Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Democratic Party: Left Behind (Rats are leaving the Rats)
Real Clear Politics ^ | 7/31/05

Posted on 07/31/2005 4:30:14 PM PDT by linkinpunk

The Democratic Party: Left Behind

By Thomas Lifson

Sunday, July 31, 2005

The Democratic Party just took a body blow this week, deepening the crisis of the American Left. The historic split of organized labor which took place Monday will slash the Democrats' cash flow and remove thousands of “volunteer” union workers for the nuts and bolts work of organizing political campaigns and getting out the vote. Even worse is the danger of infighting.

With their uneasy coalition of blacks, Jews, gays, and feminists, to name just a few, Democrats do not want to see infighting become a popular mode of struggle among their client interest groups.

A pillar of the Democratic Party is crumbling before our very eyes.

The AFL-CIO has been the greatest financial patron of the Democrats, as well as an indispensable adjunct for organizing on the ground, precinct-by-precinct. For years, reliance on big labor to staff a major part of the retail level organization gave the Democrats an advantage in getting out the vote.

The GOP finally assembled an effective apparatus for mobilizing its voters in 2004, to the shock and dismay of Democrats. The prospective loss of a substantial chunk of the Democrats’ organizational muscle could not come at a worse time.

Democrat insider Harold Ickes, Jr. said that if the Democrats couldn’t head off this split, the future would be “very, very bleak….” He was correct.

The AFL-CIO’s new rival is Change to Win, a still-forming consortium of unions under the leadership of Andrew Stern, boss of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). The SEIU is one of very few major unions whose membership is growing rather than declining. For months Stern had been publicly threatening John Sweeney, head of the AFL-CIO, with a walkout, demanding more money be spent on organizing new workers, and less money and attention for the Democrats.

Instead of selling the idea of unions to new workers, labor has been shrinking to the point where it had too little clout in national labor markets. Stern warned that the entire enterprise of organized labor was at risk because of this failing strategy.

And now he has walked. Monday, the SEIU and the Teamsters boycotted the AFL-CIO’s 50th Anniversary meeting in Chicago. Those two unions together account for one quarter of the AFL-CIO membership. Over the next two weeks, an orchestrated wave of other unions likely will follow into the rival-in-the-making union coalition.

Historical comparisons The romantic mythology of the labor left sees heroism in the champions of industrial unions. Pro-union journalists could not help but draw at least an implicit comparison to the Depression-era split in the labor movement, when John L. Lewis led the more militant CIO unions out of the AFL, and built strong new industrial unions like the United Auto Workers.

Stern wrote:

we hope will open up opportunities similar to the surge in worker unity and organization when the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) was created in the 1930s because the American Federation of Labor (AFL) failed to adapt to the changing economy of that era.

Andrew Stern, a former social worker and a career leftist, might wish to see himself joining the pantheon housing John L. Lewis and Walter Reuther. But in fact he is more in the mold of Henry Kravis, William Simon, and other LBO artists of legend.

The Business of Labor A labor union, after all, is also a business, with a payroll to meet and prices (dues) to charge their customers (members). Stern’s “business” – the SEIU – was well-positioned in a growing sector of the economy, the service industry, and was pursuing strategic niche opportunities, such as health care workers and Hispanics. Stern also spent lavishly on marketing, organizing and winning the right to represent new workers. As a result he enjoyed growing revenues and clout.

But at the federation level and in many other major unions, the heavy commitment of resources to the Democratic Party precluded the same kind of organizing. Industrial unions were struggling to hold onto to their membership, and saw political influence with labor’s historic ally as a necessary insurance policy. If all else fails, ask for trade restrictions or federal bailouts.

These failing unions are now left behind in a smaller and vastly weaker AFL-CIO, one which inevitably turn more and more of its attention to dying-industry issues: pension security, layoffs, health benefit givebacks, and other unpleasant matters. The federation's own workforce will be subject to downsizing and possible pay cuts and loss of benefits, just like their membership.

No doubt Stern and his coalition will wish them well, keep the doors open for work together on issues of common interest, and otherwise maintain a smiling face. But the two union groups are on divergent paths. There are promises from Teamsters’ boss James Hoffa to tell his locals to continue to pay dues to the AFL-CIO for political contributions, but inevitably these and other transitional arrangements will end, and the AFL-CIO will be cut loose, like a spin-off of an unpromising manufacturing division in a corporate restructuring.

Stern's new group will build its membership, and when it practices politics it will look to play off the two parties against each other, gaining bargaining leverage.

So Stern has leveraged his success, his vision, and his organizational resources to bring other unions with him into a brand new organizational framework, to be constructed under his leadership. Like similar visionaries in the business world, he has attracted resources to his control, taking them from failing entities which were not using them productively.

