Ross Perot vs NAFTA: NAFTA Was A Mistake; Job Killer (Debate Videos)

Was Ross Perot Right About NAFTA?


Was Ross Perot right about the North American Free Trade Agreement and its effects on workers and immigration? That is the subject of my newest nationally syndicated newspaper column out this past Friday. This is a key question in the wake of Hillary Clinton trying to laugh off the topic at the last presidential debate (see the interchange here on YouTube).

Roughly 20 million Americans in 1992 thought that he was, in fact, right. Those are 20 million independent swing voters - a Ross Perot voter demographic that remains absolutely critical. Just take a look at this map - and make sure to roll your cursor over the states. Notice anything interesting? Yes, that's right: The states where Perot did best are some of the most closely divided and therefore politically important states in the country - states like Nevada, Colorado, Maine, Arizona and Oregon.

The Wall Street Journal notes, the debate over NAFTA is becoming ever more intense in the Democratic caucus race in Iowa. Ben Smith at the Politico puts the whole political question in stark relief in a story published one day after my column:

Though Perot has been off the stage for a decade, strategists in both parties recognize that his supporters remain a key bloc and that voters' dissatisfaction at the end of the administration of the second President Bush has echoes of the mood when his father was booted from office. What's more, neither party has geared up to focus on pet issues of the Perot crowd: opposition to immigration, unfettered trade and foreign wars.

Substantively, whether Perot was right is pretty clear. Though the Washington Post this morning trumpets "NAFTA's record of raising living standards here and in Mexico," as my column shows, the actual facts prove that's a typical lie manufactured by the the same paper that, as economist Jeff Faux documents, worked overtime to silence all criticism of the original NAFTA. Since NAFTA passed, Mexican wages have plummeted increasing illegal immigration pressure at the southern border. Meanwhile, American wages have stagnated, and a million American jobs have been eliminated. That says nothing about the environmental degradation that NAFTA helped accelerate.

Since the column was published, some have asked me how its possible for Mexican wages to have decreased at the same time American jobs were shipped to Mexico. Part of it had to do with the Peso crisis, but the other part has to do with how NAFTA drove Mexican farmers off their land under a glut of corporate agribusiness subsidies.

As Mexican farmers headed north to the cities and to the maquiladora border regions in search of NAFTA's manufacturing jobs (the giant sucking sound), there was a glut of cheap labor for these jobs, which was precisely the point. As we all know from our Economics 101 lessons about supply and demand, when there are more workers than there are jobs, wages go down. That's what happened in Mexico.

I hope leading Democrats take a good look at the electoral map and stop going on television and laughing at Perot. But more important than even that, I hope Congress takes a good look at Perot's arguments, and factors them in before passing the new NAFTA expansion it is considering. Those who ignore the history are doomed to repeat it - and America's middle class can't afford to be trampled yet again.


View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, Huffington Post, Youtube, Google Maps

North Carolina Remains Least Unionized State In The Nation

North Carolina Is The Nation's Least-Unionized State


Two N.C. Labor leaders said Tuesday they support Charlotte's bid for the 2012 Democratic National Convention - despite one union's call for the party to bypass the city.

UNITE HERE, a union representing hotel workers, this month asked the Democratic National Committee to rule out Charlotte and Cleveland because they lack unionized hotels.

Among the four convention finalists, it said, only St. Louis and Minneapolis fit the bill.

But some union leaders from North Carolina say they'd welcome the convention.

"We believe it will be a tremendous economic boost not only for the Charlotte metro area but for the entire state," said James Andrews, president of the state's AFL-CIO. "We believe there will be jobs for our workers and others."

The DNC is expected to announce a convention site around the end of the year. While factors such as the quality of venues and even politics are expected to be paramount considerations, the labor issue has hovered over the choice just as it did with earlier conventions.

A St. Louis TV station reported this month that its city enjoys an advantage over Charlotte because it has hotels with unionized workers. Organized labor is a major part of the Democratic base and financial support.

North Carolina is the nation's least-unionized state, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Only 3.5 percent of the state's work force is unionized.

The last two cities that hosted Democratic conventions had labor issues of their own.

In Boston, site of the 2004 gathering, a police union there threatened to picket the convention until a deal was worked out. And in 2008 Denver won its bid despite labor concerns, including protests over the lack of unions at downtown hotels.

At least one Denver hotel was unionized before the convention and labor won other concessions.

Charlotte convention backers says they're not worried about concerns over organized labor or by the rap that the city lacks sufficient hotel rooms.

Organizers say the city has the 15,000 hotel rooms the party required within 30 minutes of uptown and access to at least another 15,000.

"We feel like our bid is strong the way it is," said Will Miller, acting executive director of "Charlotte in 2012."

"And we've made it clear from the beginning that should this become an issue, we are happy to meet with folks to work through those issues, just like they did in Denver."

