Go to this link to watch Target's anti-union propaganda film, http://gawker.com/5811371/heres-the-cheesy-anti+union-video-all-target-employees-must-endure. It's interesting to see behind the Human Resources door of a large corporation. When I have shopped at Target in the past, I didn't know that I was a "visitor" rather than a customer or that those people in red shirts are "team members" rather than employees. Although the film is a series of obvious distortions and lies, the good news is how pathetic it is as a persuasive argument or entertainment.
Thanks to Gawker for breaking this story.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Revenue crisis can be solved
Mary Still has done a great job of standing up on the revenue crisis in Missouri. It's time for action now.
Inaction forced tuition increase.
BY MARY STILL
Columbia Tribune
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Consider these facts:
The University of Missouri has faced a 10-year decline in state support.
The university’s enrollment has increased by 17,000 during the past 10 years.
The university accounts for 70 percent of the state’s growth in undergraduate enrollment among four-year institutions and is educating these students with the same state support it had 2001.
It is no wonder the Board of Curators and the Coordinating Board for Higher Education approved a tuition increase for MU. While I regret the necessity of that decision, I understand it is essential if we are to preserve quality at the state’s premier public research institution and if we are to move our state forward.
Thus, I was disappointed to learn Gov. Jay Nixon withheld funds for higher education and hit the university extra hard because of the increased tuition.
Of even greater disappointment, however, is the fact legislators and the education community are not facing up to reality. Missouri has a revenue crisis because we stubbornly refuse to do the obvious.
First, we refuse to raise cigarette taxes, even though we have the lowest rate in the country. We could raise our taxes by 12 cents a package and still be the lowest in the country and bring in more than $60 million a year. Or we could move our cigarette taxes up to be competitive with other states and bring in hundreds of millions in revenue. We would have the added advantage of reducing the $600 million tab the state and federal government pay annually for smoking-related illnesses. It makes sense. Even one Republican senator from a district not our own said to me, “It is indefensible to be the lowest in the nation.” Our own Republican Sen. Kurt Schaefer has said he would support a vote of the people on this issue.
Second, we are not collecting sales tax on Internet transactions. These are taxes owed and easily collected once Missouri joins the interstate compact. Collecting this sales tax has the double value of raising revenue and supporting our local businesses that are at a 6 to 9 percent disadvantage because they collect sales tax. Almost all surrounding states do this, and Missouri could raise $20 million a year almost immediately, with much more to come in the future.
Third, we could close tax loopholes that almost all other states have closed.
Fourth, we could reject the false theory that low corporate taxes will help us attract industry. If that were the case, we would be swarming in jobs. We already have among the lowest corporate taxes in the country, and last session the legislature voted to eliminate the corporate franchise taxes for companies with more than 10 million in assets. This will cost our state $80 million a year. Legislators who voted in favor of this are part of the problem, not the solution.
Finally, consider our income tax: Those in poverty pay the same rate as multimillionaires. We could alter our tax structure in ways that would not harm the middle class.
In fact, none of these sources of revenue would have a significant effect on the hard-working middle-income families who are playing by the rules but struggling.
What does affect these middle-income families is the fact they can no longer afford to send their children to the state university.
What does affect middle class Missourians are the cuts to education that we will continue to make until we face this reality: Missouri does not have a budget crisis; it has a revenue crisis.
I recall a quote attributed to Huey Long: “Louisiana ain’t a poor state — it has a passel of poor folks, but it is not a poor state.”
The same will be said of Missouri if we don’t have the political courage to address the obvious. We have the resources to do better. Political courage is what’s missing.
Mary Still of Columbia represents the 25th District in the Missouri House of Representatives.
Inaction forced tuition increase.
BY MARY STILL
Columbia Tribune
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Consider these facts:
The University of Missouri has faced a 10-year decline in state support.
The university’s enrollment has increased by 17,000 during the past 10 years.
The university accounts for 70 percent of the state’s growth in undergraduate enrollment among four-year institutions and is educating these students with the same state support it had 2001.
