Trumka: "Most Crucial Election in 75 Years"
Monday 06 September 2010
by: Dick Meister, t r u t h o u t | Report
AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka protests outside the San Francisco Hilton. (Photo: Steve Rhodes / Flickr)
Labor and Democratic Party leaders are concerned - and rightly so - that labor's rank and file may not turn out in November to support labor-friendly Democrats in the massive numbers that played a major role in the election of President Obama and Democratic Congressional majorities in 2008.
AFL-CIO officials are hoping to turn the anger and frustration that so many working people feel into votes, financial support and campaigning on behalf of pro-labor Democrats. But the officials worry about an "enthusiasm gap" among unionists and their supporters stemming from the relatively slow pace of the progressive economic and political changes that they had very much expected from Obama and the Congressional Democrats.
Many unionists are frustrated as usual by the lack of a viable progressive alternative to the Democratic Party. But they'd best beware, as AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka says, of the serious consequences of being less than enthusiastic supporters of Democratic candidates in November's elections.
"The Republican Party of NO doesn't want our vote," says Trumka. "All they want is for us to stay home. They want us to feel hopeless and disgusted so they can come back by default."
Trumka acknowledges that many union members, and many of their supporters and other progressives; are frustrated with the slow pace of economic change; the continuing high unemployment rate; continuing wars; and other serious, unsettled problems.
But Trumka points out that, in just a year and a half, Obama has had to dig out of a huge economic hole and "face extremist opposition on every point." Yet, Trumka notes, "We've halted taxpayer bailouts, no longer are losing 700,000 jobs a month but are gaining a few. And by the end of this year we will have created or saved 3 1/2 million jobs and have fulfilled the dream of every president since Harry Truman and started to move down the road to health care for all."
Organized labor has particularly good reason to be pleased with the performance of Obama and the Congressional Democrats - particularly good reason to once again deploy millions of campaign dollars and millions of campaign workers on their behalf as labor did in the 2008 elections.
The Labor Department and National Labor Relations Board, virtually tools of the anti-labor right wing under President Bush, are, under Obama, returning to their job of enforcing the laws that guarantee workers the right to unionize without employer interference.
And federal agencies are once again strictly enforcing the minimum wage and hour laws and other vital pro-worker laws that had been seriously neglected under Bush's distinctly anti-labor administration. What's more, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration is actually attempting to clamp down on the widespread violation of the job safety laws that has led to the needless deaths and serious injury of millions of American workers.
"We know you are angry," Trumka told a recent gathering of labor leaders, "but we have made progress. No one said this was going to be easy. Ask African Americans how long they have fought and continue to fight. If they had given up after a year and a half they would still be in chains."
November's election, says Trumka, is "the most crucial election in 75 years." It will, in any case, be of unusually high importance to America's working people and their unions and of exceptional importance to the rest of us as well.
This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.
Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
Obama's unwillingness to
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 11:23 — Liced-christ (not verified)Obama's unwillingness to embrace a progressive/labor-based agenda will form the basis of his political undoing. What we have in the Oval Office, in great similarity to Diane Feinstein in CA, is a Democrat who ran for office as a democrat for political expediency. Both Obama and Feinstein hardly display themselves as democrats.In fact, both ran for office as genuine Republicans. Feinstein was a Republican before she ran for Mayor of SF. I often wonder who Obama was before he was tapped on the shoulder by God knows who to run for President. Was Obama a Republican at Harvard when he studied there? I would love for some TO reporter to find out.
Labor needs to form a new
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 11:59 — Vic Anderson (not verified)Labor needs to form a new party, instead.
Man, we have to fix the
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 13:28 — OrwellWasAnOptimist (not verified)Man, we have to fix the Democratic Party we have. New Party? In America? How about sharing some of what you're smoking, eh? There will never be another party in the US (at least not in my lifetime). The Ds and Rs will continue to morph into whatever they need to survive, as they have since what, the Civil War? You might as well say "Oh, life be great when we live in terra-formed domes on Mars and fly around in private rocketships". Yeah, The Dems suck, but like we used to say the newest version of Apple's operating system: "It Sucks Less".
"The Republican Party of NO
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 13:57 — Anonymous (not verified)"The Republican Party of NO doesn't want our vote," says Trumka. "All they want is for us to stay home. They want us to feel hopeless and disgusted so they can come back by default."
And the best tool they have to keep voters at home is the Obama Democrats.
Seems I've heard before that
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 14:06 — goobagooba (not verified)Seems I've heard before that "this election is the most important one in years."
If they are of any importance at all, each one is of equal value. Different aspects of different issues take precedence over time, and are made to appear crucial by our fourth estate.
Since the press is owned by the exact people it is supposed to observe with a critical eye, it has about as much truth to offer as any other acknowledged propaganda outlet.
As for the government, they are evidently as much at sea as the rest of us. Replacing them with others of their ilk serves to change the DJ at the party; it's all music, only some people like the last guy's choices better. When the party is over and we all go back outside, none of us looks as good as we thought we did going in.
Vic Anderson is right. The
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 14:18 — BillyDoc (not verified)Vic Anderson is right. The only answer short of revolution is a new party, and who is in a better position to form it than organized labor? The Dems and Repugs are both Fascists and will never work for "We the people." Their masters are where their money comes from.
