Is The Employee Free Choice Act Being Discussed In This Electoral Cycle? It Is In Brooklyn And Staten Island-- Meet Michael DeVito

NY-11 is all of Staten Island and the Trumpiest part of south Brooklyn. In fact, the district, the most Italian district in America, has a PVI of R+3. Although Obama beat Romney there in 2012-- 51.6% to 47.3%-- in 2016 it was Trump country. He beat Hillary 53.6% to 43.8%. The GOP establishment is happy to run incumbent Dan Donovan but former Congressman Michael "Mikey Suits" Grimm is our of prison and trying to get back into Congress again as a Trumpist. Trump, at the urging of Giuliani, Ryan and McCarthy, endorsed Donovan.

Meanwhile the DCCC and right-of-center shitbag, Joe Crowley, are pushing carpetbagger and Blue Dog Max Rose, who has nothing whatsoever to do with the district. Blue America has endorsed Michael DeVito and I asked him to introduce himself with a guest post. Please consider contributing to his campaign by tapping on the ActBlue 2018 congressional thermometer on the right. The primary, by the way, is 3 weeks from yesterday.



"We Are A Working-Class District. We Are Union"
by Michael DeVito

“How do you join a union, Mister?” Manny, one of my student interns, is eager to know. I’m struck suddenly by the impact of being asked two questions about unions in one day, and wonder if it’s a sign the conversation is gaining traction, especially among those in the next generation.

 In my work as a teacher and youth advocate, there is never any shortage of moments when intersectionality punches you in the face.

Manny is asking this question as we walk in a procession chanting, “No More Guns, No More Guns. Stop the Violence, Stop the Violence.” We are on the North Shore of Staten Island, and we’re walking to celebrate the life of a young man I mentored five years ago: Cesar Sanchez.  Cesar was murdered by a two-time killer in the Berry Homes (a NYCHA Housing Development) on September 24th 2014. Delano Hubert had shot and killed another kid a few hundred feet away years earlier. Hubert served just six years for that murder, because the D.A. accepted a plea of attempted manslaughter. That D.A. is the current Congressman of New York’s CD11, Dan Donovan. Hubert was released to no prospects for a job, continued education, or mental health services. He was on parole and often not showing up for probation.

Manny is asking me about unions because before we started our Walk Against Gun Violence, I gave a speech about standing united in solidarity for what you believe in and that, now more than ever, we need to stand together to fight for our civil rights and our economic freedom.

We tell the kids every year that we could have prevented Cesar’s death with better laws, and if we really looked out for each other; if we made sure we worked together to make our community strong and vibrant.

After Cesar’s death, I started a scholarship fund with his mother and each year we host a run/walk called “A Race Against Gun Violence.”  We usually do our walk down on the beach. This year, we are walking around the housing complex where Cesar lived, because next week, the NYC Parks Department-- having accepted my application-- will formally name the basketball courts there in honor of Cesar.

As we walk around the complex this time, Manny tells everyone he just dropped a track on SoundCloud. He says, “I gotta make some bank so I can fund my music career. I gotta get into a union to do it.”

Just a few hours before the walk, I was at a Democratic Party debate.

The question there: what legislation would you introduce into Congress to make it easier for those who want to unionize to have their union recognized by their employer?

The South Shore of Staten Island, the scene of the debate, is reputed to be a Republican stronghold. The reality is more nuanced, and the district in its entirety is actually a microcosm of America. Even throughout the infamously Conservative South Shore, there is an immense concentration of civil servants, and trades workers: firefighters, cops, electricians, teachers, plumbers, construction workers, nurses, bus drivers, signalmen, etc. We are a working-class district. We are union. We are a district which has largely been voting Republican for the last 30 years (although Obama was elected and re-elected right here), even as there are 1.75 times the number of registered Democrats as Republicans. More remarkably: there are about as many unaffiliated registered voters as Republicans.

NY-11 went 20 points for Trump in 2016. If we are paying attention, the message is clear: the Establishment is not welcome in this district.

We want change. We need a champion.

We know why people here voted for Trump, and really: this question is plucked right out of the minds of the middle class, which is rapidly becoming the new poor in America-- the poor who are being imprisoned by debt and lack of opportunity.

My answer is the Employee Free Choice Act.

Since Taft-Hartley, unions have been up against the ropes. As we are forced into the blinding light of the gig economy, (what Chris Hedges calls, “the new term for serfdom”) we are faced with the apparent possibility that the only way to save America is with a Labor Movement larger than the Civil Rights Movement of the sixties. In 2005, The Employee Free Choice Act was presented for the first time. According to labor leaders far and wide, it was destined to pass in 2009 when Democrats controlled all three parts of the government.

It failed.

It failed because of corporate Blue Dog Democrats who were more beholden to their CEO masters and the donor class demagogues than the working people of our country.

It failed the American Worker.

Corporate Democrats failed the American Worker.

The EFCA does three things:

1. It empowers workers to unionize without the requirement of an additional secret ballot.
2. It mandates that if an agreement were not reached after 90 days of collective bargaining, mandated mediation and then arbitration would be required.
3. It penalizes corporations should they attempt to subject workers to detriments for participating in union activities. 

This is the kind of clear message we need to send to corporations. We are standing with our workers, and we can only do so if we send people like me to Congress who are unbought.

This is what I am fighting for in NY-11 and across the country.

Right now, we have 1,800 IBEW Local 3 union families striking for 14 months against Charter/ Spectrum in New York City. They are being starved. They are losing their homes. They are being stripped of their dignity, all because Charter doesn’t want to honor the contract they acquired through the purchase of Time-Warner.

The mandated mediation/arbitration clause in the EFCA would have had these folks back to work 11 months ago.

When Bernie was defending the EFCA, he said, “Big Business does not want to ensure that workers make a decent wage.” Local 3’s fight is the perfect example.

We used to cheer at the number of Americans that climbed into the middle class in our country. Now we are mourning as droves of people fall into the pit of poverty.

Most of the young people I work with have fallen behind in high school. Some made bad choices, while many have had to make tough choices, and all of them are subject to a school system that is failing them because of a lack of vision and equity. Most of my kids are headed toward the perilous gig economy-- towards serfdom. The majority of them are not college-bound and will wind up in the service industry.

I tell Manny that we have an OSHA 30 training this coming week. I tell him he can join two unions if he wants: the carpenters union and the musicians’ union.

The first step is to be on time for OSHA training this weekend.

He says, “Word? No Doubt.”

We shake hands with the thumb snap at the end.

My commitment to my community is thirteen years renewed, after eight-plus years as a U.S. Marine in peacetime, and six more years as a graduate student/ contractor/ expat father in Okinawa.  When I got back to my hometown in 2005, I hit the ground running – right into service. Every day I get up and go to work to help just one kid succeed because I know that helping one kid is helping a whole family, and every family affects a community.

Their fight is my fight, because I have skin in this game too.

I fight for my own child who, as a newly-minted Court Stenographer, is making her way in the gig economy. Miya is working hard to pay back her school debt and is contributing to the greater good of America. She pays her dues to the National Court Reporters Association, and she’s working towards joining the Association of Surrogate’s and Supreme Court Reporters.

All my kids want an America that is going to be there for them. I believe it is up to people like me to ensure we make it so.