Claude Gray, president of Teamsters Local 391 in Greensboro, wrote DNC Chairman Tim Kaine earlier this year in support of Charlotte's bid. He said the Teamsters represent about 4,000 drivers in the Charlotte area who would benefit from the influx of convention-goers.

Dana Cope, executive director of the 55,000-member State Employees Association, said his union hasn't taken a stand on the convention. He's talked to Charlotte leaders about creating a more labor-friendly environment.

"We can always address it like we did in Denver," he said, "so that gives me a lot of hope that we can still land it in Charlotte."





Unions To 2012 DNC: Shun These Cities: Charlotte & Cleveland


A Union representing Hotel Workers has asked the Democratic National Committee to rule out two of its four convention-site finalists, Cleveland and Charlotte, N.C., because they lack sufficient unionized hotel facilities.

"Among the DNC's four finalist cities, only St. Louis and Minneapolis" have the capacity to "house a large portion of the delegates and other guests ... in unionized hotels," John Wilhelm, president of the international UNITE HERE union of hotel and textile workers, wrote in a letter to DNC Chairman Tim Kaine.

"Therefore, one of those two cities should be the DNC's choice for 2012. Unfortunately, Charlotte and Cleveland do not fit the bill, and they should be removed from the list."

Though the letter was dated Oct. 6, it wasn't publicized until this week, when the union's Minneapolis local, eager to enhance its city's chances, issued a press release on the subject.

"We're just very interested in having the convention here on a number of levels, and for the international it's a priority that it be in a union city," said Wade Luneberg, secretary-treasurer and political director of UNITE HERE Local 17 in Minneapolis. "We think it's important to differentiate between the four [finalist] cities and see that Minneapolis and St. Louis rise to the top."

Charlotte, N.C., has no unionized hotels, and its convention center's employees are not union members, according to Wilhelm's letter. Cleveland has some union hotels, but only a handful in the downtown area and about 10 in the larger region; they belong to a competing union, Workers United.

UNITE HERE under Wilhelm split with former President Bruce Raynor in a bitter and protracted battle that ended last year with Raynor leaving and founding Workers United.

Workers United, which has affiliated with the Service Employees International Union, says it has 150,000 members, while UNITE HERE, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO, claims 265,000.

A subcommittee of the DNC visited potential convention sites over the summer to evaluate their logistical suitability and advise the committee on their findings. A decision is expected in late 2010 or early 2011.

Democratic sources familiar with the decision-making process say Charlotte and St. Louis are the current front-runners, with Charlotte at a slight disadvantage because of its small overall hotel room stock.

Political considerations — including last week's election results — are expected to play a major role in the decision-making process. The defeat of a Democratic governor in Ohio may have hurt Cleveland's chances, while Minneapolis could be helped if Minnesota's Democratic gubernatorial nominee, Mark Dayton, hangs on to win. He currently leads in the count in a race that is likely to go to a recount.

The Minneapolis area has at least 20 union hotels totaling 5,300 rooms, with more than 2,000 workers, Wilhelm's letter notes. St. Louis, the letter says, has 10 union hotels with more than 3,000 rooms. Both cities' sports arenas and convention centers are unionized as well.

"Employees at union hotels are far more likely than employees in non-union hotels to get the sort of basic fair treatment for which the Democratic Party stands — good wages, affordable health benefits, stable long-term positions, and respect and a voice on the job," Wilhelm wrote. "For these reasons, those employees are more likely to provide delegates and guests with better service as well."

UNITE HERE official Pilar Weiss said the DNC was receptive to the union's concerns. "It's early on," she said. "We're having a dialogue with them."

A spokesman for the DNC, Hari Sevugan, said, "As always, we are looking at a number of factors and will have an announcement in the coming months."






Unions Charge North Carolina Violating NAFTA Labor Rules


More than 50 Labor Organizations in Mexico, the United States and Canada, together representing several million workers, charged North Carolina and the United States with Violating Labor rules established under North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

The complaint charges that 650,000 public employees in North Carolina are illegally denied the right to Collective Bargaining, a violation of Labor protections guaranteed by the North American Agreement for Labor Cooperation (NAALC), the labor side agreement to NAFTA. It was formally filed on October 17 in Mexico by the Frente Autentico del Trabajo (FAT – the Authentic Labor Front.)

Frustration with the lack of collective bargaining and effective voice on the job has led to increasing protests by North Carolina public employees. The most dramatic recent instance was a strike by Raleigh sanitation workers on September 13 and 14.

The complaint was filed at the request of UE Local 150, the North Carolina Public Service Workers Union. UE 150 represents public sector workers across the state, including municipal employees in Raleigh, Charlotte, Chapel Hill, Durham and Rocky Mount, and state employees at numerous facilities of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the University of North Carolina (UNC) system and the Department of Administration.

UE Local 150 President Angaza Laughinghouse expressed the local’s gratitude for the showing of international support. “We are very pleased at this showing of solidarity with North Carolina public employees by unions from across the three NAFTA countries. This shows that North Carolina’s continued denial of basic worker rights is an international disgrace, and it must be corrected.”

