The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) is dead. It won't be passed by Reid and this Senate

[Better Believe It]

This is rather obvious now.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act passed the Senate by a vote of 61 to 36. If this mild (compared to the Employee Free Choice Act)
legislation barely avoided a Republican filibuster by 2 votes, how many votes do realistic people believe the EFCA will get?

And Senator Reid's dismal performance in the "stimulus" bill debate makes passage of EFCA that more difficult and unlikely. Can one even imagine Senator Reid leading a powerful and successful fight for passage of the EFCA in the Senate?

Here are the most likely scenarios with EFCA later this year.

1. Senator Reid will not bring the EFCA to a vote on the Senate floor because he doesn't have the 60 votes to break a potential Senate filibuster. This may happen even if the Republican merely threatens to filibuster without a traditional filibuster actually taking place.

2. Senator Reid will have one or two quick cloture votes even if the Republicans fail to actually initiate a genuine filibuster.
Lacking 60 votes, Reid will withdraw the EFCA from consideration .... in other words surrender.

3. If the Republicans are actually compelled by Reid to filibuster, Reid will put on a good show and withdraw the legislation after failing to win quickly win 60 cloture votes after only a day or two of filibuster. The Republicans of course will understand in advance that Reid will cave-in after a few hours or perhaps days at the most. The filibuster and Reid's surrender will make the Republicans look good to their business allies while Reid will be portrayed as a great crusader for working people because he "fought the Republican filibuster" for a few days or hours. That's how old style politics works in Washington.

4. The EFCA's provisions for card check and mandatory arbitration will be taken out or seriously weakened in the legislation. A new and inferior bill that will not represent meaningful improvement in the rights of workers to organize unions will be proposed.

And the following is the least likely and most desired scenario.

The Democratic leadership in the Senate will fight for passage of the bill and stand up to and defeat any Republican led filibuster.
Reid and company will stand up to the Republicans and not repeat their stimulus bill failure.

[glowing]

1. I wish he did have the balls to bring it to the floor and then let the pugs

fillabuster... Then, we know who to get rid of. It won't be until 2010.. mid-term when we finally get a Dem majority and then we will have to watch the hell out of those freaking blue dogs.

[Sebastian Doyle]

4. Bring it to the floor, make them vote on it.

And any blue balled coward that votes against it, they're out of the party.

If you don't support Labor, get the FUCK out of this party. No exceptions.

[malletgirl02]

2. Ledbetter

The Republicans tried to filibuster the Ledbetter act? I know I should be suprised since on about five Republicans voted for it, but it still pisses me off.

[Better Believe It]

8. There was no filibuster against the Ledbetter act.

But, it only passed with 61 votes and Senator Reid is taking the position that 60 votes are necessary for passage of legislation.

[dflprincess]

10. Reid needs to taken aside and have the words

"majority" and "leader" explained to him.

[thatsrightimirish]

3. Not to mention

we don't have a labor secretary

[Thrill]

5. I've always said there needs to be about 62 Democrats to pass that

Because outside of Specter, there is NO Republican support. And you can't count on Dems like Lincoln to support it

[Dragonfli]

6. This Senate With This Leader Couldn't Pass GAS that didn't smell like elephant shit.

How pathetic must they be before they experience shame?

[Better Believe It]

7. The Employee Free Choice Act still has a chance of being passed if ....

We have massive mobilization of organized labor and its allies demanding passage of EFCA.

This would have to be done on the same or even greater scale than labor's mobilization to elect Barack Obama President.

The labor movement spend 300 million dollars in that campaign. Vast human and material resources were deployed by the union movement. Tens of thousands of union members hit the streets, going door to door. Big rallies were held.

All of that and much more will need to be done by union members and others who support the Employee Free Choice Act.

Mass meetings, really mass meetings and demonstrations numbering in the tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands need to take place.

We need to organize a mass movement in support of EFCA.

That's the way pressure can be put on Congress to pass EFCA.

I'd like to hear what other positive ideas DU'ers have for effective actions that can help pass EFCA.