It is no wonder the Board of Curators and the Coordinating Board for Higher Education approved a tuition increase for MU. While I regret the necessity of that decision, I understand it is essential if we are to preserve quality at the state’s premier public research institution and if we are to move our state forward.
Thus, I was disappointed to learn Gov. Jay Nixon withheld funds for higher education and hit the university extra hard because of the increased tuition.
Of even greater disappointment, however, is the fact legislators and the education community are not facing up to reality. Missouri has a revenue crisis because we stubbornly refuse to do the obvious.
First, we refuse to raise cigarette taxes, even though we have the lowest rate in the country. We could raise our taxes by 12 cents a package and still be the lowest in the country and bring in more than $60 million a year. Or we could move our cigarette taxes up to be competitive with other states and bring in hundreds of millions in revenue. We would have the added advantage of reducing the $600 million tab the state and federal government pay annually for smoking-related illnesses. It makes sense. Even one Republican senator from a district not our own said to me, “It is indefensible to be the lowest in the nation.” Our own Republican Sen. Kurt Schaefer has said he would support a vote of the people on this issue.
Second, we are not collecting sales tax on Internet transactions. These are taxes owed and easily collected once Missouri joins the interstate compact. Collecting this sales tax has the double value of raising revenue and supporting our local businesses that are at a 6 to 9 percent disadvantage because they collect sales tax. Almost all surrounding states do this, and Missouri could raise $20 million a year almost immediately, with much more to come in the future.
Third, we could close tax loopholes that almost all other states have closed.
Fourth, we could reject the false theory that low corporate taxes will help us attract industry. If that were the case, we would be swarming in jobs. We already have among the lowest corporate taxes in the country, and last session the legislature voted to eliminate the corporate franchise taxes for companies with more than 10 million in assets. This will cost our state $80 million a year. Legislators who voted in favor of this are part of the problem, not the solution.
Finally, consider our income tax: Those in poverty pay the same rate as multimillionaires. We could alter our tax structure in ways that would not harm the middle class.
In fact, none of these sources of revenue would have a significant effect on the hard-working middle-income families who are playing by the rules but struggling.
What does affect these middle-income families is the fact they can no longer afford to send their children to the state university.
What does affect middle class Missourians are the cuts to education that we will continue to make until we face this reality: Missouri does not have a budget crisis; it has a revenue crisis.
I recall a quote attributed to Huey Long: “Louisiana ain’t a poor state — it has a passel of poor folks, but it is not a poor state.”
The same will be said of Missouri if we don’t have the political courage to address the obvious. We have the resources to do better. Political courage is what’s missing.
Mary Still of Columbia represents the 25th District in the Missouri House of Representatives.
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Dems double down on new spending after discouraging jobs report
Yes. Jobs, jobs, jobs should be the priority.
The Hill
By Mike Lillis - 06/04/11 10:29 AM ET
House Democrats this week have amplified their calls for new spending on infrastructure and other federal projects in the face of May's discouraging job-creation figures.
Even as Republicans are insisting on "trillions" of dollars in spending cuts, Democrats maintain that a targeted injection of additional federal dollars in the near-term would go a long way toward reversing the hiring slump. Friday's disappointing job report, they say, only bolsters their case.
"The American people, while concerned about the deficit, place much more emphasis on job creation, and they see a role for the government," Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) told The Hill. "A fast injection of job stimulus on the public side would help tremendously. … It [the job report] helps our argument about investment."
Other Democrats delivered a similar message on Friday. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) said "the answer" to the lingering jobs crisis is "investment" in the "communities and businesses who need confidence and resources to hire [people]."
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) said "investing in our communities goes hand in hand with full economic recovery."
Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) said that only in Washington is targeted new spending being demonized.
"Once you get outside the Beltway, almost everyone agrees that we should be rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure and investing in clean American energy that reduces our dependence on oil," Blumenauer said.
