Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Omaha Steve

(99,618 posts)
Sat May 30, 2015, 07:43 AM May 2015

Bloomberg: Unions Drawing Line in Sand With Hillary Clinton and Democrats on Trade Deal


http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-05-29/unions-drawing-line-in-sand-with-hillary-clinton-and-democrats-on-trade-deal


May 29, 2015 10:33 AM CDT
As the clash moves toward a vote in the House of Representatives, the union is beginning to pressure Democrats directly

By Emily Greenhouse,

The AFL-CIO, the largest labor federation in the United States, is typically allied with Democrats, but today finds itself moving away from the Democratic president over Obama’s proposed trade pact.

In an interview with Susan Page of USA Today, Richard Trumka, the union’s president, on Friday warned Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton that the wrong position on the Trans-Pacific Partnership could cost her much union support.

“She's going to have to answer that,” Trumka said of her position on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. “I think she won't be able to go through a campaign without answering that and people will take it seriously and it will affect whether they vote for her or don't vote for her.”

As the clash moves toward a vote in the House of Representatives—which Trumka predicted would fail—the union is beginning to pressure Democrats directly. The AFL-CIO, the New York Times reported Friday, has launched an aggressive ad campaign against Democrats who support the president on the pact.

FULL story at link.



18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Bloomberg: Unions Drawing Line in Sand With Hillary Clinton and Democrats on Trade Deal (Original Post) Omaha Steve May 2015 OP
Hey Trumka, got news for you, whatever she says she would sign it if it was delayed and Dustlawyer May 2015 #1
Exactly.. sendero May 2015 #3
K&R! This should have hundreds of recommendations! Enthusiast May 2015 #2
No kidding. blackspade May 2015 #5
I see unions moving away from the Democratic party Backwoodsrider May 2015 #4
I have been frustrated with unions supporting dems w/o getting anything in return. hollowdweller May 2015 #11
This message was self-deleted by its author Backwoodsrider May 2015 #13
There is a better candidate out there Fearless May 2015 #6
And I suspect that Trumpka is not just speaking for his own Union. They were all against it. jwirr May 2015 #7
Clintons response turbinetree May 2015 #8
She has already spoken BrotherIvan May 2015 #15
Your answer turbinetree Jun 2015 #18
Go Bernie.... democrank May 2015 #9
K&R Mbrow May 2015 #10
The Chamber of Commerce is happy, unions are unhappy. peecoolyour May 2015 #12
Can't wait for Unions to have a candidate that gives a damn about them. That shouldn't take libdem4life May 2015 #14
K&R! countryjake May 2015 #16
Hey AFL-CIO... check this out... cui bono May 2015 #17

Dustlawyer

(10,495 posts)
1. Hey Trumka, got news for you, whatever she says she would sign it if it was delayed and
Sat May 30, 2015, 08:03 AM
May 2015

came in front of her. It would be like Obama saying on the campaign trail that he would rein in Wall Street, in reality it ain't going to happen!

sendero

(28,552 posts)
3. Exactly..
Sat May 30, 2015, 08:28 AM
May 2015

... her words on the subject will mean NOTHING. Look at her past deeds for the best clue of where she really stands.

Backwoodsrider

(764 posts)
4. I see unions moving away from the Democratic party
Sat May 30, 2015, 08:30 AM
May 2015

Unless that party goes back to doing things for the union. Maybe unions go the way of the Chamber of Commerce? After all the current shot callers in the GOP are looking for a new base now that theirs is either dying, nuts or woke the f up that national politics don't matter.

 

hollowdweller

(4,229 posts)
11. I have been frustrated with unions supporting dems w/o getting anything in return.
Sat May 30, 2015, 10:41 AM
May 2015

I've been an AFSCME member for over 30 years. Retired public employee now.

Without fail AFSCME has always supported the democratic candidate for governor in my state.

Even though in my time the 2 governors who gave us the biggest pay raises were republicans.

One governor, republican who was opposed by AFSCME sat down with the union after the election and agreed to a 3 year pay raise that gave us more money than any governor in my 30 year career. He also appointed a director to my agency that gave everybody 5%. When the election came around the union supported not him, but the Democrat. Who if I recall did not give us ANYTHING in his 4 year term.

I'm a democrat thru and thru, but it really rubbed me the wrong way that after the raises the union couldn't at least get some concrete promise out of any of the democratic governors for us, yet they supported them.

I think the union should support the candidate that promises the best deal for the membership, regardless of party.

Response to hollowdweller (Reply #11)

Fearless

(18,421 posts)
6. There is a better candidate out there
Sat May 30, 2015, 09:41 AM
May 2015

It's time to support him and get him the exposure he needs to win. What are you waiting for?

BrotherIvan

(9,126 posts)
15. She has already spoken
Sat May 30, 2015, 03:07 PM
May 2015

But that was before the progressives stood up to fight, so now she's trying to lay low.

A Timeline Of Hillary Clinton's Evolution On Trade

Yet, previously as secretary of state, Clinton called the Trans-Pacific Partnership the "gold standard in trade agreements." In her second memoir, Hard Choices, released in 2014, Clinton lauded the deal, saying it "would link markets throughout Asia and the Americas, lowering trade barriers while raising standards on labor, the environment, and intellectual property." She even said it was "important for American workers, who would benefit from competing on a more level playing field." She also called it "a strategic initiative that would strengthen the position of the United States in Asia."


http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/21/401123124/a-timeline-of-hillary-clintons-evolution-on-trade


Why is "evolution" so often used with HRC? Curious.

turbinetree

(24,695 posts)
18. Your answer
Tue Jun 2, 2015, 09:16 AM
Jun 2015

is the reason that I do not trust this woman.

Her evolution is based in part on my opinion when she was a Goldwater Girl.
I am reading three books by Rick Perlstein, about the republican machine during Goldwater , Nixon and Reagan, and it brought back many memories about why I have always been a democrat, anti-draft, war, pro -union, civil liberties, environment, ect.....

They (republicans) will do whatever it takes to subvert the Constitution, subvert any means possible to gain power at all means, and to hell with everyone else, and for some reason I see a façade in her, and this election is going to be about trust----------and I mean trust.

When she was on the board of directors at Wal Mart she hemmed and hawed on being questioned on why she didn't do more for the worker, men and woman.
And most people do not realize that she was there when they started to remove the made in America brand and replace it with foreign made products.
She did some other good things, for woman and others items while in the senate, but her position with the worker has not in opinion been totally with us.
The third way position gave us NAFTA-----------and then we have gotten the false promise

But her sitting on that board says a lot about her position of wage and unions, middle class, ect..... and then your fine piece on her position, which I thank you very much, truly says everything about her waffling and trying to have it both ways ------------------- its not going to happen this time.
Like Warren and Sanders, Brown ect.... have said many times the system is rigged and its rigged for the rich and the powerful.

Again Thank you for the opposition research

 

peecoolyour

(336 posts)
12. The Chamber of Commerce is happy, unions are unhappy.
Sat May 30, 2015, 10:58 AM
May 2015

Should be a no-brainer for any Democrat worth our time.

Also: Anytime Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan are happy, the American people are getting fucked.

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
14. Can't wait for Unions to have a candidate that gives a damn about them. That shouldn't take
Sat May 30, 2015, 03:04 PM
May 2015

a whole lot of soul-searching. This may be the first time in a long time a real candidate can speak for Labor. Get on the Bus, Sir, your members need a welcome place to sit. Only a Socialist will be willing to "hand out" decent wages. It's the Capitalists that go wherever any country offers them the best deal...profits, you know.

I believe that is the crux of this election in a nutshell. And it affects all classes, races, gender, religions, sexual orientationt et al. There aren't many gray areas any more.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Bloomberg: Unions Drawing...