[glowing]

9. There is something that I don't really understand about the bill.. and that

is the voting for a union. Why is there an issue about voting.. I would think unions would get greater support by having a voting system that is similar to our govt election process... so that you vote, but no one in your work place knows exactly how you voted.

AND there is a big disconnect about unions. My mother is a boomer and has a huge issue against unions. She thinks that unions are corrupt.. that a lot of money is spent and the individual is left paying a lot and the union doesn't do a lot for the individual worker. She thinks the Union Bosses are just as corrupt and disgusting as the CEO's of a large company. How does this perception of Unions change? I personally think they are better than not having anything to negotiate contracts and workers rights, but I also tend to agree with her about someone within a union becoming un-touchable... Its her opinion in the education aspect.. she's been on the school board and she's now a teacher... but has always felt that if a teacher cannot teach, they should not continue being protected. Its nearly impossible to fire a teacher, and you can't make any negative statements about performance to another school district in consideration of their performance for fear of a law suit. I also told my mother that a teacher has to pay for 4yrs of college. Its expensive. If after 4yrs of paying for education, you enter the field and you suck, who re-imburses you? What we should be doing in regards to teaching is allow for a degree'd individual to teach after colleg for re-imbursement or for further education.. and then move on. If you really like teaching and want to devote year and years to the profession, then stay in... if not move on... if you suck during your probation time of teacher training, then move onto a private job. Burn out rate would be less and one wouldn't waste 4yrs and all that money realizing they can't teach at all. I'm rambling and making very little sense I suppose.

I personally think the south needs to get rid of the right to work laws... Those are unpatriotic and would help a lot. We should also make more states equal... Someone in the South East could finally have as much access and ability for similar pay, housing, education, etc. as someone living in New York city or in CA.. OUR states are so unequal, its disgusting.. shoring up equality amongst the 50states would help our country a lot. Its insane that one state may cost more taxes or pay diff. or have diff. education or be competing for big business to come into their state over any of the other 49 states is insane.

[mikehiggins]

11. If a fair and free election was possible there would be no problem

Since employers have proven they can get away with firing union organizers and/or union supporters and/or anyone they think might be favorable to unionization, only a truly dedicated and determined worker will risk losing their job by agitating for a collective bargaining agreement.

Please do not tell me this is not true because if you do not recognise that that is the state of affairs almost everywhere in this nation, then there is nothing that can be done for you.

None are so blind as they who will not see.

[glowing]

15. I really don't know... I lived until 18 in VT, after that, I've lived in the south

right to work states... and the inequality in the south in regards to standard of living suck.. very behind. and I have very limited knowledge of unions other than the history of unions. Unions really, really need to sell themselves down here in particular... because many don't know enough about their particulars. I'm trying to educate myself.. thanks.

[demosincebirth]

17. As and organizer, off and on for years, well said.

[Earth Bound Misfit]

22. What "demosince" said! n/t

[glowing]

30. After watching Rachel last night, I missed the first time thru, it was explained

much better. I understand this card vote thingy... which was really very unclear to me. Which means its very unclear to many people; especially those of us who haven't had the opportunity to utilize unions. what I would do is make a commercial that explains exactly what that congresscritter explained last night on Rachel's show. that makes sense.. that's clear. There's a lot of mindless chatter down in the south.. the local newsies are pathetic and the chamber of commerce is winning the fight.

[Earth Bound Misfit]

21. The NLRB election system is similar in name only

to our govt election process. For a comprehensive (72 pgs) and accurate (IMHO)comparison of the two read NEITHER FREE NOR FAIR: THE SUBVERSION OF DEMOCRACY UNDER NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ELECTIONS by Gordon Lafer, Ph.D., University of Oregon or the Executive Summary (4 pgs) of which the following is a sample:

In new research, University of Oregon professor Gordon Lafer, Ph.D., lays bare the realities of how workers’ rights to democratic process and freedom of association have been effectively eliminated under the NLRB system, exposing the myriad ways in which workers are denied the most basic tenets of democracy. This research illustrates just how far NLRB elections fall short of the standards that we rely on in elections to Congress and other public offices. Finally, this report addresses head-on the claim that the NLRB election process guarantees workers a truly secret ballot — the central claim of anti-union advocates who seek to keep the current NLRB system in place. Lafer’s work shows instead that NLRB elections fail to safeguard workers’ right to keep their opinions private; and that, on the contrary, the NLRB system results in workers being forced to reveal their political preferences long before they step into the voting booth — thus turning the “secret ballot” into a mockery of democratic process.