The NAALC requires the United States, Mexico and Canada to provide for “high labor standards” in their laws, and lists freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining among its core principles. These rights are also required by the conventions of the International Labor Organization (ILO), the labor arm of the United Nations (UN.) But North Carolina’s General Statute 95-98 prohibits collective bargaining by state and local government employees, a clear and direct violation of international law. The NAALC and other international agreements also require standards of due process for workers, protection of health and safety on the job, and protection against employment discrimination. The labor groups charge that North Carolina, in denying its workers the right to negotiate contracts, denies them these protections as well.

Mexico and Canada are North Carolina’s largest international trading partners. North Carolina’s combined annual exports to Canada and Mexico total $6.5 billion.

The FAT filed the charge in Mexico City with the National Administrative Office (NAO) within Mexico’s federal ministry of labor. Under NAFTA’s terms, the U.S., Canada and Mexico each established an NAO to act on complaints of violations of the NAALC. The petitioners are asking the Mexican NAO to investigate North Carolina’s labor rights violations, and issue a report and recommendations for action. The actions requested by the labor organizations include North Carolina immediately ceasing to enforce, and moving to repeal General Statute 95-98, replacing it with legislation that will guarantee public sector workers the rights to organize, bargain collectively, and full freedom of association.

Benedicto Martinez Orozco, national coordinator of the FAT, described his organization’s reasons for acting. “I traveled to NC and was shocked at the level of discrimination and that a country that places such importance on democracy does not permit public sector workers in North Carolina to bargain collectively. We are filing this complaint to support workers in the US.

UE entered into a “Strategic Organizing Alliance” with the FAT in 1992. The two organizations exchange information and assist each other in organizing campaigns and in struggles to protect and expand workers’ rights in both countries. They organize visits by rank-and-file workers to each others’ countries to increase understanding and solidarity between Mexican and U.S. workers.

United Steelworkers President Leo W. Gerard said, “The Steelworkers are proud to join with the UE and democratic and independent unions in Mexico to challenge violations of what few international standards exist for preventing unions in the United States from exercising the most basic rights to organize and bargain collectively.”

UE filed the first complaint under NAALC in 1994, after the Mexican government allowed General Electric to commit massive labor law violations in crushing a FAT organizing campaign at a GE plant in Juarez.

The filing of the current complaint was simultaneously announced to the media on Tuesday, October 17 in Mexico, Canada and the United States. The following organizations participated in the complaint:

* Alianza de Tranviarios de México
* Asociación Sindical de Trabajadores del Instituto de Vivienda
* Canadian Association of Labour Lawyers
* Canadian Auto Workers Union (CAW)
* Canadian Labour Congress
* Centrale des syndicats du Québec (CSQ)
* Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE)
* Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada
* Confédération des syndicats nacionaux (CSN)
* Coordinadora Sindical Independiente
* Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC), AFL-CIO
* Federación de Liberación Social
* Federación Estatal de Sindicatos Auténticos de Guanajuato (FESAG)
* Fédération des infirmieres et infirmiers du Québec (FIIQ)
* Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec (FTQ)
* Federación Metropolitana de Trabajadores
* Frente Mecánico de Trabajadores y Empleados del Comercio en General, Oficinas Particulares, Bodegas y Tiendas Comerciales del D.F.
* International Federation of Chemical, Energy, Mine and General Workers’ Unions (ICEM)
* International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW)
* Labor Council for Latin American Advancement
* Public Service International (PSI)
* Sindicato de Trabajadores de Casas Comerciales, Oficinas y Expendios, Similares y Conexos del Distrito Federal
* Sindicato Democrático de Trabajadores de Pesca y Acuacultura de la SAGARPA
* Sindicato del Heroico Cuerpo de Bomberos del Distrito Federal
* Sindicato “Flores Magón” de Trabajadores de la Fábrica Hulera Industrial Leonesa, S.A. de C.V.
* Sindicato Industrial de Trabajadores Textiles y Similares “Belisario Domínguez”.
* Sindicato de Trabajadores Académicos de la Universidad Autónoma Chapingo
* Sindicato de Trabajadores del Instituto Nacional de Capacitación del Sector Agropecuario
* Sindicato de Trabajadores de la Industria Metálica, Acero, Hierro, Conexos y Similares
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Educación para Adultos (SNTEA)
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de Elevadores Otis
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Industria de la Costura, Confección, Vestido, Similares y Conexos “Diecinueve de Septiembre”
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Industria del Hierro y el Acero, Productos Derivados, Similares y Conexos de la República Mexicana
* Sindicato de Trabajadores del Transporte en General, Similares y Conexos de la República Mexicana
* Sindicato de Trabajadores de Metlife
* Syndicat de la fonction publique du Québec (SFPQ)
* Sindicato Nacional de Empleados y Trabajadores de Nacional Monte de Piedad
* Unión Nacional de Trabajadores (UNT)
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de Azucarales y Derivados “Chema Martínez”
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de General Tire de México, S.A. de C.V.
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de Impulsora Mexicana de Telecomunicaciones
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores del Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de Telecomm Telégrafos
* Sindicato Nacional Único y Democrático de los Trabajadores del Banco Nacional de Comercio Exterior
* Sindicato de Trabajadores de la Universidad Iberoamericana
* Sindicato Único de Trabajadores de Calzado Sandak (Calpulalpan)
* Sindicato Único de Trabajadores del Gobierno del Distrito Federal
* Sindicato Único de Trabajadores de la Universidad Autónoma de la Ciudad de México
* Sindicato Único Nacional de Trabajadores de Nacional Financiera
* UNITE HERE
* United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America (UE)
* United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW)
* United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial & Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO/CLC (USW)