Send Barrow Home-- From A Labor Perspective

A re-match could come out very differently in 2010

Louie is a union member (Millwright, Local 256) in Savannah, Georgia and reader of DWT.  After experiencing the political betrayal of working Americans, he has resolved to expose corporate politicians posing as friends of labor, supporting candidates whose actions don't contradict their words.  He is active in the Savannah Regional Central Labor Council, and maintains their website. We've been corresponding about his congressional district's heinous Blue Dog, John Barrow, and in honor of Labor Day, I asked him if he'd write a post about how local Democrats and union members are seeing Barrow these days, after he was rescued from a tough primary battle with help from both Obama and labor unions only to turn around and stab the president's agenda and working Georgia families in the back. Just looking at substantive votes for the current session, Barrow is one of only 2 Democrats from strongly Blue districts to vote overwhelmingly more with the Republicans than with his own party. With that in mind let's hear what Louie has to say about his Representative:

As each day passes, more and more Georgians are finding themselves in agreement on one thing: John Barrow cannot be trusted, and needs to go.  And as each day passes, time is running out for a successful campaign against him.  Somebody needs to step up to the plate and run. Now.

At this point, he's sweating. He wants to be everything to everyone, trying as hard as he possibly can not to say anything that can be used against him in a television commercial.  When your bottom line is staying in power, and two of your big supporters are the opposing forces of big business and organized labor, picking a definite side can be tough.

For evidence of this, look no further than the Employee Free Choice Act, HR 1409. This is one of those issues where a politician's just got to pick a side.  In this age where news travels as fast as youtube or a blog allows, this is no good.

Diane Feinstein found this out earlier this year when she reportedly came out against the EFCA.  She was quick to back peddle, revealing she was not "completely" against the bill. Thanks, Dianne, glad to know you've got our back!

When Barrow refused to co-sponsor the same bill he promised a Georgia labor group he would support "in any form," the group's leadership was not pleased. Without Barrow's unconditional support of EFCA, "not one dime" would go to his 2010 campaign. Mr. Barrow spoke of possible "improved language" for the bill (i.e. removing its effectiveness), and tried to console the angry union members he would indeed support the bill, once again "in any form" it took. He could say that to a room full of union members without fear of offending his friends at the Chamber of Commerce and the Business Industry Political Action Committee (BIPAC).

Arlen Specter recently encountered the same situation in Pennsylvania.

This writer wasn't consoled. 

As far as Barrow's behavior on the EFCA, let's look at the good and the bad of it.

In 2007,  Barrow kept his promise and voted for HR800.  He also voted against the 3 Republican attempts to amend the it (Though it is interesting to see where Feinstein and other Democrats stood):

King (Iowa) Amendment

Foxx (NC) Amendment

McKeon (CA) Substitute Amendment

Info on the Amendments are here

Despite his "Yes" vote on EFCA in 2007, (as reported in this blog) Barrow voted for a "motion to recommit" on the EFCA, which would have killed the bill.

House Committee on Rules on The Motion To Recommit. From the site: "This motion is traditionally the right of the Minority and gives them one last chance to amend or kill the bill." And here's Barrow's vote on the record.

In researching the matter, I came across this blog. Specifically:

I remember last year when Blue America was trying to help Georgia state Senator Regina Thomas oust reactionary Blue Dog John Barrow, we ran into some surprising difficulties. Here was a politician who has shown again and again that his sympathies are, at best, very conflicted between the special interests and the interests of working families and yet he has always counted on easily duped and somewhat politically naive organized labor to underwrite the part of his campaign that the special interests don't.

For example, in 2007 Barrow signed on as a co-sponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act and, in fact was among the 228 Democrats who voted for passage on March 1-- all but two Democrats. However, Barrow didn't totally let down his Chamber of Commerce anti-union supporters either. Just moments before the final vote, the House Republicans tried killing Employee Free Choice with a motion to recommit. Barrow and a dozen other reactionaries joined 189 Republicans in voting for that motion, which would have killed the bill. This year Barrow and most of those reactionaries, at the urging of the Chamber of Commerce and other Big Business interests, have refused to co-sponsor the exact same bill. The other anti-union Democrats who voted to recommit in 2007 and refuse to co-sponsor this year, are Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK), Joe Donnelly (Blue Dog-IN), Brad Ellsworth (Blue Dog-IN), Baron Hill (Blue Dog-IN), Jim Marshall (Blue Dog-GA), Harry Mitchell (AZ), Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN), Heath Shuler (Blue Dog-NC) and Gene Taylor (Blue Dog-MS). Counting Barrow, that's just 10. What about the other 3? The other 3 Democrats who voted to kill Employee Free Choice, Tim Mahoney (Blue Dog-FL), Nick Lampson (Blue Dog-TX) and Nancy Boyda (KS), were defeated at the polls in November-- no thanks to organized labor, which cluelessly supported each of them-- $239,250 for Mahoney, $245,000 for Lampson and $193,800 for Boyda.

And last year labor unions donated $231,500 to Barrow, one of the most reactionary, anti-working family Democrats in Congress, who, although he represents a reliably Democratic district, regularly crosses the aisle on core issues to vote with the GOP. What was especially frustrating is that Regina Thomas is a staunch supporter of organized labor, not just in words but in deed. She wasn't given one thin dime by an Inside-the-Beltway labor movement thoroughly co-opted by the Democratic Party Establishment incumbent protection racket. Barrow, as well as other reactionary special interest Democrats, were also collecting money, quite openly, from one of organized labor's bitterest political enemies, far right Republican Party front group, BIPAC.

Despite winning by narrow margins in each of his elections, its clear Barrow's money (literally) is on business.  If he is forced to vote for a toothless, watered down version of EFCA, he may and then use that to sweet talk the donations and campaigning out of labor in 2010.

After multiple, (unacknowledged) hand written letters, emails and phone calls, his Washington, DC office dropped a bomb.  When asked if a vote on "that card check bill, about the unions" came up today (this was on September 1st)

You probably won't be surprised to know that Barrow's Washington office confirmed that he will "definitely not" vote for EFCA "without a compromise."  When asked how he would vote if the bill came to the floor today, the spokeswoman said he would vote "NO".  Really?  "That's right, sir. He would vote no."  That was yesterday.

I saw Mr. Barrow at a business group-sponsored town hall on health care.  He reaffirmed he was against any type of 'public option,' among other things like clean energy.  Afterward, I confronted him about the flip flop on EFCA.  I told him he had not responded to several hand-written letters, emails, calls I made about the issue.

He put on his dancing shoes and his nose grew too.  "I'm trying to get a compromise where the secret ballot is preserved," he said.  He implied his interns could make mistakes, and denied his interns would "phrase it like that. (i.e. "he would definitely vote no""  Not to be bullshitted further, I cut him off. 

ME: "1409, as written.  The same bill you co-sponsored in 2007.  If it came up today, YES, or NO."

Barrow: "well.... that depends on if it really came up today,"

Me:  "yes or no?"

Barrow:  "We are working to make a compromise that can pass the senate that preserves the secret ballot..."  (Count Barrow in the "EFCA destroys the secret ballot" camp).

He then turns to another questioner.

Me:  "So as written, you would vote yes or no?"

Barrow:  "I think I answered that... if there was no other choices.... and the vote really did come up today... I probably would be inclined to vote yes"

And there it is, as clear and direct as ever.

If a Democratic challenger needs any more ammunition against Barrow, look no further than his own voting record against his own party.

So Georgia:  The rumblings against Barrow are rising, but need to evolve into a progressive candidate to challenge him. Tighten up, because time's wasting!

-Louie
Local256news@gmail.com
Savannah, Georgia

I've been staying in touch with Sen. Thomas and gently urging her to run again. Until there is a Democratic candidate in the race, we're promising to use our Bad Dogs ActBlue page in the fight to retire John Barrow.


UPDATE: Louie Isn't The Only Workingman Speaking Out Against Blue Dogs Today

A union pipe fitter in Baton Rouge, Michael Day, published an OpEd in the Louisiana Advocate about the Employee Free Choice Act and what the political impact is likely to be for Blue Dogs.

These so-called “Blue Dog Democrats,” who are riding the fence on this issue thinking that they are helping themselves politically, I think are mistaken.

What good is a blue dog if it growls and barks the same bark as a foaming-at-the-mouth, rabies-infected red dog?