The remarks are a stark contrast to the Republicans' plans to cut trillions of dollars in federal spending to bring down the nation's soaring deficits. Those deficits, they argue, have crippled the ability of the private sector to hire new workers. Friday's job report, the Republicans contend, is evidence that the Democrats' deficit-spending strategy has failed.
"If you talk to job creators around the country like we have, they’ll tell you all the over-taxing, over-regulating, and over-spending that’s going on in Washington is creating uncertainty and holding them back," House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said at a press conference Friday.
"One look at the jobs report should be enough to show the White House it’s time to get serious about cutting spending and dealing with our ailing economy,” he said.
The spending debate was stirred up Friday by the Labor Department's report that the economy created only 54,000 jobs in May – about a quarter of the average job growth over the last three months. Of those, roughly 83,000 were created by the private sector. State and local governments have been shedding jobs for months, and that trend continued in May, the Labor Department found.
Leaders from both parties blamed the other side for the continued jobs crisis. Democrats flung charges that House Republicans have yet to bring a jobs bill to the floor this year, while GOP leaders countered with accusations that the 2009 economic stimulus bill was a flop.
"They passed a nearly $1 trillion stimulus bill which failed to get people back to work," House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said last week of the $787 billion stimulus bill. That proposal featured $288 billion in tax benefits; $275 billion for energy and infrastructure projects; and $224 billion for safety-net programs.
Both sides have proposed legislative packages they say will spur job creation. Democrats are pushing their "Make It In America" agenda, a package of bills designed to increase manufacturing and discourage the outsourcing of jobs. It includes proposals to boost funding for airports, highways and high-speed rail, and also develops a national infrastructure development bank.
Republicans, meanwhile, have proposed to cut taxes, eliminate trade barriers and scale back federal regulations that the business lobby considers burdensome.
If the Democrats see the government as a necessary catalyst for economic recovery, the Republicans just want to get it out of the private sector's way.
Dennis Slater, president of the Association of Equipment Manufacturers, a trade group, suggested Friday that the most effective strategy would incorporate elements of both approaches.
"Until Congress and the administration agree to make America's farmers and manufacturers a national priority by passing free trade agreements and investing in critical national infrastructure – both proven drivers of economic growth – unemployment will remain unacceptably high and our economy will continue to stagnate," Slater said in a statement.
Grijalva, the co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said the Democrats could be doing much more to convince the public of the merits of an increase in targeted spending.
"I don't know if it's a question of being able to sell it, or [that] we haven't fully embraced the concept as our own," he said. "It's a winner. I don't know for the life of me why we're not being more assertive on this point."
The Hill
By Mike Lillis - 06/04/11 10:29 AM ET
House Democrats this week have amplified their calls for new spending on infrastructure and other federal projects in the face of May's discouraging job-creation figures.
Even as Republicans are insisting on "trillions" of dollars in spending cuts, Democrats maintain that a targeted injection of additional federal dollars in the near-term would go a long way toward reversing the hiring slump. Friday's disappointing job report, they say, only bolsters their case.
"The American people, while concerned about the deficit, place much more emphasis on job creation, and they see a role for the government," Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) told The Hill. "A fast injection of job stimulus on the public side would help tremendously. … It [the job report] helps our argument about investment."
Other Democrats delivered a similar message on Friday. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) said "the answer" to the lingering jobs crisis is "investment" in the "communities and businesses who need confidence and resources to hire [people]."
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) said "investing in our communities goes hand in hand with full economic recovery."
Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) said that only in Washington is targeted new spending being demonized.
"Once you get outside the Beltway, almost everyone agrees that we should be rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure and investing in clean American energy that reduces our dependence on oil," Blumenauer said.
The remarks are a stark contrast to the Republicans' plans to cut trillions of dollars in federal spending to bring down the nation's soaring deficits. Those deficits, they argue, have crippled the ability of the private sector to hire new workers. Friday's job report, the Republicans contend, is evidence that the Democrats' deficit-spending strategy has failed.