Smithfield Workers Say "Yes" To Hog-Plant Union


Workers at the world's largest hog processing plant, Smithfield Packing Co. in Bladen County, have voted for a union to represent them at one of the state's largest industrial sites, totals released Thursday night showed.

The tally was 2,041 to 1,879 in favor of the United Food and Commercial Workers.

About 4,600 of Smithfield's 5,000 employees in the tiny town of Tar Heel were eligible to vote over two days of balloting overseen by the National Labor Relations Board.

“From the beginning, our goal was to give employees the opportunity to vote on this issue in a fair, secret-ballot election. This has now been accomplished, and we will abide by the results of the election. We respect the decision and look forward to working with the union to negotiate a fair labor contract for our employees,” said Tim Schellpeper, president of Smithfield Packing.

The UFCW has been trying since the plant opened 16 years ago to win the right to represent the Tar Heel workers. This time, the selling points of improved working conditions and better wages convinced enough workers to vote in favor of the union.

“We have a union now. Amen. Hallelujah,” said Letia Spivey, a Smithfield worker. “I feel like tonight’s vote went wonderful. Everything is swell. We are very happy people at Smithfield."

Ronnie Ann Simmons, a veteran of 13 years at the plant said, "We are thrilled. This moment has been a long time coming. We stuck together, and now we have a say on the job."

The election comes as part of a settlement to a racketeering lawsuit the company filed against the union last year.

“We will be entering negotiations with another union as we have done at many of our other facilities. And we will continue to operate, moving forward as a company, hoping to continue to provide good jobs and high-quality products,” said Dennis Pittman, Smithfield Packing spokesman.

Workers with whom WRAL News spoke who did not support the union said they were concerned about bringing in a union during tough economic times. They said they were worried the union's demands could put the company out of business.

Employees at eight of Smithfield’s 13 plants are unionized.

The Tar Heel plant processes up to 32,000 live hogs a day into plate-ready pork.


View Larger Map


Sources: McClatchy Newspapers, Politico, UE News, WRAL, Youtube, Google Maps

Obama Makes 15 Recess Appointments Despite GOP Objections

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Obama Makes Labor Board Appointment During Recess Over GOP Objections


Despite intense Republican objections, President Obama on Saturday used recess appointments to fill 15 administration posts without Senate confirmation, including Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board.

By filling the jobs while Congress is in recess, Obama gets around Senate confirmation. Obama justified the move by charging Republicans with playing politics with his administration nominees.

"The United States Senate has the responsibility to approve or disapprove of my nominees. But if, in the interest of scoring political points, Republicans in the Senate refuse to exercise that responsibility, I must act in the interest of the American people and exercise my authority to fill these positions on an interim basis," he said in a written statement.

All 41 Senate Republicans wrote Obama this week urging him not to use a recess appointment for Becker, a former top lawyer with Service Employees International Union and the AFL-CIO, whose nomination was rejected by the Senate last month, 52-43.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also wrote Obama on behalf of 20 business groups that opposed Becker's nomination and decried the recess appointment.

"This recess appointment disregards the Senate's bipartisan rejection of Craig Becker's nomination to the NLRB," Chamber Vice President Randel Johnson said in a written statement.

"Overriding the will of the Senate and providing this special interest payback contradicts the president's claim to change the tone in Washington," he said. "The business community should be on red alert for radical changes that could significantly impair the ability of America's job creators to compete."

But White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki cast the opposition of Becker's nomination as part of an "unprecedented level of obstruction in the Senate" that had left "key economic positions unfilled, especially at time when our country is recovering from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression."

Psaki said the five-member labor board had been trying to operate with only two members.

"The roadblocks we've seen in the Senate have left some government agencies like the National Labor Relations Board and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission impaired in fulfilling their mission," she said in a statement. "These agencies can now get back to working for the American people."

The Senate's top Democrat, Harry Reid, welcomed Obama's move. "Regrettably, Senate Republicans have dedicated themselves to a failed strategy to cripple President Obama's economic initiatives by stalling key administration nominees at every turn," said Reid, the majority leader from Nevada.

But Republicans say Becker isn't working for all Americans.