Trumka suggests we "Ask African Americans how long they have fought and continue to fight." and I think many would answer that their fight was almost entirely futile until they got serious with Malcolm X's militant approach. Only then did they see real results, and those results were quick in coming. A lot of people were serious about an all-out revolution in the sixties. That fact scared established power. Those with power simply won't recognize moral arguments, they only respond to power. A new party would be a serious threat to establishedt power, and at the very least would frighten them into a few concessions. Voting for a Democrat is a wasted vote. You might as well stay home if that's the only choice!
And don't buy the "Republicans are worse" argument . . . they are exactly the same. They feed at the same trough, and are elected by the same corporations. Can you think of a single example in the last decade where this hasn't been true? As Dr. Einstein pointed out, "Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity." (I paraphrase) Are you really going to give the Democrats "one more chance" after all their betrayals? Remember Albert E. if you do.
Hey, ya'll, what's the point
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 15:11 — Anonymous (not verified)Hey, ya'll, what's the point of even discussing it? Party-Schmarty. It doesn't matter, not now that corporations can buy elections with unlimited "contributions"; voting machines, manufactured by a very greedy special interest, are so easily manipulated; an electorate that doesn't do its homework and, through ignorance and a very short attention span, votes irresponsibly; a system that somehow allows the Supreme Court to decide our elections, over the votes of the people; and the list could go on. So, why get your knickers in a twist when we have no control nor say in the outcome of this disaster that is our country?
Suggestion: Background: We
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 18:12 — Anonymous (not verified)Suggestion:
Background: We all know the Dems always
blabla about how crucial it is for them
"to win this time", then they revert to
being corporate lapdogs.
THIS election IS important , just as
important as the 2008 election.
Suggestion is: Make sure to go out
and vote for the Dems in congressional
races, HOWEVER also make sure to send
a handwriiten letter to each one you voted
for demanding they work a progressive
legislative slate OR they will NEVER get
your vote again EVER.
23:12 Sounds like Lucy
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 19:03 — drosera (not verified)23:12
Sounds like Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown to kick. "This time I promise I won't take the ball away." You know what happens.
All you new party people are
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 19:38 — Anonymous (not verified)All you new party people are losers! If we had a [parliamentary system- we could do more than 2 parties, but not this system in the US. Now with unlimited corporate donations, we should be thinking of circling the wagons.
If Obama had more liberals around, he would be able to do more. It is typical of the loser left to shoot itself in the foot. Then you can complain about Obama like you did Clinton- only it is the best show we have is get more liberals on bard and more progressive agendas will be possible.
JEESH-seems so simple, but Lefties are puritanical in their beliefs.
we need a tax on imports,but
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 20:03 — Anonymous (not verified)we need a tax on imports,but Wal Mart and wall street won't stand for it,labors dead
Dear fellow union members,
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 20:29 — Richard Schwartz (not verified)Dear fellow union members,
To avoid the nightmare of a Republican return to power, we should take the offensive and challenge Republicans in letters to editors, call-ins to talk shows, discussions and debates. Among the questions we should ask are:
How would Republican policies if they were returned to power differ from those in the Bush years that had such disastrous results, including converting a 3-year major surplus into a deficit, creating very few jobs, and leaving the country on the brink of a depression?
Why have Republicans obstructed Democratic efforts to get our country out of the tremendous ditch they left us in, often voting against legislation they previously supported and sometimes co-sponsored?
Why are Republicans supporting corporations and wealthy people, rather than the middle class?
Why did Republican legislators vote against: providing funds to save jobs of teachers, police officers and fire fighters? providing unemployment benefits to long-time unemployed people? providing medical benefits to 9/11 responders?
What ideas do Republicans have to create jobs? To reduce deficits?
Since they have no effective response to these and other challenges, they will try to distract people’s attention from them. It is essential that we not let them.
Until Labor figures out that
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 21:44 — Anonymous (not verified)Until Labor figures out that they need to turn to the Socialist Party in a big way, they are screwed.
Dims and Thugs could care less about you or your whining sniveling wives and children. You are all useless eaters that can't contribute enough money in a big bundle to buy the votes you need. Which makes you beneath contempt.
Participating in the bi-annual charade only wastes your time and taxpayer funds.
This is like being a child
Mon, 09/06/2010 - 23:13 — CatDad (not verified)This is like being a child and having to choose to spend with weekend with one relative who will beat you 20 times or another relative who will beat you just 5 times.
Excellent analogy, CatDad!
Tue, 09/07/2010 - 07:10 — Anonymous (not verified)Excellent analogy, CatDad! And they wonder why so many of us "beaten children" have decided to run away from home and not go to either abusive relatives' house.
Well, I have been active in
Thu, 09/09/2010 - 21:50 — Duane Campbell (not verified)Well, I have been active in unions for 40 years.
For those of you arguing for establishing a new, socialist party, allow me to ask a simple question. You have tried that route almost every year since 1948. How is that working out for you? What would be different this time?
What are you willing to do to create a new party?
And, what are you doing now to stop the Republican potential victory? Remember, if they control the House, they write the budget.
Dear Duane: Maybe the folks
Sun, 09/12/2010 - 18:14 — Frances in California (not verified)Dear Duane: Maybe the folks wanting to establish a Socialist Party (I think they have one already; just can't run a candidate every time) might not be mentioning what would help them and all Americans immeasurably: ABOLISH THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE. Also, institute Instant Runoff Voting. It'll still take a while, but those two things have to happen first.
louis vuitton outlet online
Sat, 05/11/2013 - 22:08 — louis vuitton outlet online (not verified)the heat is effortlessly felt - my 1st in ANY shoe! [url=http://www.picklegendarymonogram.com/]louis vuitton outlet online[/url] louis vuitton outlet online