Censored Whig Letters

Democratic Talk Radio T-shirts, polo shirts, hats, etc.

Here is the link to see and order the merchandise http://www.multiprintstores.com/unionedge/category.aspx?cat=19

If you desire a link sent to your friends to view or purchase, email Stephen Crockett at demlabor@aol.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/opinion/29krugman.html

So the House passed the Waxman-Markey climate-change bill. In political terms, it was a remarkable achievement.

But 212 representatives voted no. A handful of these no votes came from representatives who considered the bill too weak, but most rejected the bill because they rejected the whole notion that we have to do something about greenhouse gases.

And as I watched the deniers make their arguments, I couldn’t help thinking that I was watching a form of treason — treason against the planet.

To fully appreciate the irresponsibility and immorality of climate-change denial, you need to know about the grim turn taken by the latest climate research.

The fact is that the planet is changing faster than even pessimists expected: ice caps are shrinking, arid zones spreading, at a terrifying rate. And according to a number of recent studies, catastrophe — a rise in temperature so large as to be almost unthinkable — can no longer be considered a mere possibility. It is, instead, the most likely outcome if we continue along our present course.

Thus researchers at M.I.T., who were previously predicting a temperature rise of a little more than 4 degrees by the end of this century, are now predicting a rise of more than 9 degrees. Why? Global greenhouse gas emissions are rising faster than expected; some mitigating factors, like absorption of carbon dioxide by the oceans, are turning out to be weaker than hoped; and there’s growing evidence that climate change is self-reinforcing — that, for example, rising temperatures will cause some arctic tundra to defrost, releasing even more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Temperature increases on the scale predicted by the M.I.T. researchers and others would create huge disruptions in our lives and our economy. As a recent authoritative U.S. government report points out, by the end of this century New Hampshire may well have the climate of North Carolina today, Illinois may have the climate of East Texas, and across the country extreme, deadly heat waves — the kind that traditionally occur only once in a generation — may become annual or biannual events.

In other words, we’re facing a clear and present danger to our way of life, perhaps even to civilization itself. How can anyone justify failing to act?

Well, sometimes even the most authoritative analyses get things wrong. And if dissenting opinion-makers and politicians based their dissent on hard work and hard thinking — if they had carefully studied the issue, consulted with experts and concluded that the overwhelming scientific consensus was misguided — they could at least claim to be acting responsibly.

But if you watched the debate on Friday, you didn’t see people who’ve thought hard about a crucial issue, and are trying to do the right thing. What you saw, instead, were people who show no sign of being interested in the truth. They don’t like the political and policy implications of climate change, so they’ve decided not to believe in it — and they’ll grab any argument, no matter how disreputable, that feeds their denial.

Indeed, if there was a defining moment in Friday’s debate, it was the declaration by Representative Paul Broun of Georgia that climate change is nothing but a “hoax” that has been “perpetrated out of the scientific community.” I’d call this a crazy conspiracy theory, but doing so would actually be unfair to crazy conspiracy theorists. After all, to believe that global warming is a hoax you have to believe in a vast cabal consisting of thousands of scientists — a cabal so powerful that it has managed to create false records on everything from global temperatures to Arctic sea ice.

Yet Mr. Broun’s declaration was met with applause.

Given this contempt for hard science, I’m almost reluctant to mention the deniers’ dishonesty on matters economic. But in addition to rejecting climate science, the opponents of the climate bill made a point of misrepresenting the results of studies of the bill’s economic impact, which all suggest that the cost will be relatively low.

Still, is it fair to call climate denial a form of treason? Isn’t it politics as usual?

Yes, it is — and that’s why it’s unforgivable.

Do you remember the days when Bush administration officials claimed that terrorism posed an “existential threat” to America, a threat in whose face normal rules no longer applied? That was hyperbole — but the existential threat from climate change is all too real.

Yet the deniers are choosing, willfully, to ignore that threat, placing future generations of Americans in grave danger, simply because it’s in their political interest to pretend that there’s nothing to worry about. If that’s not betrayal, I don’t know what is.

http://blog.aflcio.org/2009/06/25/congress-hears-demands-for-health-care-reform-in-town-hall-meetings-today/

Members of Congress met in town hall sessions Thursday with constituents who were on Capitol Hill to rally and demand health care reform. Read dispatches from some of the meetings.

—————–

Ohio Weighs In

After the rally, more than 250 activists from Ohio met at the Columbus Club at Union Station to plan for an afternoon of lobbying and hear from members of Congress about health care reform.

The session was introduced by Tim Burga of the Ohio AFL-CIO, who decried the “free market run amok” in the current health care system and affirmed that we must have a serious public health insurance option.

He introduced Hattie Wilkins, who made one of the most moving speeches of the event. Her situation illustrates the deep problems working families have with the way the current system operates. Hattie is a member of the United Steelworkers (USW) union who worked for 35 years for Brentwood Originals, a pillow factory in Youngstown, Ohio. The USW struck Brentwood Originals in 2008, and more than three-quarters of the workforce has been laid off. She was fired because of her strong support for the union, Hattie said. She has been collecting $887 a month in unemployment since then. She has COBRA coverage, and now pays $275 per month—31 percent of earnings from unemployment—for her health insurance. She pays another $450 per month for her mortgage payment, leaving her only $162 each month for food, utilities, transportation and all her other expenses. Now her unemployment payments are ending and she doesn’t know what she is going to do.

At 58 years of age, Hattie is searching for another job at places like McDonald’s but has to compete with applicants much younger than she is. She gave us her cell phone number, though she wasn’t sure how much longer she would have it. Hattie came to Washington, D.C., to participate in the rally and make sure her elected representatives heard her voice on this critical issue.