"Craig Becker stands far outside the mainstream of NLRB nominees," Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said in a written statement Thursday. "Given the bipartisan opposition to his nomination, the administration would be wise to not circumvent the will of the Senate by recess appointing him to the NLRB.

"There is no place on this powerful board for someone who believes that card check legislation -- getting rid of the secret union ballot -- can be enacted surreptitiously through regulation."

Sen. John McCain said the Senate has already delivered its verdict on Becker's ability to serve impartially on the labor board.

"If this administration chooses to recess appoint Mr. Becker, it would be just another example of putting the will of one special interest group over the will of the American people," he said.

Republicans wanted Obama to scrap Becker's nomination and appoint one Democrat, Mark Pearce, and one Republican, Brian Lewis, to the other vacant seats. Pearce was one of the 15 nominees appointed Saturday.

Democratic groups, such as the AFL-CIO, have said Becker's an experienced advocate for worker rights and have decried GOP "obstructionism."

But Obama didn't specifically address the controversy over Becker in his statement Saturday. Instead, he focused on the nominees still awaiting a vote in the Senate.

"At a time of economic emergency, two top appointees to the Department of Treasury have been held up for nearly six months," he said. "I simply cannot allow partisan politics to stand in the way of the basic functioning of government."

Obama noted that former President George W. Bush made 15 recess appointments by this point in his presidency, "but he was not facing the same level of obstruction."

According to the White House, Bush had five nominees pending on the Senate floor by the same point in his first term compared with Obama's 77 nominees.


Sources: Fox News, MSNBC, WCNC

Democrats Are Losing Labor Union Support & Millions Of Voters

Labor Unions Steam Over Democrats' Inaction



Labor groups are furious with the Democrats they helped put in office — and are threatening to stay home this fall when Democratic incumbents will need their help fending off Republican challengers.

The Senate’s failure to confirm labor lawyer Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board was just the latest blow, but the frustrations have been building for months.

"Here's labor getting thrown under the bus again," said John Gage, the national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents 600,000 workers. "It's really frustrating for labor, and a lot of union people are thinking: We put out big time in money and volunteers and support. And it seems like the little things that could have been aren't being done."

The 52-33 vote on Becker — who needed 60 to be confirmed — really set labor unions on edge, but the list of setbacks is growing.

The so-called “card check” bill that would make it easier to unionize employees has gone nowhere. A pro-union Transportation Security Administration nominee quit before he even got a confirmation vote. And even though unions got a sweetheart deal to keep their health plans tax-free under the Senate health care bill, that bill has collapsed, leaving unions exposed again.

Union leaders warn that the Democrats' lackluster performance in power is sapping the morale of activists going into the midterm elections.

"Right now if we don’t get positive changes to the agenda, we’re going to have a hard time getting members out to work," said United Steelworkers International President Leo W. Gerard, in an interview.

“There’s no use pretending any longer.”

The biggest threat, of course, is apathy from a Democratic constituency that has a history of mobilizing for elections.

"You're just not going to be able to go to our membership in the November elections and say, 'Come on, let's do it again. Look at what the Democratic administration has done for us!'" Gage said. "People are going to say, 'Huh? What have the Democrats done for us?'"

Kim Freeman Brown, the executive director of a D.C.-based nonprofit called American Rights at Work, acknowledged "frustration" with the lack of movement.

"I implore Congress to listen to the voice of their constituents who want change, and so far we haven't delivered good enough on that promise," she said. "To the degree that we don't address these real bread-and-butter issues, we will have failed America's workers."

Gage warned that Democrats will struggle to energize blue-collar voters if they don't score a few victories soon. Union leaders say they will closely watch as a new "jobs bill" emerges to see if it includes more labor-friendly provisions or tax cuts for small businesses.

When you talk to labor officials these days, much of their animus is directed at Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), who helped filibuster Becker's confirmation.

"Ben Nelson has got principles until you buy him off," Gerard said.

A group affiliated with the Service Employees International Union, called Change That Works, had defended Nelson's support for an unpopular health care reform bill in his home state.

But the Nebraska director of that group, Jane Kleeb, now criticizes Nelson for not allowing the Becker nomination to come to the floor for an up-or-down vote. And Bill Samuel, legislative director for the AFL-CIO, accused Nelson of following a "double standard" since he had argued that the nominees of then-President George W. Bush should get up-or-down votes.

Another AFL-CIO spokesman, Eddie Vale, pinpointed Nelson, saying he had "let down" working families.

Nelson said Becker’s stance on labor issues made him worry whether he would be "impartial" in making NLRB decisions.

But labor unions can’t pin all their blame on Nelson. The failure of a wide range of union priorities has been deflating for the labor movement, which seemed destined to be one of the biggest beneficiaries of Barack Obama’s presidency.

And with unemployment hovering around 10 percent, special treatment for unions has only served to harm the movement.