Ironically, the actual members of the unions he is attracting to his new federation have no direct voice in the decision of their union to leave the AFL-CIO. Their elected leadership will make that decision for them.

In the allegedly less-democratic and more ruthless world of capitalism, shareholders themselves get to vote on whether or not to sell the company to the takeover artists. Leverage is used to bring them cash, not to force them into something new.

Dues-paying union members have less leverage on their leadership. The unions have plenty of leverage on them.

Call Andrew Stern’s new organizational strategy a leveraged walk out.

Thomas Lifson is the editor and publisher of The American Thinker.


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aflcio; democrats; laborhistory; schism; seiu; unions
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

1 posted on 07/31/2005 4:30:14 PM PDT by linkinpunk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk
A pillar of the Democratic Party is crumbling before our very eyes.

I like the good news we've been hearing these days. I'm surprised it took this long for people to figure out what the democrat party is really all about. Sheesh!

2 posted on 07/31/2005 4:39:49 PM PDT by concerned about politics ("A people without a heritage are easily persuaded (deceived)" - Karl Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk

And this is a bad thing?


3 posted on 07/31/2005 4:40:05 PM PDT by scooter2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk

"I didn't leave the Democratic Party. The Democratic
Party left me." - Ronald Wilson Reagan


4 posted on 07/31/2005 4:40:57 PM PDT by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk

Yes, the Democratic Party IS a Left Behind.


5 posted on 07/31/2005 4:42:38 PM PDT by Ed_in_NJ (Who killed Suzanne Coleman?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk
With their uneasy coalition of blacks, Jews, gays, and feminists

Obviously it's dangerous to generalize, but I have noticed some things. Black people are often significantly more religious than white people, and downright conservative on social issues. No less a Dimocrat than Donna Brazile said "Even I have trouble explaining to my family that we are not about killing babies."

And while Jewish people may tend to be politically liberal, I have noticed that Jews who practice their Faith seriously are often quite conservative politically. I'm not Jewish, but I can't imagine anybody taking the Dims seriously when they express support for Israel. The Dims say they support Israel but they expect Israel to deal with it's ruthless (and insane) enemies in a toothless manner.

I don't think that the Dims can take Jews and blacks for granted anymore.

6 posted on 07/31/2005 4:43:15 PM PDT by T. Buzzard Trueblood ("...there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda." - Thomas Kean, chairman, 9/11 Commission)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk

7 posted on 07/31/2005 4:45:00 PM PDT by BulletBobCo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk

These people are being marginalized bit by bit. If they dont win in 2008 they may never win a national election in my lifetime. Democracy is a numbers game... and in a numbers game you probably shouldn't abort your new voters.


8 posted on 07/31/2005 4:45:51 PM PDT by Minus_The_Bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk
"The historic split of organized labor which took place Monday will slash the Democrats' cash flow and remove thousands of “volunteer” union workers for the nuts and bolts work of organizing political campaigns and getting out the vote."

Should we then figure on Illinois, Michigan and Pennsylvania finally going red-state in 2008?
9 posted on 07/31/2005 4:46:28 PM PDT by decal ("The French should stick to kisses, toast and fries.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk
I'm not buying that the sky is falling for the Dems on this.

Special Report
Twenty-first Century Unionism?
By Ivan G. Osorio
Published 7/28/2005 12:07:18 AM
WASHINGTON -- The AFL-CIO's loss of two large unions this week hit Democrats and the labor federation hard. But this move by the Teamsters and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) may not hurt Democrats as much as they fear. -snip

The split seems to be about the fundamental question: What should be organized labor's core mission? In fact, it is about union strategy.

While Hoffa and Stern claim that Sweeney has focused excessively on politics, their own unions haven't been shy about political activity.
During the 2004 election cycle, SEIU gave out $2,284,875 in campaign contributions, with 87 percent going to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
That is down from the union's $6 million-plus efforts in 2000 to elect Al Gore and in 2002 to give Democrats control of Congress.
The Teamsters' contributions also dropped off, from $3,119,140 in 2000, to $2,544,643 in 2002, and to $2,147,127 in 2004. -snip

Yet does anyone seriously expect any of the dissident unions to stop politicking for Democrats? -snip

But the Teamsters' and SEIU's tactics are not intended so much to attract workers but to beat employers into submission. -snip

Corporate campaigns are multi-faceted political and public relations campaigns that target a specific employer or group of employers. Tactics include feeding allegations of company wrongdoing to the news media, contacting stockholders to deride management and the company's financial health, filing complaints with regulatory agencies, and good old-fashioned picketing.

