Labor Unites for November Elections
Republicans hoping recent divisions in the labor movement will help save their hides in November are likely to be sorely disappointed, according to an article by Christian Science Monitor reporter Amanda Paulson. In her article "Ignoring Split, Labor Makes Election Push," Paulson notes:
The AFL-CIO is dedicating the most it ever has for a nonpresidential election - $40 million - for political mobilization this fall. It has zeroed in on 21 key states to focus on and will be active in more than 200 Senate, House, gubernatorial, and state legislative races.
And it's not just the amount of money and resources. There is a real commitment to cooperation and coordination between the two major divisions, explains Paulson:
The AFL-CIO and the Change to Win federation have set up a national labor coordinating committee for political activities. They've agreed to merge member lists, work together on phone banks, walks, and leaflet distribution, and help state and local groups work closely on key elections.
The cooperative spirit between the two factions should allay some Democratic concerns about Change to Win's emphasis on organizing before politics. As Change to Win's political campaign director Colleen Brady said "It's still a labor family. On the ground, we will work together where it makes sense."
After a long decline in membership, unions have begun to grow again. The continuing commitment to progressive politics as a unifying theme for American labor can only bode well for Democrats.
Comments
Happy Days.
Now if we can only get Rahm and The Howard to speak to one another again, everyone will be able to sing Kumbaya together.
Posted by: Petey | August 12, 2006 03:55 PM
One can only hope the Unions have found a few new advisors to help them pick who to back. The choice they made backing Lieberman in the Primary was a poor one. The writing was on the wall long before the vote was cast. I can only hope they drop their backing of Joe, and go with the peoples choice of Lamont, and not be part of thoses that wish to split the party vote. Backing a DINO like Joe would be very telling.
Posted by: Stan | August 12, 2006 09:30 PM
Actually, it would have been foolish for labor to back anybody except Lieberman. Everybody in the Connecticut AFL-CIO saw the writing on the wall. But they, or at least a majority of delegates at the state convention, knew that Lieberman had been a friend of labor for years. No intellegent interest group would abandon its allies in a time of need. If they did how could they expect the assistance of any politician in the future?
I'm no fan of Lieberman but the reason for the labor endorsement is obvious to anybody who understands how unions work.
You help your friends and fight your enemies. For all Lieberman's faults he did really great work for labor for years.
Posted by: union steward | August 17, 2006 03:10 PM