On health care, unions found themselves in a defensive posture. They worked in early January to carve out an exception from an excise tax on so-called Cadillac insurance policies, only to see the package fall apart, with recriminations about just the kind of back-room deal making they had engaged in.

Obama said he would push for greater unionization at the Transportation Security Administration, but it hasn't happened. Obama has pushed for education programs that have long been unpopular with teachers' unions. And then, in his State of the Union address, the president called for Congress to strengthen trade relationships with South Korea, Panama and Columbia.

The support for those trade agreements irked Gerard, the leader of the steelworkers union, who praises Speaker Nancy Pelosi but blames the upper chamber.

"Our problem is the Senate," Gerard said. "The only thing they can pass is the washroom. I don't want to tar Democrats. Not all Democrats in the Senate are problems."

The situation in the Senate became more frustrating when Democrats lost their 60-seat supermajority with the election of Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown.

Brown’s first significant vote was a “no” on Becker.

"I think you see how working people feel by how they voted in Massachusetts," Gerard said. "In Massachusetts, it wasn't an anger that the government had done too much. It was an anger that there hadn't been enough change."

Democrats are now scrambling to shore up support for labor unions, but they don’t seem to have a game plan for more union-friendly legislation in advance of the midterm elections.

But Katie Packer, executive director of the anti-card-check Workforce Fairness Institute, said labor groups would have achieved a lot more if they hadn't overreached.

"I'm from Detroit, so the concept of labor overreach is not lost on me," she said. "What we've seen more than anything is an attempt by big labor is to be especially greedy and grab for things that weren't achievable."


Sources: Politico

Obama & Labor Unions Strike Health Care Tax Deal

White House Scores Key Labor Deal


The White House on Thursday cut a deal with its closest labor allies to blunt the impact of a new tax on high-cost insurance policies — and blunt their protests against the health reform plan.

Democrats couldn’t eliminate the tax on union members’ high-cost insurance policies altogether but did put off the effective date until 2018, but only for labor agreements and state and local government workers.

And that seems sure to open up Democrats to charges that it took yet another behind-closed-doors bargaining session with a powerful interest group to close the deal on health reform.

But for a day at least, the White House could claim a significant victory on the road toward passing a health care reform bill, with a deal that averts a standoff on one of the most contentious issues standing in the way of a final compromise.

Other major issues remain under discussion, but according to an official familiar with the talks, negotiators have been sending proposals to the Congressional Budget Office for cost estimates — a sign that lawmakers are close to a deal on other pieces of the tax package. Key lawmakers are set to return to the White House Thursday night for more talks.

President Barack Obama traveled to the Hill on Thursday to speak to House Democrats and sought to rally House members by invoking reform’s historical potential. But his remarks also had a I-know-this-is-tough quality that reflects reform’s unpopularity with voters.

“Now, believe me, I know how big a lift this has been,” Obama said. “But I also know what happens once we get this done, once we sign this bill into law. The American people will suddenly learn that this bill does things they like and doesn’t do things that people have been trying to say it does. Their worst fears will prove groundless, and the American people’s hope for a fair shake from their insurance companies for quality, affordable health care they need will finally be realized.”

The deal focused on a provision that would levy an excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans. Many labor union members have bargained over the years for such benefits in lieu of pay hikes and didn’t want to bear the brunt of the tax.

Major changes to the legislation include a modest increase in the threshold for taxation to $24,000 a year for family coverage, inserting adjustments for older workers and women and entirely exempting dental and vision plans for all Americans, starting in 2015.

A broad spectrum of union presidents announced their support for the reduced excise tax on a conference call with reporters Thursday afternoon, bringing a major Democratic constituency into line and helping to quell potential problems on the left in the House.

“We will endorse it, and we’ll do that proudly,” said AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka of the health care bill, assuming it stays true to negotiations. “We’ve been at this for 60 years, and we are extremely proud of the constructive role that labor’s played in advancing health care reform.”

The call, led by Trumka, included some of the labor leaders who fought hardest against the excise tax that remains in the legislation, such as Gerald McEntee of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and Larry Cohen of the Communications Workers of America.

“I didn’t have any tremendous hopes for real success in this, but I was proven wrong,” said McEntee of the bill.

White House officials and labor leaders defended the agreement against a fresh round of Republican criticism that the bill was weighed down with special-interest deals and was a targeted attempt to mollify a key constituency. They sought to highlight aspects of the deal that would benefit more than just union members, including the higher threshold at which the tax would kick in and the exemption for dental and vision plans.

“It is fairly telling that opponents of reform are criticizing a transition period for workers and are silent about a similar transition period for their friends — the insurers,” said White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer. He was referring to the phase-in of the reforms and taxes affecting insurers and other industry groups between 2011 and 2018.

The changes slice $60 billion off the $150 billion the tax was expected to raise, Trumka said. He also defended the special exemption for union plans, saying that most of the changes labor had won would apply to all workers.

House Democrats peppered union leaders with questions about the deal at a closed-door session in the Capitol complex Thursday.