The Latest on Pennsylvania Town Hall

Sen. Specter has arrived, and compliments the crowd on its tenacity and commitment. Specter says he agrees that health care is a right and believes health care legislation will pass and will include a public option component. Of course, in a room full of union members, the Employee Free Choice Act came up. Specter says he is working hard to find an answer for early union certification and gaining first contracts.

Pennsylvania Update

The folks at Capitol City Brewing Co. are waiting for Sen. Arlen Specter to arrive. We hear reports he’s been at the White House.

From the North Carolina Meeting

Sen. Kay Hagan just arrived. She says the fight for health care reform is the “most important thing going on in our country.” Everyone in America must have health care coverage, she says, and patients with pre-existing conditions should be able to get health insurance.

About a public health insurance option plan, Hagan says some critics are getting caught up in nuance about language used in the debate. “I don’t care what you call it as long as it provides affordability accessibility and covers pre-existing conditions,” she says. We’d heard earlier reports that her staff told union leaders Hagan believes if health care reform passes, it will include a public option. The senator herself did not specifically say she supports the public option.

I think the key is if you have health insurance, you keep it. We don’t want to dismantle what exists.

More Pennsylvania Town Hall

Rep. Sestak arrived and talked about his daughter’s brain tumor and his health care plan to help keep her alive. Everybody deserves health care for themselves and their families, as well, he said. Sestak says his support for health care reform is “payback” to the country that provided health care for him and his family when he was in the Navy.

Everybody must be covered under health care reform, according to Sestak, and a public health insurance plan must be an option.

Nothing is more important to me than ensuring that President Obama passes health care reform.

Pennsylvania Town Hall

Hundreds of union members from Pennsylvania have packed a hall just a block from the U.S. Capitol to hear from their elected officials on the status of real health care reform. As they wait for Sen. Arlen Specter (D) and Rep. Joe Sestak (D) to appear, the chanting is in full force:

Congress, This is our demand. The option of a public plan.

What do we want? HEALTH CARE!

When do we want it? NOW!

Congress, This is our demand, the option of a public plan!

We are waiting for Specter and Sestak so we can spring that on them.

Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (D) did not attend. A staff member is delivering her talking points.

Health care reform that guarantees quality, affordable health care reform must be passed.

We must ensure that patients’ choices are protected.

Maryland Town Hall

Sen. Barbara Mikulski, Rep. John Sarbanes and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer speak to hundreds of Maryland workers and all support public option.

Rep. Blumenauer at Town Hall on Small Business

At a town hall focused on small business issues this morning at the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) advocated a public insurance option plan, guaranteed coverage and a “pay or play” system that would require businesses to provide health care coverage for their employees or pay into a fund. These reforms would level the playing field and reduce cost burdens on small businesses, he said.

No Healthcare Reform Equals No Senate Job

It mystifies this writer that many Senate Democrats have failed to understand that killing the “public option” compromise position being pushed by the Obama will mean the end of their Senate careers. Politics has changed dramatically in the last few years and many Senate incumbents seem to have missed the size and intensity of the paradigm shift.

It is no accident that the Republican Party is in electoral meltdown. The Republican leadership is still stuck in the politics of the 1980’s and 1990’s. Unfortunately, the Democrats in power have not embraced the public sea change in attitudes completely. They do not understand that the Democratic wave does not threaten their hold on power. It does!

The Democratic shift is not based on partisan identity divorced from real changes in government policy. The Democratic election wins in 2006 and 2008 were strong rejections of both the Republican Right and the current unfair status quo in government policy.

If Democrats do nothing to reform the rigged economic system and fail to give American workers a fair shake, they are going to get replaced either in a primary or general election. If Democrats fail to protect civil liberties, they will be defeated. If Democrats start unnecessary wars, they will go down along with the already defeated Senate Republicans.

Of course, this is not good news for the Republican Right. The public is rejecting Republican Right politics and Republican-lite politics. Americans want real and meaningful reforms. Nothing less will do. Democrats who want to do the bidding of large corporations like the health insurance industry are going to get their backsides handed to them in 2010, 2012 and 2014. Senators from both major political parties better get with the program!

The public supports meaningful healthcare reform by huge margins. Depending on the wording and specific proposals, the public supports reform by percentile figures ranging from the mid-60’s to high 80’s. What the polls are missing is the intensity of this support.

Everyone is talking about healthcare. Even the majority of my highly partisan Republican friends are supporting universal government healthcare. Some are complaining that Obama’s plan does not go far enough and want single-payer universal healthcare like HR 676. More than a few have left the Republican Party over the healthcare issue.

Democratic activists in every state are actively looking to recruit primary challengers to Senators and House members who oppose significant parts of the Obama agenda. On the healthcare issue, this sentiment is so intense that even if Obama abandoned the “public option” compromise, he would lose the support of these activists. Democratic incumbents can be defeated in Democratic primaries and will be if they abandon the “public option” compromise.

Healthcare as currently organized is killing Americans! It is killing American jobs and businesses. It is grossly inefficient and unfair. Americans have been waiting for over 60 years for fundamental reform and will not wait another year without holding officeholders responsible. We are going to cost Senators their jobs if they block healthcare reform. This is a promise!

Corporate money can buy TV ads and slick mailers. It worked in the pre-Internet past. It will not work today. Obama is in the White House as proof. If Obama can win the White House largely thanks to the Internet, think what we can do around an issue that starts with around 2/3rds public support and Obama on our side.

Written by Stephen Crockett (host of Democratic Talk Radio http://www.DemocraticTalkRadio.com and Editor of Mid-Atlantic Labor.com http://www.midatlanticlabor.com). Phone: 443-907-2367. Email: demlabor@aol.com. Mail: 698 Old Baltimore Pike, Newark, Delaware 19702.