"If you talk to job creators around the country like we have, they’ll tell you all the over-taxing, over-regulating, and over-spending that’s going on in Washington is creating uncertainty and holding them back," House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said at a press conference Friday.
"One look at the jobs report should be enough to show the White House it’s time to get serious about cutting spending and dealing with our ailing economy,” he said.
The spending debate was stirred up Friday by the Labor Department's report that the economy created only 54,000 jobs in May – about a quarter of the average job growth over the last three months. Of those, roughly 83,000 were created by the private sector. State and local governments have been shedding jobs for months, and that trend continued in May, the Labor Department found.
Leaders from both parties blamed the other side for the continued jobs crisis. Democrats flung charges that House Republicans have yet to bring a jobs bill to the floor this year, while GOP leaders countered with accusations that the 2009 economic stimulus bill was a flop.
"They passed a nearly $1 trillion stimulus bill which failed to get people back to work," House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said last week of the $787 billion stimulus bill. That proposal featured $288 billion in tax benefits; $275 billion for energy and infrastructure projects; and $224 billion for safety-net programs.
Both sides have proposed legislative packages they say will spur job creation. Democrats are pushing their "Make It In America" agenda, a package of bills designed to increase manufacturing and discourage the outsourcing of jobs. It includes proposals to boost funding for airports, highways and high-speed rail, and also develops a national infrastructure development bank.
Republicans, meanwhile, have proposed to cut taxes, eliminate trade barriers and scale back federal regulations that the business lobby considers burdensome.
If the Democrats see the government as a necessary catalyst for economic recovery, the Republicans just want to get it out of the private sector's way.
Dennis Slater, president of the Association of Equipment Manufacturers, a trade group, suggested Friday that the most effective strategy would incorporate elements of both approaches.
"Until Congress and the administration agree to make America's farmers and manufacturers a national priority by passing free trade agreements and investing in critical national infrastructure – both proven drivers of economic growth – unemployment will remain unacceptably high and our economy will continue to stagnate," Slater said in a statement.
Grijalva, the co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said the Democrats could be doing much more to convince the public of the merits of an increase in targeted spending.
"I don't know if it's a question of being able to sell it, or [that] we haven't fully embraced the concept as our own," he said. "It's a winner. I don't know for the life of me why we're not being more assertive on this point."
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
The Good News in Wisconsin That Media Aren’t Covering
This week in Madison, Wis., has seen the largest protests since a "budget repair bill" virtually outlawing collective bargaining proposed by Gov. Scott Walker inspired an occupation of the state capitol building and massive street protests this past winter.
Now, thousands are protesting Governor’s Walker drastic cuts to the social safety net and workers’ rights, contained in his 2011-2013 budgets. The budget would cut education funding by $824 million and Medicaid by $466 million. Walker is making these cuts despite giving away nearly $320 million in tax cuts to big corporations.
The Republican governor has also proposed allowing local governments to privatize their highway departments and hire private contractors to maintain state roads in Wisconsin. This upset many highway workers who would be stripped of their union representation if highway work was privatized in Wisconsin. Many claim not having union representation would make highways dramatically more dangerous as it would be more difficult to speak up about safety problems if highway workers did not have union protection.
Also, the budget bill would strip police and firefighters of their right to collective bargain over their healthcare plans. Previously, police and firefighters had been exempted from the ban on public employees collectively bargaining that passed as part of a budget repair bill in March.
Of course, a Wisconsin Court has ruled that that bill’s passage was illegal since it violated the Open Meetings Law. It nullified the bill. There are even rumors that Republicans might try to pass a new, less legally dubious version of the ban of public employee collectively bargain as part of the 2011-2013 budgets, since Republicans expect to lose control of the State Senate in a series of six state senate recall elections to be held this July.
Activists, who have been locked out of the Capitol by Governor Walker’s administration despite numerous court orders telling the administration to re-open the Capitol, have responded by setting up a tent city on the Capitol Lawn called “Walkerville.” More than 300 people have been sleeping on the lawn of the Capitol all week lawn in protest of Walker’s attempt to pass the bill.
