Fellow union members, if Dems punish the gains made though COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

[Union Yes]

then come November, remember that the Dem Party has chosen to be an enemy of labor.

Unions are talking about a boycott of the Dem party. I'll stand with Unions in November.

Let's see Dems win without the support and vote from Union members.

Every passing day the Dems are joining the Republicans as enemies of labor.

Now, the Dems are going after the backbone of organized labor.

The ability to negotiate a union contract through the collective bargaining process.

Democrats are using so-called HC reform to undermine the gains made through the CB process.

To me, 3 things turned HC reform into a gigantic slap in the face of the working class.
1. Taxing a quality, union negotiated HC plan.
2. Using HC reform as deficit reduction. Whoever's idea this one belongs to should be impeached for stupidity and evil. If only those were impeachable offenses.
3.Single Payer off the table. Then later, the PO is off the table.

Did conservative Republicans win Nov '08? Sure feels that way.

The Dem party has boycotted the working class and poor. Time for a payback in November, if things don't drastically change.

These upcoming primaries had better produce a boatload of progressive candidates.

Time to remind the Pro-Serf Dem party of the meaning of the word..

SOLIDARITY.

[shopgreen]

1. BRAVO.

[damntexdem]

2. If the Dems do so by taxing hard-won benefits, they will deserve the union response.

My only question is whether the unions will follow through and punish the Dems for their transgression.

[northzax]

28. probably

after all, why bother being concerned about people not in Unions or the unemployed?

sorry to burst everyone's bubble on this, but someone is going to have to pay to extend coverage to the uninsured and the uninsurable. this costs money.in the short run especially. and yes, some people will pay more than others. allow me to actually provide you with some numbers: the Senate plan would tax insurance companies on plans valued over $8,500 for an individual per year and $20,000 for a couple per year and $23,000 for a family per year. you have any idea what kind of 'cadillac plan' that really is? for an individual, that's a premium of $708/month. for a couple, that's $1,666/month. how many people in the US have health insurance plans where the premium is over $708/month? or $1.910/month for families? in 2007, the Kaiser Family Foundation reported that the average annual cost of health care coverage in the United States for individuals with employer paid health insurance was $4,500. that's the total premium load, not the employer-paid part. and you think that taxing people who have 270% higher premiums than that is unrealistic? you can't get a better deal than 270% of the national average? in 2008, GM paid $5.1 billion to insure 1.1 million workers, or about $5k/employee/year. again, those rates would have to more than double before the cadillac plan kicks in. at my last job, I had an individual plan, paid for by my employer, but not as a group member. I had the most expensive plan I could possibly design through Carefirst Blue Cross/Blue Shield. I mean I had the lowest co-pays, the highest maximums, AND they maxed out my HSA. that plan was worth about $8,200/year in 2007. do you honestly have a family health insurance plan that is worth half what the average American makes in a year? and you don't find that obscene?

[Kansas Wyatt]

32. My Health & Welfare contribution is $7.40 per hour worked.

I am single and have no dependents, so you do the math and tell me that it will not effect me.

I'll be waiting for the 'but but but' in your attempted response to burst my bubble.

We have a Democratic Government and it is fucking disgraceful.

[northzax]

38. I'm sorry, you are saying that your health insurance

has a premium of $14,800 a year? for one person? $150,000 a decade? $600,000 over your four decade working career? and you think this was a good negotiation?

exactly what sort of health insurance do you get for $14k a year? do you get a hand job at the Dentist? I don't mean to be glib but your health insurance (if that's actually what the $7.40/hour is going for) is three times mine. I now have a PPO with $5 copays after the first ten visits, s five million dollar lifetime cap, a $100 annual prescription deductible. two bi-annual dentist checkups are included, I pay 50% of costs above that. I get one eye doctor visit a year and a pair of glasses or contacts every two years.

so what do you get for your company's NINE THOUSAND DOLLARS a year? is your insurance worth nine thousand dollars more than mine? (or, as is more likely, the contribution goes into a central fund, that pays health insurance for you, other people's dependents, retirees and widows/widowers? all those people are covered, right? where you figure that money comes from? are you actually getting a $14,000 a year health insurance plan? or are you helping to pay for other people's insurance and your own retirement? the insurance company is only taxed on plans worth (TO THEM) more than $14,000. have you asked your union rep? I bet they'll tell you how much they pay in annual premiums on your behalf. and I bet it isn't $14,800.

on edit: oh, by the way, that's me 'doing the math' and telling you that it won't affect you. if you have hard numbers about the actual annual value of your insurance plan, I'd love to hear them (and if you really have what is basically a health plan that costs the minimum wage, I'd love to know what is covered, cause that's a hell of a plan.)

[Kansas Wyatt]

43. You know how union contracts work don't you?

In case you really don't fucking know, union member plans buy insurance from the Insurance Industry and they are mandated to get the best possible deal, without giving up benefits previously received. You probably don't have a clue how union contracts are negotiated either, which explains a lot.

Your blathering about the cost is exactly what the problem is, which is why unions were pushing for government health care, because the problem lies within the Insurance Industry jacking rates up so high. Too bad the Great Obama pissed that away from the start. But no, you would rather jam up the union's ass, because they have it so rich. NOT! We give up wage increases for our insurance coverage, and you might want to check on who actually fought for the Working American to have medical coverage for themselves and their families.

$7.40 to my Health & Welfare fund per hour worked. Now, assuming that I am actually suppose to work 40 hours a week, like fucking politicians base their models on, that comes out to $15,392 per year to my Health & Welfare.
I am single and have no dependents, and per union contract, my employer is required to contribute more than $8,500 to my Health & Welfare Fund. So yes, it does affect me.

[northzax]

45. Yea, you said that

I understand the concept of collective bargaining and risk pools. You didn't answer my question, which I confess may not have been stated clearly enough: does your union self-insure or contract it out to a HMO/PPO? What does the card in your wallet say? (mine says 'Carefirst Blue Cross/Blue Shield of the National Capital Region. Every month. My employer writes a check to that company to insure me. At least they better be.) if they contract it out, as almost everyone does, there is an annual premium paid on your behalf. That is the number that counts. I guarantee you that number is not $7.40*the number of hours you work. If it was, who's paying for benefits for retirees? That number, the annual premium paid, is what is subject to the 'cadillac plan' tax. Not what your employer or you pays into a common pool, the amount actually paid, on your behalf, to Cigna, Aetna, Carefirst whoever. Seriously, call your union rep tomorrow (or even your insurance company) and ask them what the annual premium on your plan is. It's your money, they should tell you. Again, your employer could contribute a million dollars to a 'health and wellness fund' for you, but all that matters is the size of your annual insurance premium. Someone, somewhere, is sending a check every month to an insurance company on your behalf. Take that check, multiply it by 12 and subtract $12,000. If you still have a positive number, then your insurance company will owe a 40% tax on that amount. But I bet you won't. Here's a question that might help: if you were laid off, do you lose your insurance? Or does the Union pay it for a while? Can you get COBRA? What's the monthly COBRA cost? what if you quit? What happens to your insurance? That's your monthly premium. (obviously, not knowing the specifics of your union, contract or industry, I can only guess). How much of that $7.40/hour goes to pay for benefits of retirees? Your union does give retirees benefits, right? How much is set aside for when you retire?

So I'm not racking on unions. It was a serious question. My health insurance premium for my employer is $395/month. You seem to believe that yours is 2.5 times that. And I want to know what you're getting for that extra $600+/month? It's not a glib question. If you paid $800 more in rent every month than me, I'd hope you have a better apartment, right? If you paid $800 more for your car payment, I'd hope you have a nicer car (irrelevant since I don't have a car and walk to work, but still) if you spent $800 more than me on clothes every month, I'd hope you had a better wardrobe, right? So why not ask about insurance? what do you get for your $800/month more than me? And on the flip side, if you're paying (or your employer is paying) $800 more a month for health insurance, and you don't have better insurance than I do, don't you want to know why?

[wolfgangmo]

76. Corporate dodge number 73 - ask leading questions about wedge issues.

Why do you care what he is paying/recieving for paying into the crooked insurance companies? Your constant picking on this point, pretending it is somehow related to the question of health care for American's, is nothing more that a wedge argument. At least the Unions seem to be standing up for you even if you won't stand up for them. Your theory seems to be trying to get us to question our pathetic current coverage and somehow imply that if we are worried about the upcoming middle class tax, the we are either paying too much (i.e. stupid) or that the unions are screwing us and we don't even realize it(i.e. stupid, stupid, stupid). And by extension anything about the unions that we agree with is stupid too.

Heck - you seem to love your bargain basement. PPO/HMO. I wonder if you will be like far too many American's who assume that their issurance is just fine until they find out too late that the insurance companies hold all the cards and lie and cheat and break the law as a matter of company policy. Chances are that if you have been sick at any time in your life, and you failed to mention everything on your application form, then they will use that to show breach of contract and deny you the coverage you need to stay alive or stay on the job and you will lose everything. Just like the majority of homeless, foreclosed, or bankrupt in America.

And no, I am not a union member, but I have been in the past and I support them now as a small business owner. I run a medical clinic and I see first hand just how duplicitous and crooked insurance companies are, and how medical care is delivered in the US. It isn't justs main street the insurance companies are screwing, they are screwing clinics and doctors too. On insurance claims we won't get paid anywhere from 6 months to 10 years after treating a patient and we will probably settle for less than 50% of the original bill. There is a growing wave of doctors who are quiting and who are very vocal in telling up and coming interested young people that they should choose another career (or they should practice anywhere but here in America).

Your posts indicate that you are looking at a sows ear and seeing a silk purse.

[liberation]

90. LOL... ain't that the truth. I find it fascinating how they move from excuse to excuse.

The other day they were all in lockstep telling us that "the tax was on the HMO side, so we need not worry our pretty little minds" since that wasn't working, now they are doing the "noble" thing and using the uninsured and poor people as a shield.

If the uninsured and poor people is of such concern to these corporate lackeys, how come they were so adamant about sabotaging any attempt at a real reform that would lead to either single payer or universal forms of health care systems. And apparently one of every three tax dollars used to pay for "the uninsured and poor" will go directly to the insurance companies, which are neither "uninsured" nor "poor."

It is sad to see fools getting paid shit wages to undermine organized labor (and some even do it for free, they are *that* stupid). When it comes to side with those corporations that had profited from our sickness and have made healthcare unaffordable, or the people who gave us the weekend. It is a no brainer really....

[closeupready]

88. Amen.

n/t

[ipfilter]

115. I have such a plan.

This past December my wife had her debilitating varicose veins removed. I had a vasectomy, and my gall bladder removed. To diagnose my gall bladder I needed both an ultrasound and a HIDA scan. I figure last month alone my health insurance paid out something north of $20,000. My copays added up to about $200.

I pay $140/month in premium and my employer pays the remaining 90% of the premium. We, as a union, could negotiate a far cheaper plan with less coverage and convert the employer portion of the premium into wages but we choose not to.

[winninghand]

127. $7.40 per hour worked...?

Your union needs to hire an independent auditor and have him look into this.

[customerserviceguy]

60. We know that providing healthcare to the uninsured and uninsurable

will cost a lot of money in the short run (probably the long run, too), but it's all a matter of who's going to pay for it. The House plan impacts the people who benefitted most from the Bush years, those at the top, and the Senate plan impacts the people in the middle class.

I expect the Senate's thinking to come from the Repuke party, not from a party that has a theoretical sixty seats out of a hundred.

Besides, once the principle is in there, it will not be removed. Medical inflation will continue to push more and more people into the "Cadillac" range, even if you have ordinary inflation rates being used, as the cost of medical expenses always goes up faster than inflation. It's like that with the alternative minimum tax, when enacted forty years ago, it impacted only a couple of thousand taxpayers, today it affects many millions of them.

Your example is interesting, but I would guess that in the place where you live and work, there are more competing health plans than in many areas of the country. In those underserved places, premiums cost a lot more.

[wolfgangmo]

73. corporate lie number 17 - how will we pay for it?

Fact: Average health care costs per person in the US have been estimated at about 7200 dollars per year. Unfortunately what that means in the US is that a very few people get great coverage, a slightly larger number get OK coverage, the majority get substandard coverage (remember that the number one reason for homelessness, foreclosure and bankruptcy is medical bills froom those who have insurance which didn't pay), and about 1/6th to 1/5th (and raising) of the population get nothing. We spend more than any other country in the world and we get ranked 37th in the world (just above Albania) in health care outcomes.

Fact: the next highest spending country in the world is Canada where everyone is covered in full and they spend 1/2 what we do. And before you start mooing about long lines and lives lost because a government bureaucrat wants grandma to die, remember that all of the lies about the Canadian system have been refruted.

We spend TWICE (or more) than any other industrialized nation and we are the ONLY one that doesn't get universal care.

We are already paying for universal health care but we, the people, aren't getting it. The rich and well connected are. And we, as a nation, are footing thier bill.

So please stop spreading the lies, stop believing the lies, and start demanding more of your government. A government by the people, of the people and for the people. Remember what the tree of liberty demands and remind your congress critter what they are there to do.

[gorfle]

87. Irony.

I find it ironic that the people who scream the loudest to "tax the rich" are suddenly aghast when it turns out they are the rich.

[liberation]

89. I don't think irony means what you think it does...

I can think of a term or word as commonly (and freely) misused as "irony."

[ooglymoogly]

95. He/she has a perfectly good understanding of irony

Irony: To iron
To iron the wrinkles out of something, cloth etc.

All kidding aside I think he has irony down. I am not sure he/she has his/her facts right to come to such a conclusion; Except perhaps amongst a very delusional few if any at all.

Though Irony can have several meanings depending on how it is used or in what sense it is used; In this case;

Irony: Outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been expected or thought to be.

[blueworld]

118. It's doubly ironic when they manipulate the definition of "rich" n/t

[Union Yes]

34. Wholeheartedly agree!

I think the hive is about to get shaken.

:fistbump:

[ipfilter]

114. A good part of union dues collected

goes towards political contributions. Unions have a lot of political clout. The Dems do not want to piss us off.

[katandmoon]

3. K&R. I won't forget

[Marr]

4. Yep.

Same here. If they go through with this, I think it's time to let them rot. They can earn labor's support back if they want the votes.

I don't see any reason to be loyal to one party over another, when the only difference is that one wants to slaughter you overnight, while the other wants to kill you slowly.

[LiberalFighter]

5. First thing to do is to have challengers to Democrats in the primaries.

With labor members coming out in support of the candidate that has not done enough for HCR.

[salib]

77. Exactly!

Are we honestly going to:

1. Vote for a Repug?

2. Sit on our hands and let a Repug win in 2010?

3. Get out there now and be sure a pro-labor candidate wins the Dem primary?

I guess we know which choice to make.

[salib]

79. There are always other parties

I came from the Greens over to the Dems because of George Bush. It was pragmatic at the time. Many others did the same, I guess, as the Greens withered here in San Antonio.

However, I am looking at returning if we cannot get a decent candidate through the Dem primary. Had good ones in past elections, ones worth working for to make it happen, so the Dem party is not a lost cause.

[LiberalFighter]

98. Just remember that in all likelihood unless there is a very good challenger

with the financial resources and volunteers that they will lose.

The KEY is for there to be a challenger that will have the incumbent scared if they don't do well enough. And later more in line with the views of the Democratic Party as we see it.

[guruoo]

106. Challengers to Democrats, or new Democrats willing to challenge the status quo?

:shrug:

[Kansas Wyatt]

6. "gigantic slap in the face of the working class"

It's been more like a sucker punch to the side of the face by the Democrats.

[MichiganVote]

7. Solidarity. The union that stands w/me is better than the party that won't.

[ooglymoogly]

126. +1

[Horse with no Name]

8. We need a PRO-Union party to resurrect this country

There are only a handful of REAL Democrats left in Washington and they are treated like shit and marginalized at every opportunity.

[Nikki Stone1]

20. .

.

[Union Yes]

31. +1000! nt

[nyc 4 Biden]

58. +!

[billybob537]

9. They sold out to a few

Crybabies like Droopy Lieberman. Let them get elected without us.

[laughingliberal]

23. I believe it's more like they've sold out to wealthy campaign donors

And prostitution is illegal in DC.

[we can do it]

10. I'm With You

[debbierlus]

11. It is pathetic state of affairs then our suppossed 'leaders' have to be begged

To uphold the democratic platform....

[Union Yes]

13. Sad and pathetic indeed..

and it pains me to bash a party I once had a tad of respect for.

Many of us had such high hopes after Nov '08.

Since then it's been sobering. I'm left with the worst 'hangover' I've ever had.

Voter remorse.

What makes post Nov '08 so painful is that Dems have CHOSEN this path. Hell if they fought for the working person and poor and lost, I'd be very forgiving and continue to help the party any way that a peon like me can help.

Instead, Dems chose a pro-corporate, anti-people policymaking agenda.

I never thought that I'd be forced to write that about the Dem party.

Pathetic and sad indeed.

[amborin]

24. imagine all the people who put their trust in Obama, to have it so abused! ghastly!

[blindpig]

12. Solidarity

k&r

[Nikki Stone1]

14. Kick from a union member

:kick:

[KG]

15. the dem party is already an enemy of labor.

[highplainsdem]

16. Solidarity.

[Little Star]

17. k&r from a non union member.

[aaronbav]

18. K&R

[branders seine]

19. The line between 'not really a friend of labor but preferable to the other asshole'

and "an enemy of labor" is exceedingly fine, and has now been crossed.

K&R

[truedelphi]

30. And that means that it all stinks to high heaven!! n/t

[Nikki Stone1]

21. kick

.

[amborin]

22. K&R

[Doremus]

25. I'm with you! K&R n/t

[RainDog]

26. not in a union job but I stand in solidarity n/t

[Union Yes]

54. Hopefully one day all workers can join a union. Peace nt

[Odin2005]

27. I stand with the unions! K&R

[spoony]

29. Rec and a kick!

Solidarity, full stop.

[shopgreen]

33. kick

[dysfunctional press]

35. i may have to take it one step farther...

and actually vote for a repuke to make up for the people NOT willing to boycott the dems.

[krawhitham]

36. and you think having repukes in office is a better option?

If repukes run all three branches you can kiss away everything ever gained through collective bargaining. Think before you leap

[Vinnie From Indy]

39. It's rapidly diminishing anyway so why wait?

It just might be a better strategy to tear the bandage off in one pull rather than over the course of a year. The fact is that organized labor in America has been stabbed, shot, run over and is barely alive. What are we protecting by not trying to effect real change?

[Union Yes]

40. I can no longer draw a distinction between 'Thugs and GOPLC'ers. It's a one party system. nt

[customerserviceguy]

61. The Repukes are taking their time away from power

to become even more right wing. That's why they're embracing the likes of Sarah Palin, as opposed to the Bob Dole that they nominated not so long ago. When the GOP moderates gave that party the majority, they started to make noise on immigration reform and Medicare Part D. That infuriated the reich wing base, and they stopped supporting the moderates. That's how we got corporatist Blue Dogs in their place.

When the Rethugs come back, it will be with ultra wingnuts, perhaps we need to use the coming time out of power to strengthen our party from it's true base.

[Bluenorthwest]

71. Bob Dole is 87 years old.

I think embracing him might harm his brittle bones.

[customerserviceguy]

128. Well, it might

also make his Viagra kick in, too! The Rethugs clearly rejected Rudy, he was the most moderate of the choices they had in 2008, although I'll admit, that's not saying much. After the severe loss with McLame, they have learned to decisively reject anyone who would make any compromise across the aisle.

My point is, we should learn from them. No more Blue Dog candidates for us.

[Romulox]

64. What you describe is called "extortion". nt

[fascisthunter]

68. So now Democrats are in the business of extorting votes

what a stupid talking point... you think this shit's gonna keep people voting for the party?

[liberation]

91. LOL.. so you think that black mail is a reasonable political program?

[Atticus]

37. Not a union member, but grew up in a union household and remember where I came from.

I SUPPORT AND STAND WITH THE UNIONS!

[pintobean]

41. I'm with you. n/t

[DainBramaged]

42. Agreed..................

[patrice]

44. We need some Progressive Populist Democratic Labor candidates to step forward and raise hell!

[TMED]

122. Yes, even as MINIMALIST primary candidates, as in the Full Court Press project

The average filing fees for a run for House of Representatives is about $1,300. It'd be much better to run a 'mass wave' of even minimalist primary challengers who represent you, and you can vote for, rather than just staying home.

Full Court Press candidates must embrace 4 principles (these may not be final):

WPA - style program - a decent job is a human right!

Medicare for all - decent healthcare is a human right!

Repeal Stupak and Hyde - access to abortion is a human right!

US out of Iraq and Afghanistan - peace is a human necessity!

see for a Full Court Press

[ddeclue]

46. Personal Mandate w/o Public Option is political suicide!

[shadesofgray]

47. K&R

[murdoch]

48. Absolutely

They call it a Cadillac tax. I don't know many union members driving Cadillacs around.

It is an attack on organized labor, pure and simple. This bill wouldn't even exist without the backing of organized labor.

It is pretty simple to remove the Cadillac tax as well. We can implement other tax to make up for it, or cut some existing benefit.

The tax can be easily removed in technical sense, is there the political strength to remove it is the question.

This is the #1 problem with this bill.

[Union Yes]

55. Agree 100%! nt

[inna]

49. KR+58

[Dinger]

51. #59 From Me

:)

[Dinger]

50. Solidarity From Me

Count on it!:) :patriot:

[flyarm]

52. I stand with Unions and the middle class against this bill!..Retired APFA member! eom

[Nikki Stone1]

53. We won't forget.

/

[DisgustedInMN]

56. I'll never support any ...

... candidate for any office again that isn't solidly Progressive, no matter what "letter" they stick behind their name, as there isn't a nickles worth of difference between the "Rs" and the "Ds."

[freddie mertz]

57. Boycott scab Dems. No votes for Union-busters.

That really should be our bottom line.

PS I agree that placing the deficit reduction requirement on HCR was insane.

Another in a long line of Dem sell-outs and betrayals this year.

[donco6]

59. I'm with you.

And I think my gay collegues will be happy to join you, if there's still room under the bus.

[icee]

62. Great post! I'm with ya!

[vssmith]

63. with you

[Romulox]

65. k/r. nt

[Generic Other]

66. Unions have done more for me than democrats or republicans

And if Democrats stab unions in the back, I will bleed with my brothers and sisters.

[invictus]

67. K&R. GO UNIONS!

[fascisthunter]

69. kicking for the working class

[MissDeeds]

70. K&R

I stand with the unions. If my party doesn't, maybe it's not my party anymore.

[Bluenorthwest]

72. Standing with my Unions, your Union

and all of them.

[h9socialist]

74. Well, what's the solution?

Anyone who had blinders on about the Democratic Party was foolish from the get-go! I am 55 years old, and I have heard this argument ad infinitum my whole adult life. Taking out your frustrations on the Democrats won't help much -- it'll just make it harder later to put everything back together. The truth is that unions spend too much time on piecemeal collective bargaining, and not enough time using a universal approach for pulling the whole working class forward. I am a longtime member of an AFL-CIO union -- but to be honest, the IWW was right all along, and Samuel Gompers was a petty bourgeois jerk! Unions must build a movement to advance ALL labor, NOT build an aristocracy of labor based on membership cards. Right now, because US unions are so conservative and worried about being tagged "socialists" they've fallen right into the old trap of fighting for the collective bargaining gains of the past, which apply piecemeal to only a small percent of the workforce. From there the capitalists can chew them up and spit them out! The average worker sees unions as fighting for a labor aristocracy rather than for the working class as a whole. The solution does NOT lie in the Democratic Party or electoral politics in general. It lies in redefining the institutions of the working class. It involves adopting truly socialist values in those institutions, foremost of which means taking the old union mantle of "an injury to one is an injury to all" SERIOUSLY for a change!

[salib]

80. Right on.

The solution must be much more comprehensive.

- It MUST include election reform (public funded and some change to winner take all, like IRV)

- It MUST include constitutional reform (end to organizational "personhood", etc.), stripping Corps of their charters for not being good actors and forcing them to include the "general welfare" in their charters

- It MUST include One Big Union, or syndicate, as close as we can get there

All these are important and many more. All of us cannot do all of these. However, we can do some and make it easier for other to do.

[zipplewrath]

81. I don't completely disagree with you

Yes, I do think the union movement needs to re-invent itself. It needs to do so BECAUSE it was so successful at doing what you describe, representing the needs of the working class as a whole. The result is that between EOE and OSHA as well as workman's comp and various other "pro worker" laws, many workers get what unions normally had to fight for as a matter of course. Although I chuckle some times when I see non-union guys grousing about their treatment at work and suggest it might be different if they were a member of a union.

But the reality is that unions might need to return a bit to some roots of "trade associations" in which as you suggest they seek to serve workers more than just act as collective barganing units. They could provide legal representation, negotiating advice, job placement, and yes, access to more affordable healthcare all without a collective barganing arm.

Politically, their power still comes from their ability to organize, and their political clout will only grow from an ability to help candiates campaign and from an ability to deliver votes. To that end they may want to consider creating their own candidates and helping them get started, much in the EMILY's list manner or more importantly in the DCCC/DSCC/DLC model.

[h9socialist]

92. The major hurdle for Labor is . . .

. . . that most US unions were designed by, and can't seem to escape from, the labor issues of the first three decades of the 20th Century. Consequently, unions still think in terms of factories, and mass production organization. And,they have a HUGE streak of nationalism in them. Before unions can overcome their current problems they have to find a way to not only purge these old mentalities, but to restructure unions in ways that address the new organization of work.

The other thing is that US unions have been far too timid. In the days of Eugene V. Debs, unions actually talked about organizing the working class to take power from the capitalists. US unions today seem only to want to secure a seat for union members at one of capitalism's table -- one of the tables in the back, by the way. Unions need a lot more ambition. They should aspire to replacing corporate power with worker-power via a union structure. Right now, unions are playing by capitalism's rules, which means they've conceded half the playing field, and will never be in a position to triumph.

[Union Yes]

125. Agree. Also, "Free" Trade was a game changer for the worse.

Unions were dealt a major blow as a result of NAFTA CAFTA GATT/WTO.

Contract negotiations have had that cloud over them since '94.

[h9socialist]

129. I fought against NAFTA and GATT . . .

. . . but labor's failure was to become nationalistic! We should recognize that some foreign automobiles are built by union workers -- Germany, Sweden, France -- and workers should support other workers. Forget "Buy American" -- it should be "Buy Union," regardless of the nation the workers are from. Worker solidarity must be international.

[Marr]

86. An excellent point.

Thanks for making it-- I'll be thinking about this one for awhile.

[iceman66]

108. You're the only one in this thread who makes any sense.

We would have had national health care a generation ago if the unions had presented a united front on the issue.

[h9socialist]

130. And . . .

. . . a not-too-gentle assault on the power of the American Medical Association and the Health Insurance and Pharma lobbies would have been a big help, too!

[Union Yes]

124. I remember in 1999, AFMA VS IAM at Northwest Airlines in Minneapolis. 2 rival unions.

IAM was already representing Northwest Airlines machinists and aircraft mechanics. AFMA felt that they could better represent the union members. A nasty union vs union campaign ensued. Radio ads were ran, union bashing the other union.

I remember planting my face in my palm thinking is this what modern day union activism has come to?

Union VS Union instead of solidarity among all unions.

I agree with everything you said.

Part of what's hurting unions today is a rivalry between competing unions instead of consiladation and solidarity among all unions.

But to me what really undermined labor was NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT/WT.

Unions were delt a major blow. Their bargaining power took a major hit after NAFTA. It seems like union were somewhat forced to become more conservative at contract negotiating time, as a result of mass outsourcing due to "free" trade.

Infighting and rivalry also drive many of the problems in todays Unions, as you've laid out in your reply.

To me, fixing the problem starts with repeal/reform of "free" trade and ban of reimportation. Consolidation and ending these rivalries are also very important.

Solidarity is the backbone of labor.

Thanks for the thought provoking reply!

Solidarity.

[hellsbeagle]

75. It Is Time To Hit The Streets

[earth mom]

78. Solidarity!!!

:kick:

[AzDar]

82. K & R

[EndElectoral]

83. It may take this to actually reform what are called "New" Democrats.

[xchrom]

84. Recommend

[closeupready]

85. Major MAJOR K&R.

n/t

[alberg]

93. K&R! Let's focus on what most of us agree on!

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

.. . . America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.

-- From FDR's "Economic Bill of Rights.

