THE STUMP APRIL 25, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
With Mitt Romney sweeping the table against the sad remnants of the sorriest presidential field in years, the real action last night was in the Pennsylvania congressional primaries, where much of Washington's political press was caught completely off guard. Democratic primary voters knocked out two incumbent congressmen—Tim Holden, who’s represented his district between Harrisburg and Allentown for 20 years, and Jason Altmire, who won his district north of Pittsburgh in the 2006 Democratic wave. Both men found themselves in districts sharply redrawn by Pennsylvania Republicans. More notably, both men had voted against President Obama’s health care law. Their defeat leaves only four of the 34 House Democrats who voted against the law still in the House—a remarkable comment on the calculation many of those members surely made that voting against Obamacare was the politically safer route to take.
Holden was soundly beaten by Matt Cartwright, a Scranton attorney who ran on a progressive platform and benefited from the addition of more liberal Democrats into the newly drawn district (the result of Republicans’ attempts to make adjacent districts more reliably red.) More striking was Altmire’s narrow loss to Mark Critz, who took over Jack Murtha’s district around Johnstown after the earmarking king’s death; redistricting had smushed Altimire and Critz into the same district, but far more than half of the new district was Altmire territory. Yet Critz won out, in a victory that’s being attributed both to his endorsement by Bill Clinton and to the get out the vote efforts by labor unions, who backed Critz over Altmire. It was a stinging loss for Altmire, who was seen at his 2006 arrival as a star on the rise, and who had made clear his interests in preserving his own prospects when he decided to vote against Obamacare, unlike other promising young Democrats in tough districts like Ohio’s John Boccieri and Steve Driehaus and Virginia’s Tom Perriello.
Labor’s success on Critz’s behalf seems to have startled many in the Beltway loop—how can it be that a movement so diminished can still pack that sort of punch? And if it can, then who might labor next decide to help or hurt? As it happens, my piece in the new issue of the magazine addresses this very topic. The piece focuses on the battle within the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees over who will succeed longtime union chief Jerry McEntee—his anointed successor Lee Saunders is facing a vigorous challenge from Danny Donohue, leader of the largest public employee union in New York, who argues that McEntee and Saunders have been focused too much on Beltway politics and not enough on fighting for the union at the local and state level, a contention that the Saunders camp furiously rejects. But my piece also gets into the broader shift within organized labor when it comes to political activism, a move away from reflexively supporting Democratic candidates, even the ones who are cool to unions, and toward focusing labor’s support far more narrowly on its staunchest allies:
Union contributions to Democratic candidates at the national level are down sharply, a reflection of AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka’s vow to withhold support from candidates unresponsive to labor’s concerns. Unions have made plain their displeasure with Democrats for failing to push card-check legislation—which would have made it easier to organize workers—through Congress in 2009 and 2010. They have also expressed ire with the Democratic National Committee (DNC) for holding its 2012 convention in a non-union town, Charlotte. They are cutting back on the number of people (and dollars) they send to the event and planning a “counter convention” beforehand in Philadelphia. And a meeting a few months ago between DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Ed Hill, head of the electrical workers union, ended on bad terms, according to one union source who heard Hill’s angry account of the meeting at a recent AFL-CIO summit: “He went in to express his concerns and she said, ‘No one cares about you.’”
This doesn’t necessarily mean that unions are going to be funding primary challenges against incumbent Democrats who let them down, as they did, to little ultimate effect, in supporting Bill Halter against Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln in 2010. (After all, Altmire-Critz was not a true primary challenge but a clash between incumbents forced by redistricting.) But it means that unions will be holding Democrats much more accountable for their votes—on everything from labor law reform to health care to the recent legislation to reduce regulation on public offerings for smaller companies, which unions opposed. “The labor movement campaigns for issues and not for politicians and parties,” said AFL-CIO political director Mike Podhorzer. “We’ve been much more committed to looking at things through the prism of how action on Capitol Hill and the White House will affect workers, rather than how it will affect people’s chances of getting elected.”
Organized labor may be a wounded animal—private sector union membership is down to 7 percent, and public employee unions are under fierce assault across the country. But as Jason Altmire found out—and should’ve known, hailing as he does from hunting country—a wounded animal can also be dangerous.
follow me on Twitter @AlecMacGillis
7 comments
My district changed in Pa. from the 15th to the 17th and I voted for Holden only because he was the incumbent and I imagined more likely to retain the seat in the fall. Pretty much all the party bigwigs did too so I have to say I was a little bit surprised that Cartwright won. I hope this new 17th is blue enough.