On Monday, there was a large march against the budget by more than 1,000 people led by former Senator Russ Feingold. While there has been a lot of coverage of the recent protests in Wisconsin in local media and national progressive outlets, what hasn’t been talked about much is the protests now entering their 116th day—if you start counting from the initial response to Walker's "budget repair" bill back in February—has done to deepen the militancy of the people involved.
As the struggle in Wisconsin wears on, workers have become engaged not just in acts of protest, acts of civil disobedience. On Monday, 25 people were either arrested or cited including two journalists from the media outlet the Uptake, who were covering the protesters breaking into the Capitol.
Activists have also gotten more creative in how they have targeted expanding direct, militant action to other targets of corporate power. After the protesters were pushed out of the Capitol, they went to the local M & I Bank branch, a major financial backer of Governor Walker’s campaign where by protesting it they forced the bank to close for the day. Activists have begun to draw up lists of banks that pay no taxes and look for ways to resist the attempts of those banks to foreclose on homes in their neighbors.
The attack on workers’ rights in Wisconsin has proven to be a training ground for activists in a lot of ways that are going to pay long-term benefits for activism in the state. Unions stripped of their ability to automatically deduct dues from workers’ pay checks have started training activists and shop stewards to collect dues individually from workers each month. Collecting dues individually from workers is a process that involves hundreds, thousands of activists.
“I think what my union AFSCME has done is really cool. We have had a huge discussion of the old-school style of unionism with our rank-and-file members that we haven’t had in the past,” says Edward A. Sadlowski a staff representative for AFSCME in Wisconsin. He continues:
Due to the law, we simply can’t return to the model of having a staff representative do everything for workers and expect to survive as a union. Now we have to actually to train people about how are unions. We actually have to involve people in their unions and make them feel like they run the unions, not their staff representatives. This is going to have amazing results for the labor movement over the long run.
While the mainstream media has focused heavily on the change that could come from the upcoming recall elections in Wisconsin, the real long-term change is likely to come from the galvanization and training that the attack on workers’ rights has provided for activists in Wisconsin. Activists have been gaining a confidence and creativity in their ability to take on entrenched corporate power while at the same time union members have become more involved in running their unions. This promises to have a generational long-term effect much greater than any recall election for a four-year state senate term.
Now, thousands are protesting Governor’s Walker drastic cuts to the social safety net and workers’ rights, contained in his 2011-2013 budgets. The budget would cut education funding by $824 million and Medicaid by $466 million. Walker is making these cuts despite giving away nearly $320 million in tax cuts to big corporations.
The Republican governor has also proposed allowing local governments to privatize their highway departments and hire private contractors to maintain state roads in Wisconsin. This upset many highway workers who would be stripped of their union representation if highway work was privatized in Wisconsin. Many claim not having union representation would make highways dramatically more dangerous as it would be more difficult to speak up about safety problems if highway workers did not have union protection.
Also, the budget bill would strip police and firefighters of their right to collective bargain over their healthcare plans. Previously, police and firefighters had been exempted from the ban on public employees collectively bargaining that passed as part of a budget repair bill in March.
Of course, a Wisconsin Court has ruled that that bill’s passage was illegal since it violated the Open Meetings Law. It nullified the bill. There are even rumors that Republicans might try to pass a new, less legally dubious version of the ban of public employee collectively bargain as part of the 2011-2013 budgets, since Republicans expect to lose control of the State Senate in a series of six state senate recall elections to be held this July.
Activists, who have been locked out of the Capitol by Governor Walker’s administration despite numerous court orders telling the administration to re-open the Capitol, have responded by setting up a tent city on the Capitol Lawn called “Walkerville.” More than 300 people have been sleeping on the lawn of the Capitol all week lawn in protest of Walker’s attempt to pass the bill.