I vote Democrat primarily because of the party’s strong commitment to collective bargaining and other workplace issues.

I can’t understand a good Democrat having a problem supporting a bill such as the Employee Free Choice Act that levels the playing field between employees and corporations and puts the choice of joining or not joining a union in the hands of working men and women.

Americans voted Democrats into a 60-seat, filibuster-proof Senate and an overwhelming majority in the House, and what good are they if they can’t use the power.

I voted for change that I could believe in, not change that I can’t notice.

The Blue Dog Democrats should understand that the Employee Free Choice Act is about jobs, mostly theirs. I would never vote for a Bill Cassidy or, God forbid, a counterfeit David Vitter, but I can go fishing on election day.

And, in case you're unaware of the Senate race shaping up in Louisiana, that was a shot against hack Blue Dog Charlie Melancon.

GOP '09: The Party Of Bad Faith

Let's hope we get more change than this

Cantor and Boehner and that whole, rotten, reactionary crew-- in fact, every single Republican in the House-- rolled Obama. In his first week in office he offered them his hand-- and billions of dollars in tax breaks for their corporate buddies-- and they responded with a clenched fist. Remember at his inaugural when he said "To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist." He may have been addressing other unsavory characters but the shoe certainly fits. And many Democrats feel this whole post-partisan thing is a charade and, for starters, they want those billions of dollars in tax breaks for businesses to be yanked from the Stimulus bill and used more productively.

Republicans fight for real-- and with knives. Obama better stop throwing flowers. He finally spoke up about the scandal of the banksters who accepted hundreds of billions in taxpayer dollars and then doled out $18 billion to themselves and their cronies in bonuses-- all the while passing on alleviating the credit crunch Democrats thought (naively) they would be getting for the unaccounted for billions that they foolishly entrusted to the same Bush Regime that had already ripped off untold billions over the past 8 years-- at home and abroad.

"It is shameful," Obama said from the Oval Office. "And part of what we're going to need is for the folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint, and show some discipline, and show some sense of responsibility."

The president said the public dislikes the idea of helping the financial sector, only to see the hole get bigger because of lavish spending. The comptroller's report found that Wall Street employees got paid about the same amount of bonuses as they did in the boom time of 2004.

Obama said he and Geithner will speak directly to Wall Street leaders about the bonuses, which threaten to undermine public support for more government intervention. The House just approved an economic stimulus plan that would cost taxpayers more than $800 billion; the Senate is considering its own version.

..."There will be time for them to make profits, and there will be time for them to get bonuses," Obama said. "Now is not that time."

No, it isn't. It's the time for fucking accountability already. And I don't mean a slap on the wrist. These criminal banksters should all be rounded up and thrown in prison like the common criminals they are-- and I mean prison, not multimillion dollar penthouses. And those bonuses? That $18.4 billion should be taken back immediately-- with interest. The Obama DOJ should follow Andrew Cuomo's lead in New York on this.

In yesterday's Washington Post Dan Froomkin was wondering where that populist is who inspired millions and millions of America while he campaigned for a fairer and more equitable America last summer and fall.

[A]s Obama takes on the enormous challenge of trying to right a perilously listing economy, he seems to be abandoning at least some of that populism in an attempt not to upset Republicans and Wall Street.

In his first days, Obama has spent more time jawing with-- and making concessions to-- Republicans than Democrats. His photo ops are with corporate CEOs, not labor leaders or laid-off workers. His senior economic team represents the dominant Wall Street culture, and is apparently considering a financial rescue plan that will most directly help the same fat cats who gave themselves more than $18 billion in bonuses last year, even as they tanked the economy. Despite dramatic new ethics policies, Obama is peppering his administration with lobbyists. And he appears to be in no hurry to repeal Bush's tax cuts for the rich.

At the same time, the Obama team is eschewing even the easiest appeals to populism, responding with discreet pressure rather than more public outrage earlier this week when it was revealed that executives at Citibank-- who received a $45 billion infusion of tax dollars -- were buying a $50 million corporate jet.

And what does Obama have to show for all this outreach and restraint?

A stick in the eye... and lots of bad faith. Cantor and those clowns want to play games? The Democrats should pass the Employee Free Choice Act next week and ask them what game they want to play next. It's what they fear and loathe more than anything. Nevada reactionary John Ensign:

If you know anything about politics, it is a game changer. It is a total game changer for the next 40 to 50 years if the Democrats are able to get this legislation.

Ensign's paymaster, former WalMart CEO, Lee Scott:

We like driving the car and we’re not going to give the steering wheel to anybody but us.

Obama has got to wake up and realize that not only is Republican dogma worthless and counterproductive-- just look what that dogma has wrought-- but that these Republicans themselves are dealing from bad faith.

Why Are The Obstructionists Out To Get Hilda Solis?

Anti-working family fanatic Richard Burr sticking the shiv in Hilda Solis' back?

If you follow DWT or any of the Blue America blogs, you know that one of the Democratic members of Congress who we most respect is southern California progressive Hilda Solis. Our community has been directly engaging with her for the last couple of years. Of the 398 online donations to her 2008 re-election campaign-- she is so popular that the Republicans couldn't find a candidate to oppose her-- 380 donations came from Blue America, averaging $15 per contribution. Like everyone who thinks American working families deserve a hand-- and not the back of some Republican's hand-- we were overjoyed when President Obama nominated her to be Secretary of Labor. Today the editorial board of the NY Times joined us in demanding that the Republicans stop obstructing her confirmation so that she can get to work. The Times claims that obstructing her confirmation is "a way for Republican senators to score tough-guy points with business constituents who are driven to distraction by the thought of unions." Their hatred of working families knows no bounds and if they thought the election of Barack Obama and strong Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress was going to yield up another corporate patsy like Elaine Chao, it becomes easier and easier to see why the economy has become a shambles in their clueless, incompetent hands.

Unemployment is rising as mass layoffs grip the nation.

Millions of Americans who need full time jobs can only find part-time work.

Waves of professionals and college graduates are working at jobs beneath the levels associated with their career and educational achievement, which is bad for them and bad for the workers who would otherwise have gotten those jobs.

The employment picture didn’t suddenly turn dismal. The Bush years saw the worst job growth of any business cycle since World War II. Wages stagnated, even as labor productivity rose, which means that the gains from work found their way not into paychecks, but into corporate profits, share prices and dividends. As a result, income inequality has reached levels not seen since the Gilded Age.

If there was ever a time the nation needed a strong secretary of labor, this is it. And yet, for the past several days, at least one Republican senator has been using a parliamentary procedure to hold up the confirmation of Congresswoman Hilda Solis (D-California), President Obama’s choice for labor secretary. The “hold” tactic delays a full vote by the Senate on the nomination, pending, well, pending what?

There was a great deal of speculation that Oklahoma serial obstructionist Tom Coburn, a sworn enemy of working families, was the one who placed the hold on Hilda's nomination but his office swears he isn't the miscreant this time and someone with a distinctly Oklahoma drawl has leaked it that the evil doer this time is North Carolina corporate shill Richard Burr, hoping for a few more million dollars from the Big Business interests that have financed his disgraceful political career. Burr's office refuses to confirm or deny and there is also a rumor floating around that it was one of the Wyoming loons, Mike Enzi, who activated the hold. But whichever obstructionist asshat it is, the tide of public opinion is not going in the Rush Limbaugh direction of hoping for failure for the new Administration. Even the staunchly Republican-oriented Pasadena Star-News is fuming over the way the far right is treating Hilda's nomination.

In the spirit of President Barack Obama's call for open, transparent government, we call for an end to the delays and shenanigans. As Obama said in his inaugural address, "let's put away childish things" and get on with the workings of government.