- blackton
April 25, 2012 at 12:29pm
Noah says unions are the key to returning America to a more even distribution of society's benefits - US union membership topped out at 40% during what is now fondly remembered as the golden era of America, back when income inequality was at its low point. I suspect what Noah means is that working Americans (the 99%, 80%, 50%, whatever) need a Team of Their Own. By that I mean an institution created by, consisting of, and operating for working Americans. That was the role of unions for the 40% of working Americans who belonged to unions in America’s golden age. And how did unions operate for working Americans? Sure, by protecting the interests of working Americans. But more importantly, by providing job training, health benefits if you got sick, disability benefits if you got injured, and retirement benefits when you retired. What happened to unions is that they outsourced that role, primarily to the government, a government that is not necessarily created by, consisting of, and operating for working Americans. Which is Noah’s second most significant point about the causes of inequality: the rise of the influence peddling lobbyists, starting with Bryce Harlow. No, I suspect it’s not necessarily unions that are the key to returning to a more even distribution of society’s benefits, but a Team of Their Own, one created by, consisting of, and operated for working Americans. If we didn’t know it before, we most definitely know it now, after the bailout of the bankers by a Democratic Administration, that working Americans cannot count on the government as the Team of Their Own.
- rayward
April 25, 2012 at 12:51pm
A Team Of Their Own, sounds great. Why not just call it trade unions? Workers of the World? Maybe the old organizations aren't as potent as they once were but the need for workers to help each other is as great as ever, despite accusations that this makes us "communists" or that we are waging "class warfare." It's pretty obvious that workers and owners aren't living in the same universe. And government can obviously be bought; see especially on the State level, like Wisconsin, where the Democrats actually fled and tens of thousands of outraged citizens demonstrated at the Capitol; now, Scott Walker faces a recall vote. Which I fervently hope he loses. Meanwhile though, unions - workers who had no decision making power in the outsourcing or degradation of American industries - are blamed for America's failures - this is absurd. And states without unions are called "right to work." Indeed: the right to work without decent wages, working conditions or benefits - wow. What a blessing! We need to fight this battle all over again apparently. So I don't care if you call it A Union or A Team, the dignity of labor and of workers needs to be respected and no I don't mean in the Mitt Romney sense, which is punitive and would demand that young mothers (unless they are rich like Ann Romney who Works As A Mother) should leave their kids and Learn The Dignity Of Work. That is so completely absurd given that day care and transportation costs can amount to more than a poor woman's salary and further, that women's work - the work of raising a family being Exhibit A - isn't even regarded as work! Then we wonder why kids aren't doing so well, why people are obese, suffering from diabetes at a very young age, get hooked on drugs... Gee I wonder if there's a connection here? Somehow the language war, like the economic war, has been co-opted by the boss class. Economic realities are just ignored and in fact, poor working people, Walmart workers for example, have been known to live in their cars yet - they are called "parasites" by people like Mr. Rationale. Excuse me but who is the parasite? The poor working person or the corporation which exploits his or her labor? Maybe I should say "who" exploits, since corporations are people don't you know. And the really sad thing is, the workers have bought into the boss class rhetoric and hate their fellow workers with a passion.
- Sophia
April 25, 2012 at 1:51pm
Oh. You know who else works and doesn't get either pay or respect? Artists, that's who. Which classes get cut first? Don't get me started. Then people wonder why the culture is going to hell in a handbasket and we have people who think the dinosaurs were created 6,000 years ago. We need to think about WORK. What is work. Is being a mother work? Raising a backyard garden or, in this day and age, a few herbs in pot? Being an artist? A scholar? And why do people have to retrain every five minutes, having become obsolete practically overnight? Is this progress?
- Sophia
April 25, 2012 at 1:57pm
I don't know rayward this "Team of Their Own" sounds a lot like a union to me. I'm not sure we need some brand new institution as much as we need to repair and reform those that already exist. Unions only work when they're empowered by the government to be the exclusive representative of their members and bargain collectively on their behalf. That suggests to me that the problems and solutions lie in politics and government, not outside of it. Is there union corruption and government corruption? Absolutely. If working Americans want the government to be on their Team they need to actually start voting in significant and organized numbers, and not just in Presidential election years.
- Pnaut
April 25, 2012 at 2:08pm
Also, people's votes need to count, not electoral votes. And, voter suppression needs to stop.
- Sophia
April 25, 2012 at 4:13pm
You know what else needs respect? Knowledge and teaching. I watched the knucklehead who made Texas schoolbooks into a global laughing-stock on Colbert the other night. The air of impervious smugness about the guy and his hatred of "experts" (= people who've studied something and know about it) were alternately depressing and infuriating. These are the kind of people who can destroy a society without it even noticing.
- ironyroad
April 26, 2012 at 3:06pm