On Monday, there was a large march against the budget by more than 1,000 people led by former Senator Russ Feingold. While there has been a lot of coverage of the recent protests in Wisconsin in local media and national progressive outlets, what hasn’t been talked about much is the protests now entering their 116th day—if you start counting from the initial response to Walker's "budget repair" bill back in February—has done to deepen the militancy of the people involved.
As the struggle in Wisconsin wears on, workers have become engaged not just in acts of protest, acts of civil disobedience. On Monday, 25 people were either arrested or cited including two journalists from the media outlet the Uptake, who were covering the protesters breaking into the Capitol.
Activists have also gotten more creative in how they have targeted expanding direct, militant action to other targets of corporate power. After the protesters were pushed out of the Capitol, they went to the local M & I Bank branch, a major financial backer of Governor Walker’s campaign where by protesting it they forced the bank to close for the day. Activists have begun to draw up lists of banks that pay no taxes and look for ways to resist the attempts of those banks to foreclose on homes in their neighbors.
The attack on workers’ rights in Wisconsin has proven to be a training ground for activists in a lot of ways that are going to pay long-term benefits for activism in the state. Unions stripped of their ability to automatically deduct dues from workers’ pay checks have started training activists and shop stewards to collect dues individually from workers each month. Collecting dues individually from workers is a process that involves hundreds, thousands of activists.
“I think what my union AFSCME has done is really cool. We have had a huge discussion of the old-school style of unionism with our rank-and-file members that we haven’t had in the past,” says Edward A. Sadlowski a staff representative for AFSCME in Wisconsin. He continues:
Due to the law, we simply can’t return to the model of having a staff representative do everything for workers and expect to survive as a union. Now we have to actually to train people about how are unions. We actually have to involve people in their unions and make them feel like they run the unions, not their staff representatives. This is going to have amazing results for the labor movement over the long run.
While the mainstream media has focused heavily on the change that could come from the upcoming recall elections in Wisconsin, the real long-term change is likely to come from the galvanization and training that the attack on workers’ rights has provided for activists in Wisconsin. Activists have been gaining a confidence and creativity in their ability to take on entrenched corporate power while at the same time union members have become more involved in running their unions. This promises to have a generational long-term effect much greater than any recall election for a four-year state senate term.
Friday, June 3, 2011
Trumka right to push for union independence
JOHN NICHOLS | Cap Times associate editor | Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Earlier this month in a Nation magazine cover story, I looked at one of the most positive trends in recent labor history: a pattern of unions signaling that they will put more of their “political” money into grass-roots organizing and coalition building — as opposed to placing the movement’s financial and foot-soldier resources at the service of whatever Democratic candidate happens to be on the ballot.
Unions such as the Service Employees International Union and National Nurses United are investing in smart, grass-roots projects in the states — seeking to build on the protest and politics model developed here in Wisconsin, where mass protests against anti-labor initiatives signaled an opening for labor to go on the offensive. At the same time, key unions such as the Firefighters have signaled that, because of their disappointment with Republicans and Democrats at the federal level, they will be putting all their political money into state and local races and related projects.
Now AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka is stepping up with a plan for unions to declare “independence” and back candidates — no matter what their party affiliation — who are committed to support workers and their unions.
Trumka, who was in Wisconsin early and has visited most of the states where battles over labor rights and cuts in public services are playing out, has made no secret of his interest in building on the energy of the new state-based movements.
It is with this in mind that he is now talking about changing the way labor practices politics. And that’s a very good thing.
“We are looking hard at how we work in the nation’s political arena. We have listened hard, and what workers want is an independent labor movement that builds the power of working people — in the workplace and in political life,” the AFL-CIO president said in a Friday address to the National Press Club that could turn out to be one of the most important speeches of the 2012 election cycle. “Our role is not to build the power of a political party or a candidate. It is to improve the lives of working families and strengthen our country.”
Trumka is not saying that labor unions will no longer back the Democratic Party and Democratic candidates — up to and including President Obama. As in the past, labor will lean toward the party of Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman. What Trumka is saying, however, is that labor will not simply back Democrats because they are Democrats.