If indeed an anonymous Republican senator has placed a hold on Solis' confirmation hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, as is allowed under the body's rules, that senator should come forward, lift the hold and ask the chairman to continue the hearing on a date certain.

If the delays and the politicking are not serious enough, a poster on HuffingtonPost Monday said some senators from the committee have begun interviewing Solis privately in their offices. We don't think that such literal behind-closed-doors hearings are what Obama and the majority of Americans who voted for him had in mind.

They too point out that Hilda Solis will never be a shill for Big Business interests demanding a Secretary of Labor who will wage war on American working families the way Elaine Chao did for the last eight years. "[T]here's no question," continues the Star-News editorial, "that Solis is a friend of organized labor. Her father was a Teamster steward who worked in a battery-recyling plant in Industry. From her ascent from the Rio Hondo College board to the Assembly to the state Senate to Congress, she has used the podium to speak out for the worker. She helped pass legislation that increased the minimum wage and walked the picket lines with striking grocery workers. Everyone knows her background. As far as we know, she's always paid her taxes. She has no known conflict-of-interest issues. Re-start the process, and in the end, approve Hilda Solis as labor secretary." And as Dave Neiwart demands at Crooks & Liars, "in the end," should be now.

Republican Assaults On Working Families Turned Back In The House & Senate

Before we get to yesterday's final passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Equal Pay Act-- something the Republicans in the House, Senate and White House have been able to bottle up for years-- I want to recommend a not unrelated OpEd in Monday's L.A. Times by former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich. In answering the question about why the current recession is smelling more and more like a depression, he points to a time before many of us were born when "good pay meant more purchases, and more purchases meant more jobs... a virtuous circle," at the center of which was the American labor movement: unions.

In 1955, more than a third of working Americans belonged to one. Unions gave them the bargaining leverage they needed to get the paychecks that kept the economy going. So many Americans were unionized that wage agreements spilled over to nonunionized workplaces as well. Employers knew they had to match union wages to compete for workers and to recruit the best ones.

Fast forward to a new century. Now, fewer than 8% of private-sector workers are unionized. Corporate opponents argue that Americans no longer want unions. But public opinion surveys, such as a comprehensive poll that Peter D. Hart Research Associates conducted in 2006, suggest that a majority of workers would like to have a union to bargain for better wages, benefits and working conditions. So there must be some other reason for this dramatic decline.

But put that question aside for a moment. One point is clear: Smaller numbers of unionized workers mean less bargaining power, and less bargaining power results in lower wages.

It's no wonder middle-class incomes were dropping even before the recession. As our economy grew between 2001 and the start of 2007, most Americans didn't share in the prosperity. By the time the recession began last year, according to an Economic Policy Institute study, the median income of households headed by those under age 65 was below what it was in 2000.

Typical families kept buying only by going into debt. This was possible as long as the housing bubble expanded. Home-equity loans and refinancing made up for declining paychecks. But that's over. American families no longer have the purchasing power to keep the economy going. Lower paychecks, or no paychecks at all, mean fewer purchases, and fewer purchases mean fewer jobs.

The way to get the economy back on track is to boost the purchasing power of the middle class. One major way to do this is to expand the percentage of working Americans in unions.

Reich goes on to extol the virtues of the Employee Free Choice Act, apparently a line in the sand Big Business has demanded from their kept legislators. As Thomas Frank puts it so eloquently in his superb new book, The Wrecking Crew-- How Conservatives Rule, in Republicanville the interests of the ownership class "are central and defining, while every other aspect or strategy of the movement is mutable and disposable. Indeed, even the cult of the free market, which appears to be such a solid, fixed element of the business mind, is malleable as well, with conservatism whining for bailouts and high tariff walls when those seem like the way to maximize profits." They will do anything to sabotage unions and right now that means preventing the Free Choice Act from passing. As Sam Stein pointed out at Huffington Post yesterday, "Three days after receiving $25 billion in federal bailout funds, Bank of America Corp. hosted a conference call with conservative activists and business officials to organize opposition to the U.S. labor community's top legislative priority. Participants on the October 17 call-- including at least one representative from another bailout recipient, AIG-- were urged to persuade their clients to send 'large contributions' to groups working against the Employee Free Choice Act, as well as to vulnerable Senate Republicans, who could help block passage of the bill."

Currently the same class of people, and the shameless propaganda whores they rent, who were at one time also hiring armed criminals to shoot down union organizers, are now whining, quite falsely, of course (but with a huge, loud bankroll behind them) how unions are trying to steal the "secret ballot" from our beloved working men and women (the ones they used to have shot for demanding safe working conditions and a minimum wage).

One of their tools in the war against working Americans is the old imperal theory of divide and conquer. And I'm sure there are still some males-- apparently predominantly in the old slave-holding states-- who feel better about themselves if they make more money than women doing the same work they do. But most Americans-- by far-- have long since moved beyond this Bronze Age social more. Most Americans feel people who do the same work should get the same pay regardless of extraneous factors like race, religion or plumbing. Today the House reconciled their own version of the bill with the one passed last week by the Senate so that President Obama can sign it. It will be, fittingly, the first piece of legislation he does sign.

In the fruitless effort to derail the legislation today, 174 Republicans (i.e., every single one of them except freshman Bill Cassidy of Baton Rouge, the man who replaced reactionary Democrat Don Cazayoux), plus two so-called Democrats, rightist loons Parker Griffith of Alabama and Travis Childers of Mississippi, voted in support of a parliamentary tactic to kill the bill. Ten minutes after that failed, the bill passed by a landslide, 250-177. Cassidy had scurried back across the aisle to loony-land and was voting with the Republicans by then, only 3 Republicans voting for equality for working women: Chris Smith and Leonard Lance of New Jersey plus Ed Whitfield of Kentucky (who wants to run for the U.S. Senate if Bunning dies, is committed to an asylum or voluntarily decides against seeking re-election). And the Democrats who crossed the aisle in the other direction to register their votes against equality?

Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK)
Allen Boyd (Blue Dog-FL)
Bobby Bright (AL)
Travis Childers (MS)
Parker Griffith (AL)

I wonder how Kirsten Gillibrand, Melissa Bean, Loretta Sanchez, Jane Harman, Gabby Giffords, and Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, the female Blue Dogs, feel about their colleagues' contempt for working women.

The Bush White House and Senate Republicans blocked the legislation in the last session of Congress, but Obama strongly supports it and the Democratic-controlled Congress moved it to the top of the agenda for the new session that opened this month.

..."What a difference a new Congress and a president make," said  Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., sponsor of the bill and chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee.

Obama invited Ledbetter, for whom the bill is named, to accompany him on his train trip to the inauguration ceremony in Washington. After the Senate vote last week, the 70-year-old retiree said Obama "has assured me that he would see me in the White House when they sign the bill."...[T]he measure, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964, also applies to discrimination based on factors such as race, religion, national origin, disability or age.

Meanwhile, the Senate came one step closer to finally passing another bill that the enemies of working families have been bottling up for years-- S-CHIP, basically health insurance for needy children. And if there's any time that is desperately needed it's when unemployment is soaring and the economy is reeling. Reactionary Republicans were out in full force to block the bill, of course. Arch-obstructionist Jim DeMint (R-SC) proposed a harebrained amendment to force states to impose cost-sharing for some individuals enrolled in the program. Even Republicans Kit Bond, Susan Collins, Arlen Specter and Kay Bailey Hutchison joined all the Democrats (except Claire McCaskill, who had apparently lost her mind) in voting that down 60-37. When it comes to the final bill, conservative Republicans Chuck Grassley (IA) and Orrin Hatch (UT) switched their former support of the bill to declaring themselves opposed to it, bitching about a provision lifting the five-year waiting period for SCHIP coverage for legal immigrant children and pregnant women as well as a provision easing paperwork requirements they claim could make Lou Dobbs have a heart attack by possibly making it easier for illegal immigrants to obtain coverage. The real problem, though, is that one of the consequences of the war against working families-- which Warren Buffet reports, quite sadly, is being won by those who are waging it, the rich-- is that millions of needy American children have no health care and no insurance. The Republicans have an answer to this pressing social need: "Tough luck; bite me. Next time around try getting born into a rich family."