“My concern is that this [threshold] isn’t high enough to pass muster,” said one Democratic member who has been regularly briefed by House leaders on the White House negotiations. Asked whether the Democratic Caucus would reject the deal, the member said: “It’s possible.”

Connecticut Rep. Joe Courtney, who has led opposition to the excise tax, said after reviewing details of the deal: “It reflects a more intelligent direction, ... but I really am reserving judgment.”

The deal might also raise eyebrows in the Senate. Earlier Thursday, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) sent Reid a letter asking that all “sweetener” provisions be struck from final legislation — a reference to agreements with Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and others to help secure their votes.

“These ‘sweeteners’ are unjustifiable and only detract from our collective goal of putting America’s health care system on a better and more sustainable path,” Feingold wrote. “Several provisions were included in the health reform bill that create, rather than diminish, inequity. ... Simply put, they are intended to provide an undeserved windfall to specific states.”

Feingold’s letter became easy fodder for Republicans seeking to use the right words to attack the union bargain.

“Sen. Feingold says it well — that they should strike the unwarranted measures that win the support of certain members and special interests,” said Don Stewart, spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. “It’s emblematic of the whole debate, so it’s not a surprise. They’re not trying to get the support of the American people; they’re trying to get the support of the union lobbyists.”

To help make up for the lost revenue, Democrats are targeting at least two industries that already put up contributions to health reform’s bottom line. The hospital industry has been asked to offer an additional $15 billion in concessions on top of a $155 billion deal last summer with the White House, according to one source.

And the pharmaceutical industry has agreed to provide an extra $10 billion to its already negotiated $80 billion deal over 10 years.

Democrats are also negotiating further adjustments to the Medicare payroll tax rate, which was already increased under the Senate bill. Lawmakers and the White House are looking to apply the tax to investment income for high-income earners.

Maintaining the excise tax, which health care economists say can help control spiraling health care costs, was a top priority for Obama. But it has been fiercely opposed by top labor leaders and rank-and-file House Democrats.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said the push to send a final bill to CBO by Friday wasn’t because of political pressure generated by the Massachusetts Senate race, where Republican Scott Brown has said he would be the 41st vote to scuttle health reform if elected.

“No. The fact that CBO takes so much time is really more the issue,” she said. “When we’re ready to send something, we will. We’d like to do it as soon as possible, as soon as it’s ready. Most of this legislation CBO has seen.

“There are no real surprises in here because the makings of the reconciliation have been in the public domain, in our case for months, in the Senate’s case for several weeks, so much of that has been crafted,” Pelosi said.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said finishing by Friday was the goal. “That’s been the goal. But it’s a goal, it’s not a deadline,” he said.


Sources: Politico

Demint Tightens His Grip On Obama's TSA Chief Nominee

Demint Defends TSA Hold


South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint defended his decision Monday to place a hold on the nomination of Erroll Southers to head the Transportation Security Administration.

DeMint, who has drawn criticism for stalling Southers's confirmation since the attempted attack on a Delta flight on Christmas Day, said he was still hoping to extract answers from the nominee on whether Southers would change agency policies on collective bargaining.

"What I want is a few hours of debate on Mr. Southers to help focus the nation back on security, and get this politics — or, particularly union politics — out of our security apparatus," the first-term Republican told NBC's "Today" show.



View Larger Map


Sources: Politico, Google Maps

AFL-CIO Threatens To Abandon Dems Over Weak Health Care Bill

AFL-CIO: Senate Health Care Bill "Inadequate"


Following emergency meetings yesterday to discuss the Senate health care bill, labor has finally weighed in.

After the Service Employees International Union issued a challenge to President Obama and lawmakers earlier today, the AFL-CIO has now released a statement calling the post-Lieberman-defection Senate bill "inadequate."

"The absolute refusal of Republicans in the Senate to support health care reform and the hijacking of the bill by defenders of the insurance industry have brought us a Senate bill that is inadequate: It is too kind to the insurance industry," AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said in a statement just released this afternoon.

"The House bill is the model for genuine health care reform. Working people cannot accept anything less than real reform," Trumka said.

So labor has denounced the Senate bill, saying it will fight for changes. The AFL-CIO perhaps went a bit further than SEIU, in that it stated it "cannot accept" anything less than "real reform"--which is an indirect way of saying it "cannot accept" the Senate bill.

Labor is clearly displeased. It has, however, eschewed the tack of Howard Dean: it hasn't phrased its complaints as a call for Democrats to vote against the current bill.

See Trumka's full statement below:

The labor movement has been fighting for health care for nearly 100 years and we are not about to stop fighting now, when it really matters.

But for this health care bill to be worthy of the support of working men and women, substantial changes must be made. The AFL-CIO intends to fight on behalf of all working families to make those changes and win health care reform that is deserving of the name.

The absolute refusal of Republicans in the Senate to support health care reform and the hijacking of the bill by defenders of the insurance industry have brought us a Senate bill that is inadequate: It is too kind to the insurance industry.