Feel free to publish or print in full without prior approval.

http://www.progressiveexchange.com

“There is, however, one important thing that the D.H.S. report didn’t say: Today, as in the early years of the Clinton administration but to an even greater extent, right-wing extremism is being systematically fed by the conservative media and political establishment.”

The combo of Wall Street’s Greed and Racist fear is being exacerbated by those that are trying to prevent an overhaul of our capitalist system. Obama is not into bringing socialism, he is focused in reviving a capitalism that serves the Middle Class. That revival is anathema to Wall Street.

The Big Hate
Written by Paul Krugman, Op-Ed Columnist - The New York Times
Jun 12, 2009 at 10:52 AM

Back in April, there was a huge fuss over an internal report by the Department of Homeland Security warning that current conditions resemble those in the early 1990s — a time marked by an upsurge of right-wing extremism that culminated in the Oklahoma City bombing.

Conservatives were outraged. The chairman of the Republican National Committee denounced the report as an attempt to “segment out conservatives in this country who have a different philosophy or view from this administration” and label them as terrorists.

But with the murder of Dr. George Tiller by an anti-abortion fanatic, closely followed by a shooting by a white supremacist at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, the analysis looks prescient.

There is, however, one important thing that the D.H.S. report didn’t say: Today, as in the early years of the Clinton administration but to an even greater extent, right-wing extremism is being systematically fed by the conservative media and political establishment.

Now, for the most part, the likes of Fox News and the R.N.C. haven’t directly incited violence, despite Bill O’Reilly’s declarations that “some” called Dr. Tiller “Tiller the Baby Killer,” that he had “blood on his hands,” and that he was a “guy operating a death mill.” But they have gone out of their way to provide a platform for conspiracy theories and apocalyptic rhetoric, just as they did the last time a Democrat held the White House.

And at this point, whatever dividing line there was between mainstream conservatism and the black-helicopter crowd seems to have been virtually erased.

Exhibit A for the mainstreaming of right-wing extremism is Fox News’s new star, Glenn Beck. Here we have a network where, like it or not, millions of Americans get their news — and it gives daily airtime to a commentator who, among other things, warned viewers that the Federal Emergency Management Agency might be building concentration camps as part of the Obama administration’s “totalitarian” agenda (although he eventually conceded that nothing of the kind was happening).

But let’s not neglect the print news media. In the Bush years, The Washington Times became an important media player because it was widely regarded as the Bush administration’s house organ. Earlier this week, the newspaper saw fit to run an opinion piece declaring that President Obama “not only identifies with Muslims, but actually may still be one himself,” and that in any case he has “aligned himself” with the radical Muslim Brotherhood.

And then there’s Rush Limbaugh. His rants today aren’t very different from his rants in 1993. But he occupies a different position in the scheme of things. Remember, during the Bush years Mr. Limbaugh became very much a political insider. Indeed, according to a recent Gallup survey, 10 percent of Republicans now consider him the “main person who speaks for the Republican Party today,” putting him in a three-way tie with Dick Cheney and Newt Gingrich. So when Mr. Limbaugh peddles conspiracy theories — suggesting, for example, that fears over swine flu were being hyped “to get people to respond to government orders” — that’s a case of the conservative media establishment joining hands with the lunatic fringe.

It’s not surprising, then, that politicians are doing the same thing. The R.N.C. says that “the Democratic Party is dedicated to restructuring American society along socialist ideals.” And when Jon Voight, the actor, told the audience at a Republican fund-raiser this week that the president is a “false prophet” and that “we and we alone are the right frame of mind to free this nation from this Obama oppression,” Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, thanked him, saying that he “really enjoyed” the remarks.

Credit where credit is due. Some figures in the conservative media have refused to go along with the big hate — people like Fox’s Shepard Smith and Catherine Herridge, who debunked the attacks on that Homeland Security report two months ago. But this doesn’t change the broad picture, which is that supposedly respectable news organizations and political figures are giving aid and comfort to dangerous extremism.

What will the consequences be? Nobody knows, of course, although the analysts at Homeland Security fretted that things may turn out even worse than in the 1990s — that thanks, in part, to the election of an African-American president, “the threat posed by lone wolves and small terrorist cells is more pronounced than in past years.”

And that’s a threat to take seriously. Yes, the worst terrorist attack in our history was perpetrated by a foreign conspiracy. But the second worst, the Oklahoma City bombing, was perpetrated by an all-American lunatic. Politicians and media organizations wind up such people at their, and our, peril.

The Letterman Joke Deception, Smears and Cynicism of Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin owes the American people of very sincere apology. She owes David Letterman an apology. She owes her own children an apology. Her actions and statements have been dangerous, exploitive, divisive and deceptive

I am disappointed that the media pundits commenting on this case did not point out that Sarah Palin conveniently used a 6 second joke by a non-political figure to divert the discussion away from the role Palin’s recent political rhetoric has played in creating a hostile and dangerous political climate in America over the past year. Palin’s outrageous comments falsely connecting Obama to socialism, falsely creating a completely unfounded fear of Big Brother government and stoking up political paranoia on the Right is dangerous and in poor taste. Her kind of rhetoric can directly be connected to the recent murders by Right-Wing extremists at the Holocaust museum in DC and in Kansas. She stoked the paranoia and inflamed their misguided passions and twisted political world view.