Indeed, he was putting compromise-prone and all-talk-no-action Democrats on notice.
“We’ll be less inclined to support people in the future that aren’t standing up and actually supporting job creation and the type of things that we’re talking about. It doesn’t matter what party they come from. It will be a measuring stick,” Trumka explained on the eve of the speech.
The address itself is reasonably blunt in its dismissal of Democratic officials who think they can make draconian cuts in education and public services — or that they can undermine union rights — simply by claiming that the Republicans would make crueler cuts.
“It doesn’t matter if candidates and parties are controlling the wrecking ball or simply standing aside — the outcome is the same either way,” says Trumka. “If leaders aren’t blocking the wrecking ball and advancing working families’ interests, working people will not support them. This is where our focus will be — now, in 2012 and beyond.”
Practically, what Trumka is talking about is replacing the traditional pre-election mobilization of the union faithful with year-round organizing that is more oriented toward issues and immediate struggles.
But, as is always the case with Trumka when the AFL-CIO president is at his best, there is an idealistic component to the initiative.
At the root of Trumka’s message is an idea that needs to be returned to the center of the political discourse.
“America’s real deficit is a moral deficit — where political choices come down to forcing foster children to wear hand-me-downs while cutting taxes for profitable corporations,” says Trumka, who adds that “powerful political forces are seeking to silence working people — to drive us out of the national conversation” so that these issues are not raised.
If organized labor seeks to add that moral message to the debate, and if it uses its still-considerable political muscle to back those Democrats, Greens, independents and, yes, Republicans who are willing to embrace the message, it could become as influential a player in the 2012 election cycle as the tea party movement was in 2010.
To do this, however, Trumka and his allies must be conscious of two requirements:
1. They have to start at the grass roots, by supporting the labor, farm, student and community coalitions that are resisting cuts in states across the country this year — and that are fighting any attempt by politicians of both parties in Washington to undermine Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Building and strengthening these coalitions in 2011 in states such as Wisconsin, Florida, Indiana, Maine, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania — all of which happen to be presidential battleground states — is the single best investment in progressive, pro-labor politics heading into the 2012 cycle. It creates an infrastructure that is not just about winning one election for one candidate or party but that seeks to achieve practical ends, both immediately and in the long term.
2. Labor must be ready to put real pressure on the Democrats, by supporting smart primary challenges (as they did to some extent in 2010) and by withholding money from incumbents who have let them down. Labor must look for Republicans who are willing to break with their party on key issues — something that the union movement historically did with such success that, into the 1990s, there were Republican legislators in states across the country (and a few members of the U.S. House and Senate) who maintained strong pro-labor voting records. And labor must recognize the value of independent and third-party campaigns that, with sufficient union backing in communities such as Madison where an independent labor-left infrastructure has been or might be established, could elect pro-union stalwarts and put real pressure on both major parties.
Ultimately, party labels mean very little. It’s the policies that matter. And to the extent that the labor movement recognizes this fundamental political reality, we will have a better politics in Madison, in Wisconsin and across the United States.
John Nichols is the associate editor of The Capital Times. jnichols@madison.com
Copyright 2011 madison.com.
Earlier this month in a Nation magazine cover story, I looked at one of the most positive trends in recent labor history: a pattern of unions signaling that they will put more of their “political” money into grass-roots organizing and coalition building — as opposed to placing the movement’s financial and foot-soldier resources at the service of whatever Democratic candidate happens to be on the ballot.
Unions such as the Service Employees International Union and National Nurses United are investing in smart, grass-roots projects in the states — seeking to build on the protest and politics model developed here in Wisconsin, where mass protests against anti-labor initiatives signaled an opening for labor to go on the offensive. At the same time, key unions such as the Firefighters have signaled that, because of their disappointment with Republicans and Democrats at the federal level, they will be putting all their political money into state and local races and related projects.
Now AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka is stepping up with a plan for unions to declare “independence” and back candidates — no matter what their party affiliation — who are committed to support workers and their unions.