Their Senate Leader, Mitch McConnell-- who has never been cooperative when it comes to lending a helping hand to working families-- claims he's not being cooperative now because the SCHIP bill sets "a troubling precedent for future discussions on health care reform." This comes in the midst of the GOP adopting the Limbaugh Approach to governing America. Like their drug-addled hero, the Senate Republican leadership seems to have decided they too want President Obama to fail. Right now all they care about is coddling the hate-obsessed Republican base, not about America's problems.

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, the new chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, is staking out a sharply partisan approach to the task of rescuing his party from the steep losses it suffered in the last two election cycles.

Cornyn, who once shared former President George W. Bush ’s hard-edged political consultant Karl Rove, has already gone after some of President Obama’s Cabinet nominees. Now he intends to target Democratic senators who vote for the economic stimulus package (S 1) that Senate appropriators and tax writers are slated to mark up Tuesday, a version of which (HR 1) will be on the House floor Wednesday.

“If you talked to any pollster after the election, they would say this was an election based on personalities. This is still a center-right country ideologically,” Cornyn said.

Ahhhh... so that's why Ted Stevens R-AK), Gordon Smith (R-OR), John Sununu (R-NH), Elizabeth Dole (R-NC), Jim Gilmore (R-VA), Steve Pearce (R-NM), and Bob Schaffer (R-CO) all lost their Senate races a couple months ago? They have lousy personalities? And Susan Collins (R-ME), Miss McConnell (R-KY), Lindsay Graham (R-SC), James Inhofe (R-OK) and Cornyn himself (R-TX) all won because... they're the life of the party? Don't think so. How about this: all the losers were consistent voters against working families and all the winners campaigned as champions of working families? And, by the way, not all Republicans-- especially not the ones who are up for re-election in 2010-- feel comfortable about the Cornyn-Limbaugh approach.

“A lot of people want some time out from the rhetoric,” said Tom Rath, a longtime GOP activist from New Hampshire, where Republicans have lost both House seats and one Senate seat in the past two cycles. Rath noted that Sen. Judd Gregg , R-N.H., who is up for re-election in 2010, has emphasized his willingness to work with Obama.

But Rath also said there is a place for Cornyn’s strategy of drawing lines in the sand. “There is a role for someone who calls us to our principles and says you don’t abandon them because you lost an election,” he said.

One Republican who disapproved of holding up Clinton’s confirmation [one of the tactics advocated by the Cornyn-Limbaugh school] was Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the party’s unsuccessful 2008 presidential nominee. McCain issued a stinging rebuff to Cornyn when, in supporting Clinton’s nomination, he told colleagues, “We had an election. I think the message the American people are sending us now is they want us to work together and get to work.”

...Terry Madonna, a pollster at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, Pa., said Cornyn could be detrimental to candidates in a swing state such as Pennsylvania, where Obama won by a large margin and GOP Sen. Arlen Specter is up for re-election.

“The Republicans have to be careful about the face of their party, because that hard-edged face has not done well in ’08 and ’06,” Madonna said. On the other hand, he said, if Cornyn placates the base with red-meat rhetoric, it takes some of the pressure off Specter to be a loyal partisan.

The Senate Republican's most vicious and determined Limbaughist, South Carolina's cartoonish Jm DeMint, on the other hand, is cheering Cornyn on, applauding his gun-slinging approach. “We call him ‘Big John’ for a reason,” sneered DeMint.


UPDATE: ANOTHER LAME GOP TACTIC TO KILL SCHIP FAILS-- TAKE A BOW, MEL MARTINEZ

Retiring Florida wingnut Mel Martinez introduced a killer amendment to SCHIP today that would restore the prohibition on funding of NGOs that offer counselling about abortion (the "Mexico City Policy" which was thrown in the rubbish by Obama, where it belongs). Joining Martinez were 36 other reactionariy Republicans plus one reactionary Democrat, Nebraska loon Ben Nelson. Of the Republican women in the Senate only Kay Bailey Hutchison voted with the anti-choice fanatics.

How Many Republicans Would Rather See America Fail Than Obama Succeed?

And I'm not just talking about the die-hard extremist obstructionists like Jim DeMint (R-SC), Jim Bunning (R-KY), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Jon Kyl (R-AZ), and David Diapers Vitter (R-LA) in the Senate and Eric Cantor (R-VA), Adam Howdy Doody Putnam (R-FL), Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), and Jerry Lewis (R-CA), in the House.

Going back over President Obama's inaugural address, I found a couple of warnings he made to the enemies of our country that I want to remind you of. First one was aimed clearly at the GOP and their venal propaganda whores like Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Shawn Hannity, the editorial page of the neo-fascist Wall Street Journal, Fox "News"...

"On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord. On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics."

It's more of a stretch-- but no less fitting-- to interpret the second statement as a warning to right wing Republican partisans:

"To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."

Do you think Rupert Murdock or Mitch McConnell took umbrage when they heard that one? What about the collection of kooks and loons running to head up the RNC?

Yesterday we talked about how the Republican Party, as clueless today as they were when they embarked upon their grand program to destroy post-Great Depression middle class America, has come to the foolish conclusion-- and trumpeted it on one of their official websites -- that "Thanks to Republican economic policies, the U.S. economy is robust and job creation is strong." After an outcry, they removed that page from the NRCC website (although you can see the screenshot at the link above). Their cluelessness is underscored by the biggest surge in Democratic Party self-identification among voters since 1983 or, worse for the Republicans, the fact that only 5% of Americans reported they had confidence in the economy as Bush prepared to leave behind the fruits of Republican fiscal policies.

Sadder still is that the actual Republican base, long thought to be nothing but brainwashed religionist fanatics from backward parts of the South, are adamantly against the obstructionism being pushed as GOP official policy by Republican neo-Confederate political leaders like Jim DeMint, David Vitter and Eric Cantor. And severe fractures within the party are showing up in the six-ring circus that is trying to figure out who will be the new chair of the Republican National Committee. They have no Howard Dean to turn to in their time of need-- only ideological pygmies looking for personal career advancement.

Rank-and-file Republicans are telling their leaders they want more ethnic, gender and age diversity in a party that is dominated by white males. They also want party leaders to cooperate with President Barack Obama, according to surveys.

After losing the White House and 28 seats in Congress last year, some party leaders still aren’t hearing the message from voters who are urging them to claw their way back to power by promoting minorities and striking a less partisan tone, said Rich Bond, a former Republican National Committee chairman.

“We need a great deal more tolerance for the other guy’s point of view,” Bond said. “Not everybody comes from the same constituency as a majority-white homogenous district in the South where all people care about is keeping their guns and taxes.”

The 168 members of the RNC will vote for a new chairman as early as Jan. 29. Four of the candidates are white males. The two others are black, including Ken Blackwell, a former Ohio secretary of state. He is favored by the party’s social conservatives, who value ideological purity over compromise.

...[J]udging from a recent public debate about the party chairman’s job, much of the discussion among RNC leaders remains centered on ideology.

During the Jan. 5 panel in Washington, the candidates had little to say about diversity or how to retool the party. Instead, they discussed their values, including opposition to abortion, higher taxes and how many guns they owned.