[bread_and_roses]

27. WORKERS can still CHOOSE an election-the Employer just can't make them

have an election if they choose majority sign-up. It's about who gets to choose - as it is now, workers might want majority sign-up but the employer can force them to hold an election. Why should the employer get to choose? Should it not be up to the workers?

During the run-up to an election the company engages in a union-busting campaign, even firing people. Go to www.aflcio.org to get the details and numbers.

As for the typical "corrupt union bosses" - humans are humans, some abuse power. The difference is that a union official is elected - and can be unseated by the members. Try "electing" a new boss or a pay raise. No human institution is perfect, but the numbers tell the story of what unions overall do for workers - again, go to www.aflcio.org for the numbers on pay, health care, safety, retirement, etc.

[donco6]

48. Hmmm . . .

"What we should be doing in regards to teaching is allow for a degree'd individual to teach after colleg for re-imbursement or for further education.. and then move on."

And maybe we can hire some English majors to install plumbing 'n stuff, and if they don't work out, they can move on. I mean, who actually has to know anything about TEACHING?

[ProSense]

12. It's "dead"? Nonsense. n/t

[Enrique]

13. they might water it down to get it passed

they might decide they don't have the votes to push it through as is.

[Earth Bound Misfit]

43. Water it down?

Not so much.:eyes:

Compromise? :shrug:

[Unsane]

14. Agreed. The past week has shown me that EFCA will be very difficult to pass.

[Juche]

16. I'm going to wait and see

After Franken gets nominated we'll have 59 democratic senators. All dems except Lincoln from arkansas will support it, and she may come around. If you pick off Specter that is 60. Or you can tack it onto the 2010 budget so it cannot be filibustered. Or you can package it with a package of 'middle class reforms'. Personally I think the last option is what will happen. After Biden gets a middle class package written which will hopefully consist of middle class tax cuts, EFCA, energy upgrades & healthcare reform the dems will try to pass it, hoping popular opinion forces one or more GOP senators to join.

[ShadowLiberal]

18. I disagree, if EFCA will fail it will be from democrats voting against it, not repubs

Nate did a good analysis on this a while ago at 538.

Basically out of the 41 republican votes there's one vote that we have pretty much locked, Arlen Specter. He's previously voted for the bill, and has been endorsed by most labor unions in his previous runs for the senate. In short, Specter would be committing political suicide if he voted against the bill.

Our real concern should be how one democratic senator from Arkansas has started to sound like they may change their mind on voting for EFCA. The reason is a lack of a strong union presence in their own state, and being up for reelection in 2010.

Basically there seems to be very little chance of us picking up another vote for the bill from somewhere else, so passing the bill likely depends on getting Franken into the senate (which is nearly certain to happen sooner or later), and making sure Specter and all the democrats vote for the bill.

[Better Believe It]

19. We can pass EFCA with 51 votes

Assume there is a Republican filibuster.

Let them filibuster, don't withdraw the legislation on the excuse the Republicans will engage in a long debate (filibuster) against it.

All filibusters end.

It can end in one of two ways.

The Democrats can surrender to a filibuster by ending cloture votes and withdrawing the legislation, or

they can wait out the filibuster for as long as it takes until they get the 60 votes to end debate.

After cloture is voted we only need 51 votes for passage.

Here's how Republicans defeated another piece of labor legislation 15 years ago with merely a threat to filibuster! We don't need a repeat of this performance by Senator Reid and company. They took two quick votes for cloture, losing them with 53 votes and than proceeded to abandon the legislation without any actual Republican filibuster, just a filibuster threat!

---------------------------------------


Senate Republicans Deal A Major Defeat to Labor
By CATHERINE S. MANEGOLD,
New York Times
July 13, 1994


Handing organized labor a major defeat, Senate Republicans today blocked passage of a bill that would have made it illegal for employers to hire permanent replacements for workers striking over wages and benefits. Republican threats to filibuster the bill, which passed the House comfortably last year, led Senate leaders to schedule today's vote over whether to cut off debate.

Since even the hint of a filibuster can move the Senate toward a cloture vote, which calls for a wider margin of victory than the passage of a bill does, the Republicans have found it an effective tactic in stalling or forcing changes in legislation that the party opposes but cannot defeat on a majority vote.

Speaking of the striker-replacement bill, David Westfall, a Harvard University law professor who specializes in labor and employment law, said, "This was labor's No. 1 priority, and if they could not pull this off even with a Democratic President who said he would sign it, then I think the whole striker-replacement issue is dead."

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...754C0A962958260

Does the above sound just a bit familiar .... like something we just experienced with the stimulus bill?

[Earth Bound Misfit]

38. The Dems can take the position that there hasn't

been any "significant Amendment to an Arcane piece of legislation in 50 or 60 years", so yeah, go right ahead and filibuster til' the cows come home...The American working public has waited 5 DECADES, we can afford to wait (fill in days, weeks, months here)

Hmmm. This might work.

[Earth Bound Misfit]

20. Ted Kennedy did not vote

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00014

I'm pretty sure we can count on a "Yea" there.

If the EFCA is in fact "dead", or even worse, some toothless "compromise" bill is voted in, I have personally heard from some VERY influential people in Labor describing Labor's involvement in the 2010 (and beyond)elections:

NOT ONE VOTE. NOT ONE VOLUNTEER. NOT ONE DIME.

They mean it. IMHO

[Better Believe It]

28. Top union officials always say that

"NOT ONE VOTE. NOT ONE VOLUNTEER. NOT ONE DIME.

They mean it. IMHO"

It's a version of "wait till next year!"

And when that election year comes they will endorse whoever the Democrat candidate is, no matter how many times they voted against working people, because the Republican party will of course run someone who is "worse" and even farther to the right than the conservative anti-labor Democratic candidate.

[Earth Bound Misfit]

35. I do believe that "Big Labor" views

this election cycle as a matter of "life and death". I know. (Yawn) What else is new? Jonathan Tasini wrote this last August on Labor's investment in the 2008 election:

So, the bottom line: just between the AFL-CIO, its individual unions and SEIU, you are looking at an expenditure of up to $300 million. And an army of people deployed in precincts around the country.

Last thought: so, we've heard this before. Why is this different? I do sense an even more heightened sense of urgency within labor. This is an overused cliche but the labor movement really believes this election is a matter of life and death. If it can't get a president that will not have a huge boot stomping on the neck of unions every single day, it may pass the point of no return in the next four years or eight years if a Republican president is re-elected in 2012.

The UAW continues to HEMORRHAGE members through buyouts and plant closures with no end in sight. Similar scenarios are being played across the entire spectrum of organized labor.

I do believe, as you say,they "always say that", and yeah, they'll probably be back, but the difference this time is the next election will see either:

A) several hundred thousand (Million+?) LESS of those returning Union VOTERS, DONORS & VOLUNTEERS

or

B) several hundred thousand (Million+?) MORE of those returning Union VOTERS, DONORS & VOLUNTEERS

Much of whether it is A or B depends on the fate of EFCA.

ARMAGEDDON, indeed. For both sides.

Or maybe I'm completely off on this.

Edit because I'm a nitwit:dunce:

[Juche]

39. Every democrat voted for cloture on EFCA in 2007

All except one, and that was because he wasn't there at the time not because he disliked the bill. Even Blanche Lincoln voted for cloture in 2007 when it came up. So the concept that the dems will vote against the EFCA is not something I am buying. If we get 59 senators and we can either bribe, intimidate or pull one that is all we need. EFCA will sail through the house and executive branch.

Logically there is no good reason for dems to oppose EFCA. Unions are a huge supporter of dem politicians, putting about $450 million and millions of manhours into the 2008 election. If we get a stronger union movement, that means more money, volunteers and voters for progressive candidates. The dems opposing EFCA would be one of the dumbest things they could possibly do. That is why in the senate in 2007 all of them (who were present) voted for it and why it passed the house in the 110th congress despite a smaller majority.

[bread_and_roses]

45. That was when they wanted a huge Labor turn-out for the 08 election

which they got - the numbers are astounding, as is the differential between D/R votes among, for instance, white male union members for Obama compared to white male non-union votes for Obama. Also, they could rely on a Presidential veto, as I'm sure they explained to their Corporate donors, if they needed explaining to, which they didn't.

Now, they have the Presidency. And Obama made a commitment to sign it should it come to his desk. Now, you'll see the defections - can't jeopardize those Corporate $$, now, can we?

They'll rely on Labor to turn out for them anyway, on the "lesser of two evils" principle.

edit for misplaced word

[stillcool]

29. I love the threats about 2010..

that are being tossed out. I think the unions are lobbying Congress pretty hard. Maybe the rest of us will do the same. Although I doubt that. In 2010 we'll do the same thing all over again. Vote people into office and the bitch about the media and how the few in D.C. don't do what we want. God forbid we pick up the phone.

[depakid]

23. If the Dems can't get this done with all their political capital- don't expect ANYTHING

substantial to pass.

(Actually, anyone's who's surprised by what's was very likely naive- just as Obama's media team was).

[dcindian]

24. Honestly I think we could have 100 seats and it would not get done.

The Democrats are dead beats when it comes to doing what is right for America. They use the fact that there are a few Repigs in the senate to cover their sick and twisted use of us as voters.


They are interested in themselves first their lobbyist second and us never.

[Honeycombe8]

25. Hmmm. I wonder what the Employee Free Choice Act is. nt

[Earth Bound Misfit]

37. There's always one good way to find out...

google is your friend




:evilgrin: :hi:

[Baikonour]

26. All you have to do is say "fil.." to Reid..

And he cowers on the floor in the fetal position.

He's a spineless scumbag.

[ClarkUSA]

31. Gee, can I borrow your crystal ball? I love to be able to predict the future, too.

[Better Believe It]

32. Do you agree that we need 51 votes to pass EFCA and ....

that the Democrats in the Senate should not surrender EFCA if the Republicans threaten to filibuster the bill?

You didn't comment on any of the ideas raised in the lead post and brushed them off with a smart ass remark about crystal balls.

Is that your concept of debate and discussion?

Do you have any ideas about what can be done to build a mass movement in support of EFCA or haven't you given that any serious thought?

[stillcool]

34. How can one comment on your ideas..

when all you are doing is assuming facts that are not based in reality? What it there to debate or discuss? Your clairvoyance?

[Better Believe It]

46. The same way other people comment intelligently on my and other DU'ers ideas.

With their ideas.

Do you have any that should be considered regarding passing the EFCA?

[Thickasabrick]

33. They are waiting for Franken. nt

[YvonneCa]

36. Not true. Patience required. n/t

[Occam Bandage]

40. BBI on the weather: "Aw, man. Look at that. It's sorta drizzly out. THE SUN IS DEAD."

China, however, will remain gloriously sunny this and every day!

[Earth Bound Misfit]

42. BBI??

Blockbuster Inc?


Giants' fan???


I give up.

Edit to add: I'm an IDJIT...

i BELIEVE i BETTER drop IT.

[spooky3]

41. wait till Franken is seated

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

44. I wouldn't be so sure, but if you're right, that's too bad.

[Better Believe It]

47. Let the Republicans filibuster against the EFCA

Mad Kane’s Political Madness
Hey Republicans, Go Filibuster Yourselves!
By Madeleine Begun Kane


It looks like the Senate may end up passing a stimulus bill that’s smaller (spending-wise), larger (tax-cut-wise), and far less likely to work than the bill passed in the House.

I don’t know about you, but I’m sick and tired of Senate Democrats letting Republicans blackmail them with the mere threat of a filibuster. Here’s a thought: Instead of caving in to GOP demands, how about telling them to go filibuster themselves?

Find out if they’re bluffing. Make them work for all those concessions. Let the American public see GOP venality and obstructionism in action!

http://www.madkane.com/madness/2009/02/07/republicans-filibuster-yourselves/

[Better Believe It]

49. For the weekend DU crew