The Palin-type of extreme political rhetoric from the Republican Right has been feeding a growing domestic terrorist problem in America. This kind of dangerous rhetoric routinely comes not only from Palin herself, but also, from Right-Wing talk radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage, extremist Right-Wing websites like Free Republic.com and, unfortunately, from many, many Republican Party officials and activists. Examples of Right-Wing political hate speech on talk radio are legion. Free Republic.com has thousands of posted comments of the most extreme nature. At about the same time that Palin was making her most recent inflammatory comments, the Republican Party held a political fundraiser that raised over $15 million dollars where a second rate actor called Obama “dangerous” and made many other hate-filled comments about our President.

We all remember the Sarah Palin rallies during the 2008 Presidential campaign where the crowd contained numerous Right-Wing nut jobs who shouted “kill him” when Obama’s name was mentioned. We all know about the Right-Wing conspiracy theories that contend Obama is a secret Muslim and/or not really an American citizen. We saw hundred if not thousands of signs to this effect at the McCain-Palin rallies in 2008 and at the Fox News/Republican sponsored anti-tax “tea parties” earlier this year. The man who committed the political murders at the Holocaust museum in DC wrote in support of these whack-job Right-Wing conspiracy theories on the Free Republic.com web site!

I have personal reasons to believe that the Anthrax Mail killer of 2001 was in part inspired by Right Wing talk radio shows like Neal Boortz and/or Right-Wing nut job websites like Free Republic.com. Sarah Palin intentionally taps into this political paranoia and Right-Wing political extremism with her over the top rhetoric. Her political career in Alaska has always been connected with extremist and political fringe groups. No other major political figure in America is as closely connected to political extremist groups as Sarah Palin.

Palin was certainly going to face a firestorm of political criticism over her rhetoric and extremist political connections in the immediate aftermath of the Holocaust Right-Wing political murder! The criticism had just started when Palin made a huge political controversy over a 6 second David Letterman joke! It was an effective, intentional and cynical political move on her part.

Letterman apologized but Sarah Palin refused to accept the apology and let the matter drop. Doing so would not have helped her divert public attention from her rhetorical role in promoting Right-Wing extremism. It would have been the best outcome for her daughters but not for the political career of Sarah Palin. She placed her political ambition first over the emotional well-being of her daughters.

David Letterman did tell a rather crude joke, obviously referencing the 18 daughter of Sarah Palin, who is an unwed mother. It was in poor taste. Yes, it was a cheap shot. Comedians do that kind of thing every day to people in the public arena. Comedians go for the funny without regard to political correctness.

However, it is clear that Sarah Palin victimized her own daughter by putting her daughter in the public limelight just to advance Sarah Palin’s political ambitions without considering the possibility of the inevitable public humiliation that her daughter would face. Sarah Palin made her daughter’s unwed mother status and difficult relationship with her baby’s father front page news. This was done by Sarah Palin, not David Letterman. It was done for political reasons.

The controversial joke would never have been told if Sarah Palin had followed the example of President and Michelle Obama in how they insisted the media treat their daughters. The Obamas did not routinely exploit their daughters during the political campaign the way the Palin children were blatantly exploited by their mother. The Obamas continued to try to shield their daughters from excessive media attention once elected.

Comedians are not political operatives. They are not and should not be held to the same political standards of behavior as journalists, officeholders, candidates or political spokespersons. Behaving badly and pushing the envelope of social acceptability are the norms when it comes to comedians. Nearly all comedians tell less than politically correct jokes. While the jokes told by political figures should meet at least some minimum standards of political correctness, the same certainly does not hold true for comedians.

It is obvious that the remarks made by the Palins that strongly implied that a teenage girl would not be safe in the company of David Letterman were absolutely in poor taste and blatantly false. Using words like “perverted” were uncalled for by Sarah Palin. She used and continues to use them in reference to Letterman. Falsely stating that Letterman advocated underage sex and “rape” were beyond acceptable under any circumstances. Sarah Palin is smearing a popular comedian to drawn attention away from her role in creating a climate that promotes political violence by Right-Wing extremists.

Palin must know that late night talk show hosts are highly unlikely to write their own jokes. She knows the jokes are not meant to defame anyone. She must know the only goal is to draw laughter. Misconstruing the actions and motives of David Letterman tells us a great deal about the motives and character of Sarah Palin. While Palin clearly demonstrated that she has no sense of humor, media pundits should be connecting the dots concerning the clearly manipulative and political nature of the Palin-Letterman joke controversy.

Palin should apologize. If she does not apologize, we should all call for her resignation over this matter. Sarah Palin will seemingly do anything to promote her political ambitions including using her children, making false statements, engaging in character assassination and promoting a dangerous strain of political Right-Wing extremism. American political life and the Republican Party would be better off if Palin would retire from the public arena.

Written by Stephen Crockett (Host of Democratic Talk Radio http://www.DemocraticTalkRadio.com ). Mail: 698 Old Baltimore Pike, Newark, Delaware 19702. Email: demlabor@aol.com. Phone: 443-907-2367. Feel free to publish without prior approval.

Delaware State Worker Pay Cut Fight: Part 2

The fight against the proposed 8% pay cut for state employees in Delaware has grown dramatically in scale and intensity in recent weeks. This week, the State Workers United for a Better Delaware coalition has scheduled a Legislative Commitment Rally on Thursday, June 11th on the Legislative Mall in Dover, Delaware.

The crowd will begin gathering at 4pm. Speeches and the public signing of a No Salary Cut Commitment Pledge by legislators will commence at 6pm. At the time of the writing of this article more than a dozen legislators have already announced support for the pledge.

Organized labor has been rallying strongly behind the state workers in opposition to the pay cuts. Union leaders believe that the budget deficit can be solved without resorting to massive pay cuts for workers in Delaware. They have not been shy about proposing numerous alternatives and criticizing the basic unfairness of placing an excessive burden on a relatively under-paid group of workers.

