopping trip, or $9.70 per year for the average consumer who spends approximately $1,088 per year at Wal-Mart. In other words, a unionized workforce would not result in astronomic price increases.

When thinking about EFCA's potential effect on economic growth, it's also important to pull back even further: The legislation will encourage increased unionization, which in turn will raise the average wage across this country.  Higher earnings will boost the purchasing power of the working and middle class (whose wages have been stagnant for years).  With more money to spend at businesses like Wal-Mart, this cross-section of the country will buy more, thereby energizing the economy and lessening the trade deficit.

Hare understands this dynamic. Fox Business clearly does not.