If you haven't seen it, please watch one of the top candidates, South Carolina Republican Party Chairman Katon Dawson, explaining his vision for the "Republican Party's mission for the next four years":



If Obama reveres President Abraham Lincoln and looks to him as a role model and an inspiration, I'm afraid Mr. Dawson, as well as more than a few other Republicans from the former slaveholding states, see themselves as ready to fire on Fort Sumter. The conservatives' battle to preserve slavery is now a battle against working families. Nothing enrages right wing obstructionists more than the idea of working men and women banding together to negotiate collectively with Big Business. NOTHING; every thing on the Republican plate is negotiable but that. That's why on Thursday you saw 36 hard core right-wing loons in the Senate vote against equality for women in the workplace-- including even purported "mainstream Republicans" like John McCain (AZ), Richard Lugar (IN), Chuck Grassley (IA), and Judd Gregg (NH). And it's why, on the same day, you saw 31 of them support an amendment by Jim DeMint and David Diapers Vitter to undermine the viability of the American labor movement. And that wasn't just the radicals and extremists from the Deep South and Mormon West but, again, supposed "mainstream" Republicans like McCain, Thune, and Lugar.

And now that the radicals have been defeated in their bid to sabotage the confirmation of Eric Holder as President Obama's Attorney General, they have focused their vitriol on California Congresswoman Hilda Solis, the only actual progressive among Obama's cabinet nominees, who, if confirmed, will be Secretary of Labor. Under Bush that job went to a hack-- the "wife" of Mitch McConnell-- whose only priority to was undercut organized labor. Congresswoman Solis has been an unyielding ally to American working families for her entire career. The far right is well aware she will be the polar opposite of the ridiculous Elaine Chao.

One Republican senator, who is keeping his name secret, has put a hold on Rep. Solis' nomination, preventing her from being confirmed. It was widely rumored that the obstructionist in this instance was Tom Coburn (R-OK), although his office denies that he is the miscreant this time and there have been leaks that the obstructionist is Richard Burr (R-NC). Burr's hatred of Solis stems from her support for the Employee Free Choice Act, legislation geared to restoring the right of workers to form unions unharrassed by Big Business thugs.

Republican staffers, while refusing to identify which senator filed the hold, admit that the reason is because Solis backs the measures to prevent pay discrimination in the workplace and because she backs Employee Free Choice. The Chamber of Commerce demanded one of their stooges place the hold on the nomination. Even when her nomination clears HELP (the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee) next week, the hold will delay her confirmation-- pure obstructionism from the party that literally would rather see America fail than Obama succeed. Some of the worst of Republican strategists have warned that if the Employee Free Choice Act passes, Republican politicians will wander in the political wilderness for decades, ineffective in advancing the agenda of their corporate masters.

The Republican War On Working Families Hits A Roadblock-- And Lilly Ledbetter Act Passes The Senate... By A Landslide

As soon as the new House got back to work, it repassed, quite overwhelmingly, the Lilly Ledbetter Equal Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act, both meant to ensure equal pay for equal work. Ledbetter passed in the House 247-171 with only 3 Republicans joining every Democrat except 5 reactionary dogs from the old slave-holding states who, basically, agree with the GOP that women belong behind a stove, not in the workplace: Allen Boyd (Blue Dog-FL), Bobby Bright (freshman wingnut-AL), Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK), Parker Griffith (freshman wingnut-AL), Travis Childers (wingnut-MS). The Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 12) passed with an even wider margin, 256-163 and only three reactionary women-haters among the Democrats crossing the aisle to join the GOP on that one: Bobby Bright (AL), Parker Griffith (AL) and Walt Minnick (ID).

President Obama has already said he is eager to sign both bills. And yesterday Ledbetter moved to the Senate. Beverly Neufeld at TortDeform-- The Civil Justice Defense Blog set the stage nicely in the morning and warned against likely amendments by reactionaries that were introduced to weaken the intent of the bill. Needless to say, the GOP had no problem finding a lady-shill as their anti-woman stooge. Texas clown Kay Bailey Hutchison, who is eyeing a run for governor, offered an amendment, or actually a substitute bill, that would require women to prove "a reasonable suspicion of discrimination" before they would be allowed to proceed with claims that date beyond six months. Most senators saw right through her tactic and her efforts came to naught, with every single Democrat plus Republican Olympia Snowe voting it down, while all the other Republicans (40) voted for it. (The Senate had already killed a GOP attempt to filibuster the bill last Thursday, passing a cloture motion 72-23, all the Democrats plus 17 Republicans including even Mitch McConnell, who had sabotaged the same bill last year! Only the most radical right Neanderthals, led by DeMint and Kyl voted to filibuster equal rights in the workplace for women this time around.

Snarlin' Arlen Specter (R-PA) then tried 2 more maneuvers yesterday, amendments the Chamber of Commerce wrote for him that would, in effect, nullify any benefits of the bill. Specter was able to attract the two most reactionary Democrats-- Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson, each a devoted shill of Big Business-- on his first try but the attempt was handily thwarted by the rest of the Democrats plus Snowe. His second shot not only lost Landrieu and Nelson, but also sent Susan Collins over to the Democratic side. It failed 55-39.

Next up was Wyoming winger Mike Enzi but his boneheaded amendment was beaten back as well, Snowe sticking with the Democrats (although Webb defected). Johnny Isakson also tried weakening the bill with an amendment which was defeated 59-38, attracting no Democrats and losing Collins, Snowe and Specter. Yesterday was a bad day for the enemies of working families in the U.S. Senate. A little bit of change has indeed come to Washington.

After all this posturing and game-playing by the Republicans over equality for women in the workplace, the GOP's arch-obstructionist and the Senate's worst enemy of working families, Jim DeMint suddenly chimed in with an amendment he and David Diapers Vitter cooked up to weaken the ability of working people to organize and bargain with business collectively. Basically it was a tactic to throw sand in the faces of supporters of the Employee Free Choice Act. It was defeated, 67-30, all the Democrats voting yes, along with 11 Republicans, especially ones who are up for re-election in 2010 like Judd Gregg, Lisa Murkowski and Arlen Specter, as well as the Republicans who have already announced they are retiring and would rather stop beating up on working families in their last days in the Senate-- Kit Bond, Mel Martinez ad George Voinovich. Vitter then offered his own anti-worker bill, which was also defeated 59-38, every Democrat standing firm against the onslaught, along with Specter, Murkowski and Voinovich, a good indication that the Employee Free Choice Act will pass when it finally comes up for a vote.

Oh, and when the actual Ledbetter Act came to a final vote last yesterday afternoon, it passed 61-36, a nice healthy margin. Every single Democrat voted yes, of course, and they were joined by the 4 Republican women Senators plus Specter. It's 2010 but 36 reactionary Republicans voted against equality for women, including John McCain and, needless to say, the Senate's biggest whoremonger, David Diapers Vitter. Overall, Republican senators say they were just happy to be able to offer their poison pill amendments and debate them and promise they won't abuse the process to hold up Obama's agenda. I like it too because it shows Americans exactly what the GOP stands for.


UPDATE: LEDBETTER NOW HEADED FOR A CONFERENCE COMMITTEE RECONCILIATION

The House version, as usual, is more progressive and encompassing than what the Senate passed yesterday, and the two bodies will appoint a conference committee to iron out the differences. This won't be problematic and it is expected that Ledbetter will be the first new law signed by President Obama.

Hair of the Dog, Take Two: Let's Watch Who We're Being Bipartisan With

Calvin Coolidge, Andrew Mellon, Herbert Hoover-- problem makers, not problem solvers

Yesterday I tried getting across the idea that it makes no sense turning to the ideas-- and the people who promulgate those ideas-- that have driven our country to its knees. Republican ideology is failed ideology. Even as he prepares to finally leave the office he first stole in 2000, Bush is loathed by the overwhelming majority of Americans. Even a third of confessed Republicans think he did a lousy job. The Republicans in Congress are held in even greater contempt. Greed and selfishness is not a valid philosophy of governance. The precise economic policies espoused by the Republican Party that drove this country into Depression with the consecutive terms of three clueless Republican hacks-- Warren Harding, Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover (1921-1933)-- are a mirror image of what has been served up by Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and, worst of all, by far, Bush II.