[Mithreal]

94. I stand with unions

[skygazer]

96. I am a union member but I don't think unions can survive no matter who is in office

Truth is, a lot of the reasons people had for forming unions are no longer there because much of the legislation concerning basic employment law has addressed those issues. Things like working hours, fair compensation, unsafe working conditions, on the job harassment, unlawful termination.

It is extremely hard to organize a workplace because people don't see the necessity - rightly or wrongly.

I consider that a shame because I agree that unions have done an incredible amount of work to improve the working conditions of people AND to provide a high level of training and quality of work for employers.

Quite frankly, I'm not sure what you're proposing - if you refuse to support Democrats, you'll just get Republicans in office and that's not going to help anyone, including union labor. That's just reality.

[Hello_Kitty]

102. I'd like to see a union movement toward worker owned businesses

There are a few in existence already, like the bread company Michael Moore showed in his movie, and they are pretty successful.

[RoccoR5955]

97. K & R as a union member

of Local 1000 CSEA in NY.

[punkin87]

99. Me too.

[bvar22]

100. The Democratic Party Leadership (DLC) ...

...has been officially anti-LABOR, Anti-Working Class since 1992.

This is just the last betrayal in a long line of betrayals.



The DLC New Team
Working Class Democrats Need NOT Apply

(Screen Capped from the DLC Website)



"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[Krashkopf]

105. OMG WTF DLC

[Upfront]

101. Dam Right!

I will always stand with my Union. I watch these so called Democrats in amazement. We worked our ass off and voted for OBama now it looks like we were sold out. We won't forget.

[arthritisR_US]

103. I totally agree, now organize and form a 3rd party, a Labor Party if you will. n/t

[Krashkopf]

104. Rec. #141 - I'm Stickin' to the UNION!

UNION MAID
by Woody Guthrie
(sung to the tune of "Red Wing", better known as "the Ice Cream truck jingle")

There once was a union maid, she never was afraid
Of goons and ginks and company finks and the deputy sheriffs who made the raid.
She went to the union hall when a meeting it was called,
And when the Legion boys come 'round
She always stood her ground.

This union maid was wise to the tricks of company spies,
She couldn't be fooled by a company stool, she'd always organize the guys.
She always got her way when she struck for better pay.
She'd show her card to the National Guard
And this is what she'd say

Oh, you can't scare me, I'm sticking to the union,
I'm sticking to the union, I'm sticking to the union.
Oh, you can't scare me, I'm sticking to the union,
I'm sticking to the union 'til the day I die.

[Ganja Ninja]

107. I'm with the unions all the way.

If the Democrats think I'm going to vote for them because I'm afraid of the alternatives then they better think again. Right now the biggest difference between the Republicans and the Democrats is who they appeal to. Republicans appeal the the truly gullible and the Democrats appeal to people they think are truly gullible.

[Unvanguard]

109. It's a change to the tax policy. Any such change is always going to mess with people's expectations.

And thus with their past planning.

It's not pleasant, but it is what it is. Health care reform has to be paid for (and not with deficits, which, outside of a recession, will probably hurt working people most.)

[BEZERKO]

110. Teamster Local # 528 member here and I will not support a party that doesn't support me.

And neither will my wife.

[Hardrada]

111. Yes, I agree. An Injury to one is an injury to all!

Solidarity forever!

[democrank]

112. Standing with the unions Democratic leaders used to fight for

K & R

[Oldtimeralso]

113. K & R and proud to help union solidarity n/t

[bread_and_roses]

116. A big K & R here!!! (n't)

[Betsy Ross]

117. In solidarity with brother and sister union members.

Jack up the income tax rate and close loopholes for the rich. We are trying to get everyone healthcare, good healthcare. Don't tax WORKERS who have bargained for and pay for good plans: Medical, dental, eye care, and Rx with reasonable deductibles and copays. It still doesn't pay for all care. My prescribing physician, a psychiatrist never gets paid by our insurance because I gave up fighting with them over their claim that it is talk therapy. It's not, the doctor codes the invoice correctly but they fight it every time. So Cadillac plan it may be, but it still means thousands out-of-pocket every year.

[midnight]

119. k&R.

[knitter4democracy]

120. A-freakin'-men! What the heck are those Blue Dogs trying to do?!

Solidarity!!

[nvme]

121. I come from a pro-union family

I wont cross that picket line if the union declares there is one

[Vidar]

123. K&R,