One of SEIU's most notorious corporate campaigns targeted Catholic Healthcare West (CHW), the largest non-profit private hospital system in California, founded in 1986 by the Sisters of Mercy.
Launched in 1997, the campaign culminated in a contract placing 9,000 employees at 20 hospitals across California under SEIU representation.
Yes, SEIU prevailed against a bunch of nuns!

How did SEIU do it? Obnoxious, aggressive tactics may be -snip

Then there are the Teamsters' tactics.
On July 25, the same day the Teamsters left the AFL-CIO, Hoffa announced that the union would try again to unionize the trucking company Overnite Corporation, whose employees have resisted unionization in the past, even in the face of a violent strike that included more than 50 shootings against the company's trucks or drivers.

Finally, for all of Hoffa's and Stern's complaining about Sweeney's excessive focus on politics, their goal of membership expansion is apparently tied to...politics.
The Change to Win Coalition, on its website, states that "we do not believe working people can win consistently on political issues until many more workers are in unions."

And just what kind of "winning" do they refer to? "[W]e note that an in increase in union density in the state of Ohio, for example, from 16% to 26% would have put John Kerry in the White House."

Further, there is little reason to expect the Teamster and SEIU political spigots to run dry.

As early as May 16, 2005, SEIU had given out $133,000 for the 2006 election cycle, while the Teamsters had given $168,300, with 88 and 75 percent, respectively, going to Democrats. -snip

Full story here

10 posted on 07/31/2005 4:49:24 PM PDT by bill1952 ("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: decal

Don't count on it. See my prior post.


11 posted on 07/31/2005 4:50:36 PM PDT by bill1952 ("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk

BEWARE.

Power vacuums aside, this is about the replacement of elder democrat leadership by younger, equally wicked blood. Do you think the Obamas will disappear?

Great, so the old Leftist establishment is crumbling. They all have children. All they need is some prolific event, one seminal excuse to take the reigns and fight on.


12 posted on 07/31/2005 4:57:52 PM PDT by SteveMcKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk
The author (IMO) and the despicable Harold Ickes, Jr. are correct, this is enormous! You shouldn't have but, thank you democrats.
13 posted on 07/31/2005 4:58:30 PM PDT by ncountylee (Dead terrorists smell like victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Minus_The_Bear

Until they convince the majority of the American people that they wil protect us from Islamic terrorism, they will never win another presidency.
Now, if Hitlery decides that she wants to kick a** on the jihadis, we could have a problem.


14 posted on 07/31/2005 4:58:48 PM PDT by Rocky Mountain High
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk

The Dem's remind me of pre-schoolers playing soccer.

All of them just running their little hearts out in every direction, no concept of the term "team", each one trying to save the game, and blaming their own teammates when they lose the ball.


15 posted on 07/31/2005 4:59:24 PM PDT by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SteveMcKing

I think it is wise to be on the alert for this so-called split as explained by the Dem-ally, the MSM. If, as Ken Mehlman is writing, that Pubs are trying to make inroads in union voting precincts, I want to see an election cycle or two where this actually happens before I say the Dems-loving union clones are dead in the water. We shall see how Pub organization and evangelization of Demunionvoters takes place in '06 and '08. In the numbers show some movement toward the GOP, then I will dance with the cartoon figures above.


16 posted on 07/31/2005 5:03:47 PM PDT by phillyfanatic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bill1952
We should be starting to see indicators soon. Although 2005 has no federal races, New Jersey and Virginia will be electing governors, and it should provide an early indication of Dem finances. The 2006 season has all House seats, a bunch of Senate seats and 36 Governors seats up for re-election.

If the Dems do badly in 2006, it looks real bad for them in 2008

17 posted on 07/31/2005 5:04:45 PM PDT by SauronOfMordor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Minus_The_Bear

Third time could be charm, though. There won't be a Bush running for reelection next time (a mixed blessing), but Republicans need to have some good prospects for the nomination by that time and take care to keep the country on the right course. If the Democrats get back in, they won't be graceful about it.


18 posted on 07/31/2005 5:05:39 PM PDT by dr_who_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk
What Rats worry?? They still have homos, pedophiles and baby killers solidly behind them. The Unions began asking why they were for higher taxes and homo marriages??

Pray for W and Our Troops

19 posted on 07/31/2005 5:10:40 PM PDT by bray (Pray for the Freedom of the Iraqis from Islam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dr_who_2

I agree that we need to vigilant but even leftists are realistic that Hillary cannot win. And if anybody other that Hillary thinks they can win the Dem nomination they're kidding themselves. Hillary would have to totally sweep the womans vote since her negatives among men are SO high. I sont think it would be as close as Bush v Gore or Kerry.

Every day that goes by the South gets stronger and may even shift electoral votes by 2008. Mathmatically it is getting very very hard for them to win.


20 posted on 07/31/2005 5:13:29 PM PDT by Minus_The_Bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson