Labor girds for '08 (Democratic) convention

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Rocky Mountain News

Labor girds for '08 convention
Unions prepare to get tough with Democrats

By Joanne Kelley, Rocky Mountain News
April 7, 2007
The nation's fractious labor movement has found common ground in Colorado, the newest battleground state for unions hoping to bolster their thinning ranks.

Leaders from opposing labor camps - the AFL-CIO and the breakaway group Change to Win - threaten to make trouble if the Democratic National Committee holds the 2008 convention in Denver's nonunionized Pepsi Center. Observers expect labor organizers to use the issue as leverage as they press the Democrats to help advance their ambitious union agendas.

"They have this real moment of power on the organizing issue," said Harley Shaiken, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley. "The stakes for labor go well beyond the convention arena."


AP © 2005

James Hoffa, president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, talks to members of the Change to Win coalition in September 2005. Leaders from that group and the AFL-CIO don't want the Democratic National Committee to hold its 2008 convention in Denver's nonunionized Pepsi Center.


Nationally, private sector union membership has fallen to about 7.4 percent, down from 7.8 percent at the end of 2005. While the public and private sectors combined have a higher percentage of workers in unions, Colorado lags the national average.

Read more: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/other_business/article/0,2777,DRMN_23916_5470108,00.html

[Ken Burch]

1. Does this mean the AFL-CIO will hold off endorsing a candidate until, Oh I dunno,

at least the BEGINNING of 2008, for a change?

Only askin'...:eyes:

[w4rma]

3. I hope they endorse early. (nt)

[Ken Burch]

4. Er...why?

Early endorsements always mean they sell out and just give it to the front-runner without getting anything for it.

Hasn't gained the workers anything, so far.

Why stay with what's useless?

[Omaha Steve]

5. You need to watch this short video...

I would like to read your reply. :-)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=385&topic_id=18442

[Ken Burch]

6. Saw it. OK, it got the AFSCME guy praised in a campaign speech

(a late, meaningless campaign speech when everybody already KNEW Clinton had a second term locked up). So...freakin...what?

No meaningful gains for the union in terms of policy and Clinton sold out every American worker by pushing for the trade deals and globalization on corporate power's terms.

There was no good reason for AFSCME to support an anti-labor Dem instead of Tom Harkin or even Tsongas or Brown.

[Omaha Steve]

8. Was it better than say 8 years of Reagan?

Both Clinton and Reagan were union members before being elected. Clinton did not have the joy of a friendly Congress for most of his 2 terms. It makes a difference.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/rr40.html

As president of the Screen Actors Guild, Reagan became embroiled in disputes over the issue of Communism in the film industry; his political views shifted from liberal to conservative. He toured the country as a television host, becoming a spokesman for conservatism. In 1966 he was elected Governor of California by a margin of a million votes; he was re-elected in 1970.

Overall, the Reagan years saw a restoration of prosperity, and the goal of peace through strength seemed to be within grasp.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/bc42.html

Clinton and his running mate, Tennessee's Senator Albert Gore Jr., then 44, represented a new generation in American political leadership. For the first time in 12 years both the White House and Congress were held by the same party. But that political edge was brief; the Republicans won both houses of Congress in 1994.

In 1998, as a result of issues surrounding personal indiscretions with a young woman White House intern, Clinton was the second U.S. president to be impeached by the House of Representatives. He was tried in the Senate and found not guilty of the charges brought against him. He apologized to the nation for his actions and continued to have unprecedented popular approval ratings for his job as president.

[Ken Burch]

11. Clinton's time was somewhat better than Reagan. It could hardly have been worse

(though with Clinton's capitulation to racists and sexists on the "welfare reform" bill, "better" was dragged down to the level of "well, slightly kinda better if you squint at it right")

It was never an unchallengeable thing that ONLY Clinton could have been elected as a Democrat in '92. Any Democrat that had had the level of organizational support Clinton received from the party establishment in the fall and who had had Clinton's "ready response" approach to smears could likely have won. Harkin or even Jesse could have been competitive on those terms.

Progressives and unions didn't have to surrender to the DLC to get a Democratic president.

Labor doesn't NEED to settle for what the establishment offers it THIS year.

Let's hold out and actually GET something in exchange for our support. Is that asking too much?

[w4rma]

9. Because Edwards is, by leaps and bounds, the best candidate for labor issues in the entire primary.

Therefore, he'd likely win most union endorsements, and the earlier they are made the earlier they can help.

[Ken Burch]

10. Well, that would work if labor was working logically

However, the most likely result of an early endorsement would be a HRC endorsement because they were afraid of being left behind.

[Vexatious Ape]

2. Good

I hope labor takes a more active roll in politics. Maybe if we get a Dem in the White House he, or she, won't tell the working people, and organized labor to go F themselves and sign another NAFTA like the last Dem prez did.

[madfloridian]

7. I think having it there will help the union cause by calling attention to it.

It was that or NYC, you know. A GOP mayor said NYC couldn't afford it, and the DLC Dems wanted it in Denver, as well as most of the party.

So, look on the bright side. It will call attention to the lack of unions there.