To turn to those ideas now, or to treat their partisans as though they men and women of good faith and have something worthwhile to offer to the rescue effort may be called "bipartisan" Inside-the-Beltway, but looks like political game playing to the rest of us. I'm eager to give Obama the benefit of all doubts-- on his crappy middle of the road retread cabinet picks, on his less than bold political decisions, even on the footsie he's playing with those whose ideology are so damaging to our nation. I keep telling myself that he's very smart and knows how to play the game and in the end will beat back the reactionary forces both inside the Democratic Party and in the party that is the mortal enemy of working families.

And, remember, as Sean Paul pointed out today, you find bad faith, greed and selfishness not only on the Republican side of the aisle but among the putative Democrats calling themselves DLC, New Dems and Blue Dogs as well. Grover Norquist-- and if anyone knows a fellow douche bag when he sees one, it is Norquist-- rued how shabbily the Blue Dogs are being treated by real Democrats.

“Ironically, some of the biggest losers from the Pelosi rules changes will be fiscally conservative Blue Dog Democrats. The ‘pay-go’ rules they fought so hard for two years ago-- to require new spending proposals be balanced with additional revenue or cuts elsewhere-- have been gutted. And no term limits will mean they will have to stand in line for a taste of real power. ‘All of those nice pro-life, gun-owning young Democrats recruited by Rahm Emanuel will never have any real influence now,’ says Grover Norquist.”

Today's news about Obama's backpedaling on the Employee Free Choice Act is not encouraging. During his 70 minute interview with Washington Post editors and reports, Obama "gave his support for legislation that would make it easier for workers to unionize, but he said there may be other ways to achieve the same goal without angering businesses. And while many Democrats on Capitol Hill are eager to see a quick vote on that bill, he indicated no desire to rush into the contentious issue.

"If we're losing half a million jobs a month, then there are no jobs to unionize, so my focus first is on those key economic priority items I just mentioned," he said. "Let's see what the legislative docket looks like."

Reaching that goal without angering businesses-- who simply hate unions and have always and will always oppose the aspirations of working men and women-- is like making an omelet without breaking an egg. This is just plain silly-talk. Like Thomas Frank opined in the Wall Street Journal yesterday, in the heart of the beast, Obama should act as though he won, not kowtow to the enemies who are just waiting for him to slip up so they can do him in and cripple his ability to do any good whatsoever for the people who elected him.

Watching Dick Lugar (R-IN) toss those softballs to fellow Senator Hillary Clinton should have warmed the heart of anyone and everyone who's ever thought that the Inside-the-Beltway crew have more in common with each other than they do with the people whose interests they claim to represent around election time. I'm sure Dick Lugar is a decent enough man-- I once sat next to him at a White House state dinner and he rocked out to Lou Reed just like a real person-- and I'm sure he really does feel some affection for his old travelin' bud Barack. But Dick Lugar, and even the most decent Republicans, owe their fealty to a political party that in now thoroughly controlled by men and women who are as viscerally opposed to American values as are Osama bin-Laden and fundamentalist religionist fanatics, whether from Iran or Virginia. Meanwhile, the members of unions-- as Marcy points out so eloquently at Emptywheel today, have helped build America into the best place on earth, despite the concerted efforts of the greed and selfish and their elected representatives. In great contrast, I was reading some more of Arianna's Right Is Wrong this morning and I thought today would be a good time to point out this passage that starts on page 251.

Even in the unlikely event that the Right would admit that their selfishness, arrogance and stupidity contributed to the current recession (and they won't), it would still not temper their instinctive pursuit of misery dollars. The perverted form of capitalism at the core of the Right's philosophy dictates that when others are suffering there is money to be made.

For the Right, crisis begets opportunity, not to solve problems but to profit from their perpetuation. Just think of Halliburton and Blackwater sopping up juicy profits from the bloodshed in Iraq, a market closed to them while Saddam was still calling the shots.

To see how even the worst disasters can make the Right's eyes gleam with the prospect of pushing their agenda past the complacent Democrats, take a look at Hurricane Katrina, where disaster relief instantly became a policy and patronage boondoggle-- and a profit engine.

After the disaster, Tony Snowe, the soon-to-be White House Press Secretary, crowed: "This would be a marvelous time to push in a serious way for school choice, dramatic regulatory reform... even more thoroughgoing tort reform, privatization of everything from the Department of Commerce to many FEMA duties, and so on."

Political journalist David Sirota spotlighted a few of the top opportunities the GOP saw arising from Katrina, including the suspension of the seventy-six-year-old Davis-Bacon Act requiring federal contractors to pay workers "prevailing wages," the chance to offer more giveaways (and fewer regulations) to oil companies, and-- proving that no issue was too tangential to link to Katrina-- the chance to try to get the president's derailed attempt to privatize Social Security back on track.

That's who Obama seems willing to sell out the people who elected him for. Katon Dawson (R-SC), in his quest to become the head of the RNC, articulated exactly what the Republicans' version of bipartisanship is-- the bipartisanship for which Obama is willing to sell out working families so fast. I hope I'm wrong but I see no reason to believe I am.

High Priced Republican Party Propaganda Campaign Seeks To Undermine Workers' Free Choice

America's working families turned out in droves last November. Eight years of economic and fiscal policies designed to pauperize them and redistribute wealth upwards was more than enough and even Obama's hint of "hope" was better than McCain's iron clad guarantee of four more years of the Bush economic miracle. Unions worked harder to turn out their people, and non-union working people, than they have in decades. And it showed, not just in Obama's 365-173 landslide victory over McCain, including in dependable GOP strongholds like Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Indiana and Colorado, but in a Democratic landslide in House and Senate races, with Democrats winning GOP-held Senate seats in New Hampshire, North Carolina, Virginia, Oregon, Colorado, Minnesota, Alaska and New Mexico, while the closest any Republican came to winning a Democratic held seat was in Louisiana, where ex-Democrat John Kennedy managed to garner 46%. Other than in New Jersey no other Republican challenger busted 40%! The House was also a disaster for the party that had authored the misery of working families as Republican incumbents fell in Florida, Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, Michigan, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Ohio and even Idaho. Unions were active-- financially and on the ground in every race.

Patriotism? Of course... but self-interested self defense as well. The Bush Regime and its allies in Congress have been chipping away at workers' rights as well as their livelihood. The Labor Movement itself was under threat from the Republicans. Workers and the congressional representatives who care about their well being came up with several pieces of legislation to shore up the labor movement, the strongest of which is the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), which passed in the House last year and was supported by every single Democrat in the Senate, even reactionaries like Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln, Mary Landrieu, Mark Pryor, Max Baucus, etc. The Republicans managed to filibuster it to death and labor helped replace 8 Republican union-haters who filibustered EFCA-- Ted Stevens (AK), Pete Domenici (NM), Norm Coleman (MN), Gordon Smith (OR), Wayne Allard (CO), John Warner (VA), John Sununu (NH), Elizabeth Dole (NC)-- with EFCA supporters.

Big Business interests-- the greed and selfishness end of the Republican coalition-- has been panic-stricken since then, putting all their energy and resources into stopping the Employee Free Choice Act. The Republicans will sell out the anti-abortion faction, the xenophobes, the racists, the religious fanatics... any part of their coalition except Big Business. In the end, for any right wing party, it's all about the Benjamins. Always. The rest is just a means to that end. And making it easier for unions to organize is the last thing on God's earth Big Business, and especially WalMart, is going to accept-- and they don't care if 78% of Americans favor it or not. Their propaganda machine is hard at work trying to persuade Americans that they represent the best interests of workers, not workers themselves. No one's buying that line, at least not north of the Mason-Dixon Line.