Traditionally, state government employees have been paid significantly less than either federal government employees or workers in the private sector. They traded job security for significantly lower pay. Union leaders think that asking underpaid employees to further reduce their wages cannot be justified for the vast majority of state employees.

Amos B. McCluney, Jr., Chairman of the UAW Local 1183 Retiree Chapter and former Delaware State House member stated, “As a former Delaware state legislator, I realize that not all state workers can afford a pay cut. Lower paid state workers are the guys who are already maxed-out. They are already living paycheck to paycheck. If you cut their pay 8%, they would have to drop their 401K, get an inferior healthcare plan and still not be able to keep their bills current.

It is a different story when it comes to the very highest paid state workers in essentially upper-management positions. The highest paid state employee in Delaware makes around 480,000.00 per year. He can afford a pay cut. He is not going to miss it.”

The importance of finding equitable alternatives seems focused on tax fairness instead of pay cuts. For example, Harry Gravell, President of the Delaware Building and Construction Trades Council explained that “many out of state contractors and sub-contractors evade payment of Delaware taxes by various legal and illegal mechanisms. Closing the tax evasion loopholes by these unethical contractors would certainly generate enough additional tax revenues to close the budget gap and more. There would be no need to cut the pay of state workers.”

Gravell went on to state, “An aggressive effort by the Attorneys General, Labor Department and Governor to go after out-of-state construction industry tax cheats would help create jobs for the citizens of Delaware and protect the interest of honest contractors in Delaware facing unfair competition.”

Brian McGlinchey, Regional Director of Government Affairs for the Laborers’ (LIUNA) union and prominent Democratic Party activist contends that “we can find other sources of revenue to address the short-term budget deficit while we seek fairer solutions. We can certainly tap the Rainy Day fund. We can look at possibly finding some additional revenue from out-of-state corporations, legally headquartered in, but not actually having operations in Delaware.

We need to get more creative in finding solutions that do not lower the standard of living for tens of thousands of struggling working class and middle-class Delaware families. We need to grow our way out of this budget deficit. Pay cuts of this magnitude are not the right answer because pay cuts will not promote economic growth, more jobs or higher tax revenues.”

In Part 1 of this series of articles, the Laborers International Union of North America (LIUNA) Local 1029 was accidentally not included as a member of the State Workers United for a Better Delaware coalition.

Sam Lathem, President of the Delaware State AFL-CIO noted that, “Delaware workers are angry about the employment and tax policies pursued in recent decades at their expense. Tax cuts have long been focused at providing breaks for the wealthiest segment of society and large corporations instead of the working poor and the middle-class. Workers are being driven out of the middle-class by unfair government policy and excessive corporate power. Pay cuts for state workers only make the problem worse. Cutting the pay of workers reduces the buying power of consumers which leads to even more job losses. Job losses reduce tax revenues that already are stretched thin by misguided, excessive tax cuts for those most able to afford to pay taxes. We are putting the burden on the wrong segment of our society.”

AFSCME Council 81 Executive Director Michael Begatto clearly expressed the importance of finding a more equitable solution to the state budget problem. Begatto said, “Delaware public employees provide the vital public services that make Delaware happen. Public employees in Delaware are underpaid, understaffed and overworked and their health insurance rates are increasing by 50%. That means state employees and their families are already sacrificing to help balance our budget.

An 8% pay cut for public employees would be an economic disaster for Delaware. It would take 91 million dollars out of Delaware’s economy. That will deepen our recession. It would hurt small businesses. It would be bad for every Delaware taxpayer.”

The crucial roles played by state workers in economic recovery and proving essential services were highlighted by Pamela T. Nichols, Director of Communications of the Delaware State Education Association, “We have teachers, school nurses, other school specialists who will lose 18, even twenty percent of their normal salary if all of the administration’s salary cuts go through. It’s not just 8% to the base. This is really worse than short-sighted, it is worse than short-sighted to think that taking $91 million out of Delaware’s economy will help us out of economic recession. Cutting salaries to balance the budget is misguided - chasing economic chaos with more economic chaos makes no sense. It will not increase spending or create jobs. It will do just the opposite.

I also think that Delawareans get the connection between devastating public servants and devastating the services they provide. They understand that hurting teachers, for example, hurts education. Times are tough for everyone. We understand that. But devastating more families won’t increase spending or bring jobs and businesses to our state.

There are certainly more responsible ways to shore up our economy, lots of ways, all of which are being discussed by legislators now. Many of them are ideas that will not hurt Delaware’s families, adversely affect any one group, or create more economic downturn.”

When it comes to alternatives, several prominent legislators have pointed to a series of tax cuts enacted for those in the highest income brackets over the years. They indicated that the first 4 or 5 of those tax cuts were passed based on the premise that they would create additional economic growth in Delaware.

However, these same legislators noted that the most recent 4 or 5 tax cuts for upper income Delawareans were passed because the state budget at that time was in surplus. They contend that those recent cuts are not necessarily still justified since the government surpluses are now deficits. Some legislators think it might be a good idea to create additional tax brackets at the highest income levels.

There are many other alternatives being proposed. Many of these, like the Kowalko Plan proposed by State Representative John A. Kowalko, Jr., were mentioned in Part 1 of this series of articles.

It has become clear that there will be a huge political price to pay for any legislators who support budget deficit solution measures that reduce the incomes of Delaware workers. With higher fuel prices, higher food prices, higher medical costs, higher insurance costs and more, Delaware workers understand that any government action aimed at reducing wages for any portion of the workforce will inevitably result in more pressure to reduce wages for other segments of the workforce. Delaware workers cannot afford lower income levels.

The usual tactic of divide and conquer concerning pay rates will not work although the usual suspects in Dover are already floating some proposals of this type. Anti-working class bias is alive and well in the Delaware legislature.

Certain Republican legislators are trying to exploit the budget deficit by trying to eliminate prevailing wage laws in the construction industry. This is another unfair proposal to drive down the standard of living for Delaware workers. These same legislators are completely ignoring the massive tax evasion and violation of labor laws by unethical out-of-state contractors who are often exploiting illegal aliens.

The pay cut proposals being pushed in Dover have united Delaware workers in an unprecedented fashion. The anger they have generated runs very deep. The sense of injury is turning into a very deep and lasting resentment that legislators will be facing for years to come. It is unlikely to go away before the next state election.

Sadly, alternatives are clearly available that are fairer and have many additional benefits for small businesses and the citizens of Delaware. The question remains “will the state legislature look at the alternatives that create jobs and opportunity or will they be blinded by an anti-working class bias?”

Written by Stephen Crockett (Host of Democratic Talk Radio http://www.DemocraticTalkRadio.com and Editor of Mid-Atlantic Labor.com http://www.midatlanticlabor.com) . Mail: 698 Old Baltimore Pike, Suite 303, Newark, Delaware 19702. Phone: 443-907-2367. Email: demlabor@aol.com.

Battling Over Employee Free Choice
The fate of labor’s top legislative priority is in the Senate’s hands.
By David Moberg

http://inthesetimes.com/article/4450/battling_over_employee_free_choice/

On March 9, supporters of the Employee Free Choice Act carry money bags at a rally in Layfaette Square in Washington, D.C.

Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), who has proposed making it illegal for union organizers to visit workers’ homes without prior consent, will likely face a progressive primary challenge in the Fall.

When Congress votes on the Employee Free Choice Act, it will decide not only whether workers will be able to organize unions more easily and whether America will build a stronger economy based on shared prosperity. It will also decide how democratic America will be.

The fate of the proposed legislation hinges on a few senators under intense pressure from corporations. But labor leaders remain optimistic that the legislation will pass—most likely with some tweaks.

“We’re definitely in a tough fight,” says Stewart Acuff, assistant to AFL-CIO president John Sweeney. “This is the largest grassroots campaign in labor history. We’re going to play it out as hard and strong as we can.”

The legislation, a top union priority supported by President Obama, would provide legal recognition of a union at a workplace if a majority of workers signed statements of support. Now, even if a huge majority of workers sign union cards, employers can demand that the National Labor Relations Board hold an election, giving the company and anti-union consultants time to bully employees into voting against unionization.

The bill would also stiffen penalties for all-too-common employer violations of labor law—such as firing union supporters—and provide the option of mediation and arbitration of first contracts when employers balk at serious bargaining.

Business groups and their right-wing allies focus on claims the law would deny workers’ right to a secret ballot, which they portray as the hallmark of democracy. But businesses clearly oppose the bill not for any alleged democratic shortcomings but because they oppose unions. In doing so, they oppose freedom of association, a bedrock democratic principle.

Minority rule
Workers can join political or community groups at will, without secret ballots, but can only form unions without a ballot if the boss agrees. Most employers make union elections as much a free and democratic expression of workers’ views as North Korea’s secret ballots.

The congressional process of deciding on the legislation is a little more democratic, but still deeply flawed. A solid majority in the House voted for EFCA in 2007, but while a majority in the Senate would now, supporters need 60 votes for cloture, or ending debate. With the recent defection of Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter to the Democratic Party (and assuming Al Franken becomes Minnesota’s new senator), Democrats and independent supporters will number 60. That means Dems will in theory have the votes needed to end an inevitable EFCA filibuster.

But in March, Specter, who co-sponsored EFCA in 2007, said he would no longer support cloture on the bill, reiterating this point when he announced his party switch in April. And Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), from the home state of notoriously anti-union Wal-Mart and Tyson Foods, said she would not support EFCA in its current form because it is too “divisive.”

Both senators face re-election next year. Running on the Democratic ticket, even with Obama’s promised support, Specter could face a significant progressive primary challenge. Specter’s switch is more likely to increase the likelihood of a compromise than win EFCA 60 votes. That could leave labor a tough choice between a stale half loaf today or a possible whole loaf in the next Congress.

Since the 40-plus senators now supporting a filibuster disproportionately come from less populated states, a tiny minority is undemocratically blocking expanded democracy for the majority.

In fact, a clear majority of Americans favor EFCA’s provisions, according to surveys by Hart Research. After pollsters described EFCA reforms, 73 percent of Americans surveyed supported it (including 69 percent in right-to-work states). Even when respondents heard the most potent arguments on both sides, strong—albeit smaller—majorities supported EFCA by margins of about 19 percent.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a shadowy network of front groups have kept most businesses—even those who accepted majority sign-up to recognize a union—toeing a hard line against the bill.

But some small business owners around the country have spoken out for EFCA as good for business and the economy. “We need a strong working middle class or my business will suffer,” says Darren Horndash, owner of the 33-store Wisconsin Vision optical chain. He says his unionized employees’ loyal performance helps retain customers.

Corporate opponents claim widespread unionizing will shut down businesses and cost jobs, but a new study by the Economic Policy Institute concludes that “the biggest fear voiced by employer groups regarding unionization—that it will inevitably drive them out of business—has no evidentiary basis.”

And a new Center for Economic and Policy Research study, led by Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Thomas Kochan, argues that unions are associated with high-performance workplaces yielding 15 to 30 percent “performance premiums” in efficiency, quality, employee engagement and profitability.

Cracks in the monolith?
One group of big companies—partly unionized Costco and staunchly anti-union Whole Foods and Starbucks—has broken with the hard-line Chamber of Commerce. The companies have proposed quicker elections, before which unions and business would both have access to workers. But it opposes majority sign-up and arbitration, and also proposes a new right of employers to initiate union decertification. While unacceptable to unions, the group’s proposal shows cracks in the corporate monolith.