Genuine health care reform must bring down health costs, hold insurance companies accountable, assure that Americans can get the health care they need and be financed fairly.

• That's why we are championing a public health insurance option: It is the way to break the stranglehold of the insurance industry over consumers that has led to double digit premium increases virtually every year.

• Employers must pay their fair share.

• And the benefits of hard-working Americans cannot be taxed to pay for health care reform--that's no way to rein in insurance companies and it's the wrong way to pay for health care reform.

Those are the changes for which we will be fighting in the coming days.

The Senate bill does some good things: It will provide health insurance to 30 million more Americans and provide subsidies to low income individuals and families. Benefits will have to meet minimum standards and insurance companies will no longer be able to deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions or impose lifetime or unreasonable annual limits. The bill also includes some relief for plans with early retirees as well as delivery system reforms that may lead to lower costs over the long haul. And Senate leaders have made a commitment to close the Medicare prescription drugs donut hole which is so costly to seniors.

But because it bends toward the insurance industry, the Senate bill will not check costs in the short term, and its financing asks working people and the country to pay the price, even as benefits are cut.

The House bill is the model for genuine health care reform. Working people cannot accept anything less than real reform.







Nation's Largest Union: Change Health Care Bill Or Else


The nation's largest union group said Thursday that it will not support the Democratic health-care bill unless "substantial changes" are made to the current Senate version.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said in a statement to reporters that without a public option for insurance coverage or an employer mandate - and with a tax on high-end insurance plans that some union members get - the health care legislation supported by Senate Democrats falls far short of meeting his group's standards.

"[For] this health care bill to be worthy of the support of working men and women, substantial changes must be made," said Trumka. "The AFL-CIO intends to fight on behalf of all working families to make those changes and win health care reform that is deserving of the name."

The remarks are a strong indication that the coalition of pro-health-care-reform groups has begun to fray. Earlier in the day, Service Employees International Union President Andy Stern penned a letter to his fellow union members in which he called out President Barack Obama for abandoning his own principles of reform.

"President Obama must remember his own words from the campaign. His call of 'Yes We Can' was not just to us, not just to the millions of people who voted for him, but to himself. We all stood shoulder to shoulder with the President during his hard fought campaign. And, we will continue to stand with him but he must fight for the reform we all know is possible," Stern wrote.

"Our challenge to you, to the President, to the Senate and to the House of Representatives is to fight," Stern continued. "Now, more than ever, all of us must stand up, remember what health insurance reform is all about, and fight like hell to deliver real and meaningful reform to the American people."

Stern, like Trumka, called for Democrats to make changes to the legislation as the process moves forward. And his rebuke of Obama - a staunch personal ally - was a telling sign of the growing frustration within the labor movement.

Both labor leaders were particularly incensed over the concessions made by the Senate's Democratic leadership to Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), the 60th member of their caucus. "The public option is declared impossible. Americans cannot purchase Medicare at an earlier age. The health insurance reform effort we have needed for a century is at risk," Stern wrote.

Officials at both unions met late into the night on Wednesday in emergency sessions to discuss the Senate bill. Aides say the conversations were lengthy and, at times, emotional. The labor community, while privately angry with the White House and Democrats in Congress, still needs the support of these lawmakers on other legislative priorities. Meanwhile, having poured millions into advertisement and man-hours in order to get health care passed, they have watched in horror as the principles they worked for were abandoned in a matter of days.

Officials are also aware of how much would be lost by simply scrapping the bill altogether. Stern noted that under the Senate's bill 30 million additional people would be covered, pre-existing conditions would no longer be an excuse to deny coverage, and people who get sick would no longer lose their insurance. Trumka, likewise, pointed to "good things" in the Senate bill, including the fact that "insurance companies will no longer be able to deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions or impose lifetime or unreasonable annual limits."



View Larger Map


Sources: The Atlantic.com, Huffington Post, AFL-CIO, Wikipedia, Youtube, Google Maps

Pres. Obama's Balancing Act: Addresses AFL-CIO Convention, Woos Middle Class & Stumps For Sen. Arlen Specter (Videos)

Pres. Obama addresses the AFL-CIO Convention

(President Barack Obama at the 2009 AFL-CIO Convention. Part I)



(President Barack Obama at the 2009 AFL-CIO Convention. Part II)



Going before groups of autoworkers and union members today, President Barack Obama tried to assure blue-collar audiences that the economy is coming back -- and that his administration deserves credit for saving some of their jobs.

He recently addressed the AFL-CIO convention in Pittsburgh, where he urged the nation's largest labor union to support his health care overhaul.

"We didn't come here just to respond to crises; we came here to address America's prosperity in the future, and I think that's what he outlined," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters Monday, previewing the president's message.



View Larger Map

Sources: Huffington Post, AFL-CIO, Whitehouse.gov, Wikipedia, Youtube, Google Maps