Trumka, who was in Wisconsin early and has visited most of the states where battles over labor rights and cuts in public services are playing out, has made no secret of his interest in building on the energy of the new state-based movements.
It is with this in mind that he is now talking about changing the way labor practices politics. And that’s a very good thing.
“We are looking hard at how we work in the nation’s political arena. We have listened hard, and what workers want is an independent labor movement that builds the power of working people — in the workplace and in political life,” the AFL-CIO president said in a Friday address to the National Press Club that could turn out to be one of the most important speeches of the 2012 election cycle. “Our role is not to build the power of a political party or a candidate. It is to improve the lives of working families and strengthen our country.”
Trumka is not saying that labor unions will no longer back the Democratic Party and Democratic candidates — up to and including President Obama. As in the past, labor will lean toward the party of Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman. What Trumka is saying, however, is that labor will not simply back Democrats because they are Democrats.
Indeed, he was putting compromise-prone and all-talk-no-action Democrats on notice.
“We’ll be less inclined to support people in the future that aren’t standing up and actually supporting job creation and the type of things that we’re talking about. It doesn’t matter what party they come from. It will be a measuring stick,” Trumka explained on the eve of the speech.
The address itself is reasonably blunt in its dismissal of Democratic officials who think they can make draconian cuts in education and public services — or that they can undermine union rights — simply by claiming that the Republicans would make crueler cuts.
“It doesn’t matter if candidates and parties are controlling the wrecking ball or simply standing aside — the outcome is the same either way,” says Trumka. “If leaders aren’t blocking the wrecking ball and advancing working families’ interests, working people will not support them. This is where our focus will be — now, in 2012 and beyond.”
Practically, what Trumka is talking about is replacing the traditional pre-election mobilization of the union faithful with year-round organizing that is more oriented toward issues and immediate struggles.
But, as is always the case with Trumka when the AFL-CIO president is at his best, there is an idealistic component to the initiative.
At the root of Trumka’s message is an idea that needs to be returned to the center of the political discourse.
“America’s real deficit is a moral deficit — where political choices come down to forcing foster children to wear hand-me-downs while cutting taxes for profitable corporations,” says Trumka, who adds that “powerful political forces are seeking to silence working people — to drive us out of the national conversation” so that these issues are not raised.
If organized labor seeks to add that moral message to the debate, and if it uses its still-considerable political muscle to back those Democrats, Greens, independents and, yes, Republicans who are willing to embrace the message, it could become as influential a player in the 2012 election cycle as the tea party movement was in 2010.
To do this, however, Trumka and his allies must be conscious of two requirements:
1. They have to start at the grass roots, by supporting the labor, farm, student and community coalitions that are resisting cuts in states across the country this year — and that are fighting any attempt by politicians of both parties in Washington to undermine Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Building and strengthening these coalitions in 2011 in states such as Wisconsin, Florida, Indiana, Maine, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania — all of which happen to be presidential battleground states — is the single best investment in progressive, pro-labor politics heading into the 2012 cycle. It creates an infrastructure that is not just about winning one election for one candidate or party but that seeks to achieve practical ends, both immediately and in the long term.
2. Labor must be ready to put real pressure on the Democrats, by supporting smart primary challenges (as they did to some extent in 2010) and by withholding money from incumbents who have let them down. Labor must look for Republicans who are willing to break with their party on key issues — something that the union movement historically did with such success that, into the 1990s, there were Republican legislators in states across the country (and a few members of the U.S. House and Senate) who maintained strong pro-labor voting records. And labor must recognize the value of independent and third-party campaigns that, with sufficient union backing in communities such as Madison where an independent labor-left infrastructure has been or might be established, could elect pro-union stalwarts and put real pressure on both major parties.
Ultimately, party labels mean very little. It’s the policies that matter. And to the extent that the labor movement recognizes this fundamental political reality, we will have a better politics in Madison, in Wisconsin and across the United States.
John Nichols is the associate editor of The Capital Times. jnichols@madison.com
Copyright 2011 madison.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)