Unions are keeping up the fight for EFCA as proposed, but they acknowledge changes may be needed to win over 60 senators. If Lincoln and Specter can be persuaded to help end a filibuster, they’re confident all other Democrats will as well.

“Taking steps to rebalance the playing field was always going to be tough,” says Change to Win Executive Director Chris Chafe. “But we’re still in a strong position to achieve major labor law reform … It will look a great deal like [EFCA].”

Some changes—such as designing sign-up cards that explicitly give workers the choice of an election or immediate approval of the union or lengthening the time before arbitration can be requested—would not seriously compromise the legislation. But many proposals, including one from Specter that would bar union organizers from visiting workers’ homes without prior consent, would tilt the playing field even more against unions.

Likely proposals to mandate elections within a short time—say, five to 10 days after a union petition—are problematic, even if unions got equal access to workers. “It takes a short time for employers to poison the well,” one organizer explained. Indeed, the fundamental problem is that employer speech in a workplace is inherently coercive, since the boss has power over a worker’s job.

“We are weighing a bunch of options, but the last thing we want to do is make the mistake of the other side and bully or threaten people,” AFL-CIO’s Acuff says. “It doesn’t work well, but it also points out what we’re trying to stop—the bullying and intimidation every day in the workplace.”

A Tough Fight
Unions have maintained a steady push for EFCA, including more than 400 actions during Congress’ spring break. They’ve mobilized non-union supporters and given prominent roles to workers with personal stories to tell, like Colorado electrician Dan Luevano.

In 2005 Luevano and most of his fellow workers at Ries Electric near Denver asked their boss to recognize the Electrical Workers as their union to help resolve problems. The boss called everyone in and threatened to fire them if they voted for a union. Luevano said he would, and the next workday he was fired. Though the National Labor Relations Board reinstated him, his boss isolated him and cut his hours while continuing to violate labor laws by fighting the union.

Luevano eventually left Ries Electric for a union firm. But he has told his story in community forums and interviews, and in congressional hearings and meetings with Colorado senators.

“I wouldn’t want anyone to go through what I went through,” he says. “I’m not a professional lobbyist, just a working person, trying to make life better for my co-workers and our families.” By doing so, Luevano is also trying to make America better—and more democratic. It’s a tough fight.

GET INVOLVED:
Employee Free Choice Act-oriented websites:
One Million Strong petition http://www.freechoiceact.org/page/s/araw
AFL-CIO petition http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/passefca_II
American Rights at Work http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/employee-free-choice-act/
SEIU: The Battle for EFCA Heats Up http://www.seiu.org/employeefreechoice/

Help In These Times publish more articles like this. Donate today! https://secure.groundspring.org/dn/index.php?aid=2959
Subscribe today and save 46% off the newsstand price! https://www.inthesetimes.com/subscribe/

David Moberg, a senior editor of In These Times, has been on the staff of the magazine since it began publishing. Before joining In These Times, he completed his work for a Ph.D. in anthropology at the University of Chicago and worked for Newsweek. Recently he has received fellowships from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the Nation Institute for research on the new global economy.

Governor Howard Dean Presents: The Public Health Insurance Option – A Prescription for Guaranteed, Affordable, Health Care for All

Join Democracy for America, Health Care for America Now, and the SEIU Change that Works Campaign for a special guest, Governor Howard Dean, who is offering up a prescription for change in health care reform this year. What is a “public option?” Why is it so important? What can we all do collectively to help win REAL changes in health care reform in 2009 that bring quality, affordable, health care for everyone in America?

Where: Delaware Building Trades Council Sheet Metal Workers Hall

911 New Way Wilmington DE 19805

When: Friday May 29th, 3-5pm

What: Dr. Howard Dean speaks on Health Care Reform, a “public health insurance option” - and what we can all do to achieve it in 2009.

This event is FREE and open to the public

–
Jennifer A. Hill
Change That Works Delaware
State Director
SEIU
302-293-8682

Delaware State Worker Coalition and Allies Fight Massive Pay Cuts: Part 1

Most states are facing tough economic times and having great difficulty balancing state government budgets. This is certainly true in Delaware and surrounding states. Pay cut proposals for state workers were floated in Maryland and Pennsylvania but quickly rejected. Other solutions managed to at least temporarily stem the tide of red ink were found without unduly punishing state employees.

In Delaware, the Democratic Governor Jack Markell has put his political weight behind a massive 8% pay cut for state workers. The proposal is almost universally opposed by every labor union in the state and the vast majority of the progressive community. The reception for the massive pay cut proposal in Democratic Party circles has been fairly cool to outright hostile. Opposition to the pay cuts has been growing and getting increasingly organized.

All those opposition groups contend that the Governor did not give enough consideration to alternatives like tapping the Rainy Day Fund, the detailed set of proposals by State Representative John A. Kowalko, Jr. commonly referred to as the “Kowalko Plan” or specific ideas coming from actual state employees. Alternatives have been either under-reported or utterly disregarded by most of the media in the state. Representative Kowalko has offered to present his plan to any group of citizens in the state desiring to learn about the “Kowalko Plan.”

The State Workers United for a Better Delaware is a coalition of labor organizations in opposition to the proposed 8% across the board pay cuts for state workers. Included in the coalition are the Delaware State Troopers Association, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Council 81, the Delaware State Education Association (DSEA), DSEA-Retired, Teamsters Local 326, the Correctional Officers Association (COAD), Communications Workers of America Local 13101, the State Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), FOP Lodge 3, FOP Lodge 10, FOP Lodge 11, the Delaware Attorney General Investigators Association and the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 27. The proposed pay cuts will impact 33,000 state workers in Delaware.