Today's CongressDaily emphasized that unions "don't intend to allow passage of other employment legislation-- like the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which extends the statute of limitations on pay discrimination claims and passed the House last week-- to free Democrats of their obligation." Good Democrats don't want to be "free of their obligation;" they want to do what's right for the working families of the country. And then there are the Blue Dogs and other proto-Republican reactionaries in the Democratic caucus.

"Many candidates across this country ran on [EFCA], and we expect them to vote for it," said Anna Burger, secretary-treasurer of the Service Employees International Union and chairwoman of the union political federation Change to Win. SEIU and Change to Win spent more than $80 million on the election, and Burger has said she expects the Obama administration to make card check law within the first 100 days.

But the bill, which eliminates a company's ability to demand a secret ballot election to form a union, would spark a "firestorm" in the business community, said Randel Johnson, vice president of labor policy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "They need bipartisanship for the economic stimulus and a debate over EFCA right now would make that almost impossible," he said.

Democratic leaders said they were not putting off card check to avoid a fight. "Passage of the economic stimulus is our top priority. We will work with Republicans, labor, and all other stakeholders to that end," said Stephen Krupin, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Reid. "Sen. Reid remains a strong supporter of the Employee Free Choice Act."

Still, Congress has not set a timetable for considering card check-- Krupin said it would come up "in due time"-- and labor leaders will expect action once work on the stimulus has finished. "I expect it to be done in an expeditious way," Burger said.

The AFL-CIO's [Bill] Samuel said he anticipates Congress will take it up by spring. "We haven't said you've got to do [EFCA] in the stimulus, in the first weeks of the new Congress. This jobs bill, this stimulus package is really important to us, too," he said.

But the bill's opponents are lining up top Republican firepower, and the rhetoric coming from them has been fiery. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, called the legislation "dangerous" and "terrible" at confirmation hearings last week for Obama's Labor Secretary-designate, Rep. Hilda Solis, D-Calif. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., crusaded against it during the last Congress even after a Republican filibuster killed the bill.

The Chamber helped form a group called the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace, which ran TV ads opposing the card-check bill during the election and plans to step up pressure going forward. Groups with names like the "Workforce Fairness Institute," the "Coalition for a Democratic Workplace" and the "Center for Union Facts" are taking out ads in Capitol Hill newspapers and deploying top PR talent.

"It's quite clear that this is a political minefield for the Obama administration and the last thing they want right out of the gate is a firefight with business. I think it's smart of them to not bring it up early," said Mark McKinnon, a spokesman for the Workforce Fairness Institute.

McKinnon was a top adviser for President Bush and worked for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., during his primary fight for the Republican presidential nomination. Republican strategist Barbara Comstock, who worked for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney during the primary season, is working for the same group. The Center for Union Facts is backed by top Republican lobbyist Rick Berman.

It is difficult to determine who is funding such groups if operatives aren't registered to lobby Congress on the bill. Companies most likely to be affected by the law are service-oriented workplaces that aren't unionized-- large firms like Wal-Mart and Home Depot, for example, as well as hospitals and other healthcare workers. Automakers, which are heavily unionized, have less to lose.

Today we heard from two winning Blue America-backed candidates, Eric Massa (D-NY) and Alan Grayson (D-FL), who were also supported by working families and unions against Republican incumbents Randy Kuhl and Ric Keller. Both are strong supporters of working families and their aspirations. Congressman Grayson told me that he can't understand the Right's preoccupation with a "secret" ballot. "My ballots are never secret, and I'm OK with that. If ballots in Congress were secret, then every K Street lobbyist would be unemployed... Corporate bosses intimidate would-be union members every day of the week, right out in the open. And they want us to believe that open voting is going to mean intimidation by unions? Come on, get real. Let's say that 80% of employees sign union cards. Can someone please explain to me why they shouldn't be union members?"

Congressman Massa sent out a newsletter to his upstate New York constituents, after a speech he gave at a UAW convention in Syracuse, where he announced that he had signed on as a co-sponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act. "This critical legislation is not anti-business, it is pro-American, period," said Congressman Massa. "The American Labor movement represents, and in fact is, the only remaining force left to help move our country in a new direction toward fair trade and away from destructive open door free trade. I stand, proudly, with my fellow Americans to support the transformation of the domestic automobile industry into the 21st century and I reject the outrageously false attacks that claim living wages, pension security, access to quality affordable health care, safety and dignity in the workplace, are somehow un-American."

Massa went on to explain that the 21st century American labor movement is about a partnership between American business at all levels and American workers. He stated clearly that we need to stop fighting each other and start fighting for each other. "The competitors who will destroy us economically are not our fellow Americans," stated Congressman Massa. "Rather they are foreign interests who fund the elections of some partisan politicians and then reap the benefits of lowering the quality of life here in the United States."
 
"I will never surrender my constitutional mandate to stand with those fellow Americans who have no voice and I believe that Toyota, Honda, BMW, and the other foreign corporations who are taking our capital overseas, both human and financial, have a loud enough and well funded enough voice."
 
"The Employee Free Choice Act is the most important labor bill in 70 years and I think we've waited long enough," said Congressman Massa. "We need to raise the bar for all American workers, and the Employee Free Choice Act will help us do just that. A few days ago it was announced that we now have an unemployment rate of 7.2%. The fact of the matter is that our failed free trade agreements are the root of the problem, and we must address this. As we watch the domestic auto industry struggle due to unfair foreign competition, it's obvious that the problem isn't worker's wages, it's our failed free trade agreements."
 
Addressing the UAW audience, Rep. Massa asked, "How many of you make $74 per hour right now?" The audience's answer was silence. "Opponents of organized labor like Senator Corker and Senator Shelby want to make up false 'facts' and 'statistics' like this to try and break the union, but we won't let that happen. These same critics also say that the Employee Free Choice Act will abrogate the ability of workers to have a secret ballot, but we know this is false. I believe it is now time to level the playing field, overcome employer intimidation, and work with business hand in hand to defend what generations of Americans have put in place-- the American Dream."

If we had more Representatives like Alan Grayson and Eric Massa, we wouldn't be dicking around with Big Business' Chamber of Commerce and Republican Party shills now. The Employee Free Choice Act would be law and no one would be trying to coax reactionary "Democrats" like Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln to keep their word. It's more than symbolic that the next member elected to Congress is likely to be one of the strongest advocates for working families in the country, labor attorney Tom Geoghegan, who is running for the Chicago seat that has been abandoned by Rahm Emanuel. When Tom announced his candidacy last week he wrote at HuffPo that he "will have a single minded focus on the economic security to working Americans, that's why I so strongly support the Employee Free Choice Act and other changes in our labor laws. And that's why I support policies that will reduce the debt of working Americans. Overall, the plan I am setting out here will help make our country more competitive." What we need in Congress are principled and thoughtful leaders, not slimy hacks who make self-serving deals and go along to get along. The Democratic Party-- and indeed, the United States of America-- needs more Tom Geoghegans and less Mark Pryors and Blanche Lincolns.

Please consider a donation to Tom's grassroots campaign at our Blue America page. Even $5 and $10 contributions add up and have helped us elect stalwart defenders of working families, from Donna Edwards (D-MD), John Hall (D-NY), Tom Perriello (D-VA), Bruce Braley (D-IA), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Larry Kissell (D-NC), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Jim Himes (D-CT), Mark Schauer (D-MI), and Gary Peters (D-MI) to the aforementioned Alan Grayson and Eric Massa, as well as the new Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis.

One of the reasons Tom Geoghegan is so beloved of Illinois working people is for the books he has written to help further their cause, particularly his classic, Which Side Are You On?. Here's a version of the song of the same name, originally written by Florence Reece in 1931, performed here by Natalie Merchant: