will someone explain why so many union members voted for Reagan in '80?

[scheming daemons]

Also.. many unions outright endorsed him.

I can't figure that out.

In any case, they've been paying for that mistake ever since.

[liberal N proud]

1. Biggest snow job since the ice age.

Because they were convinced by the right that Carter was bad and that he was a terrible President and leader.

[MADem]

2. He was a union guy....head of the Screen Actor's Guild. NT

[Luminous Animal]

3. Myth of union Reagan vote...

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/12/myth_of_the_reagan_union_vote/

[Claudia Jones]

6. thanks

Good article. Everyone on this thread should read it.

"Except this was a myth; sure some union members did support Reagan, as some did Bush, but the large majority supported Carter back in 1980. But it's not surprising that this myth persists, because it was a major rightwing propaganda operation to create the illusion of pro-union support for Reagan."

Here is the question we should be asking:

Why do so many liberals believe that working people and union members are "low information voters" who support the right wing and therefore deserve whatever they get and have no one but themselves to blame?

[rurallib]

8. wish we could rec replies. This is excellent

I met a union person who voted for Reagan and Republicans all the time.
Said she voted that way because of abortion.
I met her while I was volunteering for a campaign and we were walking the picket line to support some locked out workers.
I asked her if she ever connected her votes for republicans to the lockout? She said she never thought of it. I told her there was a direct connection and she better start thinking.

[Carolina]

31. your post says it all

they're short-sighted, one issue voters, or just plain STUPID

[Ricochet21]

4. He was a cowboy

He beat up bad guys.

[FBaggins]

5. He was the first President to hold a lifetime AFL-CIO membership

and reportedly once said that union membership was one of the most fundamental human rights. He was also a former Democrat...

...but the real reason they voted for him in 1980 was because he was running against Jimmy Carter. Few people remember, but many at the time felt that Carter had broken almost every promise he had made to labor.

Earily familiar, eh?

[SoCalDem]

7. Their ages.. He was a Mooooovie star of their era

and their parents were the ones who had actually fought for union rights.. they fell into them through patronage jobs gotten by connections of fathers, brothers, uncles..etc.

If you were in your 40's/50's in 1980, you probably had no more than a high school education, and the New Deal was not "your" deal.. You probably took that good union job for granted, and chances are, that you learned little about the union movement while you were in school, but you probably DID go to the movies a LOT.

[Worried senior]

10. The Teamsters

were mad at Carter because of nafta and deregulation plus they had some agreement with the AFL-CIO who also supported Regan.

My husband, a teamster, was very upset that they did support Regan and we refused to vote for him.

[TeamsterDem]

19. Thank God I wasn't old enough to be a Teamster back then

I love my union but I wouldn't have voted for Reagan if James R. Hoffa has resurrected himself from the grave and personally asked me to.

[former9thward]

32. The AFL-CIO endorsed Carter in 1980.

Don't know where you are getting the Reagan stuff from. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,950727,00.html

[mike_c]

9. this union man certainly didn't....

eom

[FarCenter]

11. Lots of union members were social conservatives

[William769]

12. Will someone explain to me why people report on myths.

And wonder why they can't figure it out.

[scheming daemons]

13. It isnt a myth that he was endorsed by the teamsters and other unions

[William769]

14. If it's not a myth where are the facts?

[WI_DEM]

17. Maybe this will help you (go down to union members) Carter won Union households only 48-45

How Groups Voted in 1980


1980 Group Carter Reagan Anderson

All Voters Pct. 41% 51% 8%

SEX Men 51 38 55 7
Women 49 46 47 7

RACE White 88 36 56 8
Black 10 83 14 3
Hispanic 2 56 37 7

AGE 18-21 6 45 44 11
22-29 17 44 44 11
30-44 31 38 55 7
45-59 23 39 55 6
60 & over 18 41 55 4

INCOME <$10,000 13 52 42 6
$10 -14,999 14 48 43 8
$15-24,999 30 39 54 7
$25-50,000 24 33 59 8
>$50,000 5 26 66 8

UNION HOUSEHOLD Yes 26 48 45 7
No 62 36 56 8

REGION East 32 44 48 8
Midwest 20 42 52 6
South 27 45 52 3
West 11 36 54 10

PARTY Democrat 43 67 27 6
Republican 28 11 85 4
Independent 23 31 56 13

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY Liberal 17 60 28 12
Moderate 46 43 49 8
Conservative 28 23 73 4

Notes: Survey by CBS News and the New York Times.
Sample of 15,201 voters as they left voting booths on Election Day, November 4, 1980

http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/elections/how_groups_voted/voted_80.html

[librechik]

24. see reply #3--it's a lie that union members supported Reagan

although corrupt Teamsters leadership did help him

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/12/myth_of_the_reagan_union_vote/

[FBaggins]

36. #3 does not support that it's a lie.

Instead it makes a very illogical argument.

Democratic presidential candidates have won ~80-90% of the African American vote for some time now. If the next Republican wins 35% of that vote it would be a massive sea change. Future spin artists can't make that go away by saying "Sure... some supported him but the large majority supported Obama".

President Obama won the union vote by almost 2:1. Carter won a big majority of union votes in 1976 and lost many of them by 1980, not necessarily because Reagan was truly appealing to union voters, but because many felt that Carter had betrayed them.

A lesson this president needs to learn in the next few months or he'll have to learn it while watching someone else serve what should be his second term.

[Claudia Jones]

34. false and misleading

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/12/myth_of_the_reagan_union_vote/

"Except this was a myth; sure some union members did support Reagan, as some did Bush, but the large majority supported Carter back in 1980. But it's not surprising that this myth persists, because it was a major rightwing propaganda operation to create the illusion of pro-union support for Reagan."

[scheming daemons]

39. 48 to 45 is not a "large majority".... it a Repug gets 45% of union vote, that's a wipeout for Dems

[Claudia Jones]

43. ok

You are moving the goalposts.

Here is the question: is the problem that unions do not support Democrats, or that Democrats do not support unions?

[WI_DEM]

15. If you think Obama lost the democratic base you should have seen Jimmy Carter in 1979-1980

when his approval rating among DEMOCRATS was in the 30's as compared to Obama who has an approval rating among dems in the 70's.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. Carter was seen as an ineffectual "centrist" and the economy was in the dumpster.

He also alienated the left by reinstituting registration for the draft.

[On the Road]

18. Union People are Often Working Class

and many have political opinions similar to non-union working class people. In other words, they often listen to Rush Limbaugh and watch Fox.

Being a union member does not necessarily mean being pro-labor. If you apply for a job and it happens to be unionized, it usually doesn't change your political opinions.

[sufrommich]

20. Here's an excellent article from the Guardian about the"Reagan

Democrats" in the US:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/nov/16/democrats-ronald-reagan

[TeamsterDem]

21. With the benefit of hindsight it's easy to see how wrong the Teamsters were

But the Teamsters - back then - were the largest single union to go against Carter, and the reason they did so was almost entirely due to deregulation. It's also why older Teamsters never liked Ted Kennedy (who was the main Congressional proponent of deregulation). Carter paid the price for being (in the eyes of Teamsters) about .000001% better than Reagan - or so the IBT thought. It turns out that Reagan was eventually worse, but when your main industry is about to be deregulated and you know it will cost you membership numbers, that's a pretty hard swipe that needs a response.

There are a lot of parallels in union circles between Carter and Obama in the sense that Obama is clearly better than any of the Republicans, but he's not exactly a strong advocate either. The NLRB composition notwithstanding, the fact is that EFCA went down in flames without a presidential fight for it, the Bush tax cuts were extended with presidential silence, new trade deals are being pursued, etc. If Obama loses labor will pay dearly. But for Obama to get labor's broad support he needs to fight more for our causes. And until that fight is actually witnessed by union members they'll likely vote similarly to how they did in '80 and '84.

[JDPriestly]

22. But why would they have expected less deregulation from Reagan?

And after Patco, how did Reagan get elected for the second term? That's when the Teamsters sided for Reagan and against Mondale.

Posted the link on DU recently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_vetoes#Barack_Obama

So much for the Teamsters. :thumbsdown:

And at this time, they support conservative Obama rather than a more progressive candidate.

That's the Teamsters for you.

[TeamsterDem]

28. Well I think you're looking at a snapshot of history as opposed to the broader picture

My fingers don't have the energy to type it all, but the Democratic Party - almost as a whole - was largely in support of deregulation. Specifically in terms of the Teamsters Union that's an unforgivable thing which doesn't disappear between a few election cycles. There were certainly Republicans on-board with deregulation, but the Democrats mattered more considering they held the WH and the Congress. Deregulation was actually a major blow, one which harmed us unimaginably and now means we'll never again represent long-haul truckers. When viewed in that light, it's a bit more understandable why they went the wrong way. It was ultimately the wrong way, but they had to extract a pound of flesh for what had been done to them.

It's very easy with history's hindsight to snidely put a thumbs-down to the Teamsters Union. What's harder is to walk a mile in our shoes at the time things were happening. I was too young to be in the union at that time - I was still in grade school - but I remember my parents yelling at the TV whenever Carter or Kennedy would talk about deregulation. And make no mistake, it was ultimately they who deregulated both trucking and the airlines. There simply wasn't a way for us to support that sort of thing. And given how devastating it was and still is, it's not something you forgive overnight.

In the end most Teamsters are pragmatists, just like most American voters. While I'd much prefer a more progressive candidate, the reality is that most American voters simply don't (and to some extent, can't) choose a 3rd party candidate. Taking the pragmatic approach, there's a choice between Obama and whomever the Republican disaster will be. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Obama is running a real risk of Cartering himself if he doesn't start fighting for labor inasmuch as labor is starting to view him as only marginally better than the opponent. But as to "supporting" Obama over a "more progressive candidate" you're blaming the Teamsters for something the vast majority of Americans do, as if the Teamsters are somehow backward or otherwise singularly flawed. That's an unfair judgment.

Finally, please don't put us all in the same category, and please don't assume we're still the same union we were in '80/'84. We're no longer under mafia influence, we have many more minorities and women in both our ranks and leadership, and our membership is more industrially diversified than it once was. It's not "the Teamsters for you" as though we're a bunch of dolts who drive trucks, drink beer, and throw darts at a board to pick our candidates. You're no better than we are, but we arrive at different conclusions than you do sometimes. That's America for you, sir, it's called liberty. Who the hell are you to pretend to be so much better than us anyway?

I don't think I need to spell out where I think you can put that "thumb" or condescension of yours.

[JDPriestly]

33. The history speaks for itself. It shows how good people

can be fooled when they allow themselves to be.

Hey! I supported Obama, even went to another state quite some distance away to campaign for him. And look how he has turned out. Horrors!

[TeamsterDem]

35. Well no, history does not speak for itself

because in this case and many others throughout history, it's not as simple as "stupid Teamsters" doing something stupid. There was a reason, and whether you like it or not it was a valid reason. They ultimately chose the worse evil, but when you're betrayed and effectively assaulted by someone else you don't often turn around and vote for them.

You're yet another in a long list of false historians who pretend to know so much about the Teamsters who knows next to nothing about us; a "black-n-white'r" who thinks that there's nothing else to a situation other than the situation's result at face value. A ton of inputs went into the Teamsters' decisions in the 1980s, and most if not all of them were valid reasons. No one was "fooled," they were scorned and went elsewhere. Or didn't vote at all. And why should they have reelected Carter or elected Mondale considering that their party was the primary force of power behind the knife driven deep into the IBT's back?

Just because you feel you were fooled by Obama doesn't then mean that everyone who voted for someone who turned out to be different in office than they were on the campaign trail was similarly fooled. We weren't fooled, we were screwed ... by both parties. Quite a difference. Aside from the IBT leadership's endorsement of Hoffa (which was done to end the IRB, to gain input on the choice of labor secretary, and a few other things), the average Teamster who voted for Reagan didn't envision him being pro-labor. Those were the social conservative elements of the Teamsters who got exactly what they wished for (see also "not fooled"). And there were still others who - so incensed by the Carter/Kennedy betrayal - voted out of spite AGAINST Democrats but not necessary for Republicans. Given the magnitude of the betrayal, I'd say that while that wasn't the best thing to do, it was not without cause or merit.

An analogy of what Teamsters at the time were feeling might be best described in an analogy: If you live in a town with only two women and one of them has cheated on you while the other doesn't promise much better, you'd likely take your chances with the latter given that she hadn't yet actually burned you. She may well still do just that, but given your lack of choices you either have to remain single or pick one of them. If you choose the latter and she cheats, you weren't fooled but were instead screwed over. Going back with the first cheater would've been being fooled, just as staying with the other one after the affair would be similarly foolish.

[Romulox]

23. If they voted for Clinton, they got NAFTA, MFN China. If they voted for Obama, they got Bankster

bailouts, tax cuts for the rich, and "free trade" with South Korea.

This doesn't sound like an indictment of the Teamsters--it's an indictment of Democratic "leadership" that hasn't had much to offer working people for almost two generations now.

[Bigmack]

25. It's simple... unions & union members supported Reagan...

because union members are human... they do stupid things that go against their own best interests. Sometimes.

Why would an African-American/Hispanic/woman/gay/poor/middleclass person vote Republican?

Same answer.

To imagine that African Americans or gays - or whoever - wouldn't do stupid things sometimes is to deny their humanity.

[scheming daemons]

40. Yes.. .but 45% of union vote is a HUGE percentage for someone like Reagan to get

It defies logic.

[Bigmack]

41. There's a lotta stupid in this country...

I hear half of our population has IQ under 100.

[Hart2008]

26. Carter was the first neoliberal President. His deregulation undermined the union's power.

The decline of the American labor unions was evident in 1976 when Jimmy Carter won the nomination.

Despite the myth that Reagan is the one that devastated private-sector unions, no amount of so-called “union-busting” that Reagan allegedly did matches the amount of devastation that President Jimmy Carter did to unions by crushing their monopolies in the Air, Rail Telephone and Trucking industries. Though the narrative is a convenient one, it is misleading.

According to Alfred Kahn, the ‘chief architect’ of airline deregulations stated years later:
"I have to concede that the competition that deregulation brought certainly was terribly, terribly hard on the airlines and their unions, who had heretofore enjoyed the benefits of protection from competition under regulation."

It is time to set the record straight and give Carter credit where credit is due: Jimmy Carter was the nation’s biggest union-busting president in the 20th century.

ttp://www.laborunionreport.com/portal/2011/04/the-decline-of-...

There was a reason that Eugene McCarthy considered Carter and Reagan to similar to distinguish on labor issuess.

[Iggo]

27. Why? You writin' a book?

(Disclosure: I voted for him.)

[DrunkenBoat]

29. Because the leadership of many unions were in collusion with management?

In which case, the members saw corruption & became cynical?

[WI_DEM]

30. George Meany, the head of the AFL-CIO during part of Carter's presidency was...

actually quite conservative on many social issues. He was also a hawk who strongly supported the Vietnam war. He didn't care for Carter's foreign policy at all, considering it too soft on the commies. He, rightly, thought Carter was center-right on economic policy and with Carter putting inflation and deficit control ahead of unemployment (though for much of the Carter presidency unemployment did go down from a high of 7.7% in 1977 to 5.9% in 1979 before spiking up due to the relatively mild 1980 recession). So Labor and Carter had a difficult relationship.

In 1972 Meany strongly wanted either Humphrey or Scoop Jackson for president, but when McGovern was nominated, for the first time in many years, the AFL-CIO didn't endorse the democratic nominee. It was officially neutral in that race.

[Robb]

38. AFL-CIO leaders were unanimous in their vote to endorse Carter over Reagan.

...However the firefighters and government workers leaders abstained. I don't remember what was up with the firefighters, but the government workers unions (AFGE included) were ticked off about some weak federal pay increases during Carter's watch.

Machinists voted to sit out -- they'd backed Kennedy in the primaries, and were pissed about Carter taking price controls off domestic oil.

AFSCME was going to sit out (they'd also backed Kennedy), but came to their senses out of fear of Reagan. Most union work that election was focused on being anti-Reagan, not pro-Carter. Leadership knew what Reagan would do to the union movement, but they didn't communicate it effectively.

Meany convinced AFL-CIO leadership to sit out in '72 because of a single word: quotas. There was a lot of talk about a fake phone call purporting to be from the McGovern campaign to Meany, that was actually Nixon's "dirty tricks" bastards, but I don't remember the details, and I don't think it amounted to any more than the racism that was already there did. Labor's worst hour, I think.

[ThomWV]

37. Some of the large unions of that time were corrupt, they supported the war too.

[Odin2005]

42. Working Class people don't like being called backward racist sexist morons.

Some of them might be racist sexist morons, but to alienate working class voters is simply idiotic.

[MicaelS]

44. Carter signed the Stagger Rail Act into law...

That started the deregulation of the rail industry, and cost lots of UNION members their jobs. In 1980 there was over two-dozen Class I railroads still in operation in the US. Today because of all the mergers because of deregulation there are FIVE (CSX, NS, BNSF, UP, Kansas City Southern).

Carter signed the Motor Carrier Act in 1980 which deregulated the trucking industries.

Carter signed The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978.

Deregulation has been a disaster for workers in airline, railroad and trucking. Yes prices may have dropped in areas, but only at a terrible cost in jobs, and thus Union membership.

Carter fucked over Unions over 3 times, that's why they voted against him. Understand now?