According to police sources, an estimated 2,500 state workers and supporters rallied in front of Legislative Hall in Dover the evening of May 6, 2008 to officially launch the coalition. This was one of the largest labor union crowds gathered in Delaware in recent memory.

While there were numerous prominent speakers sharing comments from the stage, workers and allies in the crowd were eager to share their views on the proposed wage cuts and the current economic situation in Delaware.

Jeff Pittman, a spokesperson for AFSCME, stated that “the proposed 8% pay cuts will hurt all Delaware taxpayers. It means 8% less in the pockets of all state workers. There will be 8% less spent with small businesses in Delaware. There will be 8% less from state workers in collection plates at churches and 8% less in donations to charitable causes. Altogether, $91 million will go missing out of the Delaware economy.”

UFCW Local 27 Assistant Organizing Director Brian Nesbit said, “An 8% pay cut would have a devastating impact of the spending power of Delaware residents. We already have an income crisis in America. The last thing we should be doing is cutting the wages of working Americans.”

Vice President of the Delaware State Troopers Association Thomas Brackin was very positive in his comments about the labor support, “this issue has galvanized the entire labor movement. We have received calls from every labor union in the state. To have everyone together and united on this issue is unprecedented and wonderful.”

He went on to say, “Across the board pay cuts are a quick fix solution however this is a long term problem and the only way to get out of a deficit of this magnitude is to grow your way out not cut your way out. When you negatively impact the buying power of the State’s 30,000 employees you simply deepen the problem. Frankly I am disappointed that rather then make the difficult and unpopular decisions to enhance revenue the governor and his staff took the easy way out with across the board cuts for State Employees knowing they will be back to the drawing board next year without a better long term solution.”

As if to prove Brackin’s point on labor solidarity, the United Auto Workers (UAW) Local 1183 Financial Secretary Alena Bandy was spotted in the crowd. There are no state workers represented by UAW Local 1183.

Although they are not subject to the proposed pay cuts, the entire leadership of ATU Local 842 attended the rally. This union local stands solidly with the state workers fighting the proposed pay cuts.

Wali Rushdan, President of the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 842, remarked, “The thing about unions is that we stick together. This rally and effort shows that unions are coming together in support of state workers. If they fail, we all fail. Pay cuts for state workers puts pressure on all workers in Delaware. It sets a really bad precedent! We have to make politicians understand that we have a backbone and are willing to prove it.”

Teamsters Local 326 President John J. Ryan, Sr. was accompanied by at least 15 fellow members of his local. Ryan stated, “Although we only represent 12 state workers (Harbor Patrol Officers) out of our approximately 2,000 members, we are here to support all our brothers and sisters working throughout the state. It is important to note that there are alternatives to the proposed pay cuts. For example, we could save a great deal of money if we changed the way group homes are organized and financed. Doing this would help create more jobs for Delawareans instead of out-of-state contractors.”

Delaware Working Families Party Organizer Daniel Charlton expressed his opinion by stating “Delaware’s state workers are the ones providing essential services to the rest of our residents. We cannot ask them to sacrifice 8% of their income without looking at fairer options. There are better ways of closing the budget gap than asking only state workers to sacrifice. This is a time when we all need to come together to work for the best solutions and singling out state workers does not meet that standard.”

The National Treasurer of the FOP Thomas F. Penoza is a Delaware resident. Recently, he helped found and serves as President of the Delaware Attorney General Investigators Association. Penoza stated “Markell wants us to keep providing services to the citizens of Delaware but is asking us to make an unreasonable contribution to the total sacrifices needed to balance the state budget. The proposed pay cuts are putting too much of the burden on too few.”

Doug Watts, President of FOP Lodge 10 said his union represents about 260 members in Delaware. In regards to the pay cut proposal, Watts said, “I do not think this is fair. The Governor said the budget solution should be fair, shared and compassionate. I do not see these features in his state worker pay cut proposal. It is not fair to balance the entire state budget on the backs of 33,000 state workers.”

Brian P. Douty, Secretary of the FOP State Lodge, clearly stated his organization’s position. “The Delaware FOP represents over 2,200 law enforcement officers in this state encompassing 14 local lodges that include Probation and Parole, the Capitol Police Department, Alcohol and Tobacco, Fire Marshals and DNREC, in addition to municipal law enforcement agencies. All of us protect and serve the citizens of Delaware. We are providing valuable services and facing danger daily. We should not be facing these proposed severe pay cuts in return for doing our duty as law enforcement professionals.”

DSEA Executive Board member Tom Chapman shared his views, “We are in full support of the citizens of Delaware during these tough times in the state. We understand that there is a budget crisis. However, we cannot balance the state budget on the backs of lower and middle income workers which make up the vast majority of state workers.”

Shula Reaves, Vice President of COAD brought the issue home by explaining how the proposed pay cuts would impact his family. “I think this proposed pay cut is terrible. We really cannot afford it. My wife also works for the state. We are going to take a double hit on both pay and health insurance. This is unfair to my children. We have not had a pay raise in 5 years.”

The State Workers United for a Better Delaware in coming weeks will be staging numerous additional events in Dover to fight the pay cut proposal. There will be more Coalition Lobby Days on May 27, June 3, June 10, June 17 and June 24.

Written by Stephen Crockett (host of Democratic Talk Radio http://www.DemocraticTalkRadio.com and Editor of Mid-Atlantic Labor.com http://www.midatlanticlabor.com). Mail: 698 Old Baltimore Pike, Newark, DE 19702. Phone: 443-907-2367. Email: demlabor@aol.com .

Feel free to publish or post without prior approval.