Skip to main content

The Democratic National Convention may be falling short of fundraising needs, but a number of unions are making it clear that they won't be helping fill the gap. For some unions, refusing to give in 2012, let alone at the levels they did in 2008, is in response to the DNC's location in anti-union North Carolina. For more, though, it represents a desire to shift resources away from Democratic Party support and into grassroots organizing, including promoting a "Second Bill of Rights" and a rally in Philadelphia on August 11.

Describing the AFL-CIO's decisions about the DNC, Richard Trumka wrote in a memo that:

"This year, we will not be making major monetary contributions to the convention or the host committee for events or activities around the convention, Trumka wrote. "We won’t be buying skyboxes, hosting events other than the labor-delegates meeting, or bringing a big staff contingent to the convention."

An AFL-CIO official said that the decision was motivated solely by the organization’s strategy of focusing on grassroots efforts this election cycle, and the outcome would have been the same regardless of where the convention was held.

Many building and construction trades unions announced nearly a year ago that they would be skipping the Charlotte DNC because of North Carolina's hostility to unions. Now, though, the focus is much less on why unions are not participating in the DNC, or to a lesser extent than in the past, and more on what they are organizing themselves. In most cases that includes a strong effort to reelect President Obama, but on union terms, not by writing checks for the Charlotte convention.

Wednesday Trumka and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers President Edwin Hill launched what the IBEW describes as a "campaign to refocus America’s national priorities on the needs of working men and women." The campaign calls on politicians and voters to sign onto the Second Bill of Rights, which includes the rights to full employment and a living wage, full participation in the electoral process, a voice at work, a quality education, and a secure, healthy future. Top labor leaders met with Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz on Wednesday about the campaign, describing it as a positive meeting.

Originally posted to Daily Kos Labor on Fri Jul 13, 2012 at 01:09 PM PDT.

Also republished by In Support of Labor and Unions and Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I think it is a good idea and hopefully a wake up (11+ / 0-)

    to the DNC that has been floating far too far to the right for many.

    Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance.

    by Horace Boothroyd III on Fri Jul 13, 2012 at 01:14:43 PM PDT

  •  You can only screw your friend so often (8+ / 0-)

    before they start looking in different directions to further their own interests.

    "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Fri Jul 13, 2012 at 01:22:36 PM PDT

    •  and, yes, rmoney is definitely the friend of (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NedSparks, joe from Lowell, Matt Z

      all unions, right?

      sheeeesh.

      foot meet shell.

      •  You miss the point entirely (18+ / 0-)

        For decades the unkions have poured 8 to 10 times as much money into (almost entirely Democratic) politicians than they have into building their own organizing and base.    Maybe you think that sort of outlay can be sustained forever, but finally top union brass just got a wakeup call out of Wisconsin:  they are dying and need to tend to their own knitting, the interests of working people, organizing the unorganized, fighting back against the demonization of labor that  the worship of money on all sides in our society.  And see, here you are ripping into them as Romneybots for taking a moment to concern themselves with their own survival. Which is precisely why they've reached the point that they have to put their own self-interests over the interests of Dem Party political careers.

        The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges. ~ Anatole France

        by ActivistGuy on Sat Jul 14, 2012 at 08:36:02 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  THEIR survival is OBAMA's survival! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          NedSparks

          is rmoney going to get funds to rebuild infrastructure with all those union jobs?

          unless the unions get their members in gear to support democrats (because the alternative to democrats are... duh... republicans), then they are committing political suicide.

          •  Both options are neoliberal (7+ / 0-)

            Obama is just slower in implementation.  The Unions are hopefully not too little too late with their new strategy.

            NOW SHOWING
            Progressive Candidate Obama (now - Nov 6, 2012)
            Bipartisan Obama returns (Nov 7, 2012)

            by The Dead Man on Sat Jul 14, 2012 at 09:07:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Perspective is needed. (6+ / 0-)
            THEIR survival is OBAMA's survival!
            A movement like this is far larger than any one man, even if that man is Obama.  It's also larger than one party or even one generation, should November end up being a setback.  And be honest, have the Democrats really been the tireless defenders of the working class that they used to be?  I sometimes think they could use a poke with a sharp stick to remind them of their purpose.

            In the meantime, the unions don't have the money to do everything, and they're no good to anyone if they don't take care of their own core strength like they seem to be doing now, so I think this effort might end up doing more to get out the vote for Democrats than merely writing a check to the DNC.

            •  . (0+ / 0-)

              give me a break...

              makeup of the house?
              makeup of the senate?
              YEARS of republican control of one or both or all three branches of government?!?!?

              the core strength of the unions isn't worth sh*t if rmoney is in the wh.

              •  Well, frankly (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                PDiddie, wsexson

                the core strength of unions isn't worth shit right now.  Which is why I can see the wisdom in a redirection of focus towards grassroots organizing.  Do you not think that this effort could also result in more Democratic voters this November?

                YEARS of republican control of one or both or all three branches of government?!?!?
                How much power the Republicans have had is irrelevant; my point wasn't that the Democrats haven't won, but rather that they haven't been fighting.  I'd like them to start.  They might not win, but they could at least leave no doubt in anyone's mind that a battle had taken place and make absolutely clear on whose side they stood.
                •  points worthy of more awakeness than i have (0+ / 0-)

                  right now - have to be up in 5 1/2 hrs - let's explore this more tomorrow nite - or in another diary?  

                  there are reasons that the game changed - and it did - dems still try to be the party of the "moral high ground" - but HOW one fights is the issue.

                  obama's recent ads do much to hold both that ground AND come out swinging!  how much is up to the dems and how much is up to us - and how effective ARE the dems when the grass roots come out swinging against the only friends they have in office?

                  tomorrow?

                  nite

                  •  I don't quite buy the "moral high ground" thing. (0+ / 0-)

                    I see it more like the good cop/bad cop thing you sometimes see in movies about cops.  Bad cop is a scary psychopath, and good cop seems reasonable and nice by comparison, but they ultimately answer to the same master, and their differences, while not quite as feigned in politics as they are in the good cop/bad cop scenario, are still not enough to make good cop actually on your side.  Fundamentally, I’d argue that we have little more than the mere illusion of a meaningful democratic process, which cannot withstand close examination of the money dynamics driving our government, nor our adherence to the self-fulfilling prophesy of the two-party system.

                    I haven't seen any of Obama's ads, being stationed in Japan, but talk is cheap, and Obama's policy is really more the issue anyway.  Based on policy alone, I can well understand why unions, environmentalists and other assorted progressives feel abandoned by the Democrats, even if they still really want to like the president himself.  Meanwhile, party loyalists, well-intentioned though they may be, have an unfortunate tendency to resort to extremely dismissive rhetoric towards their fellow progressives, as though the cause for which we struggle takes no higher form than keeping one batch of slimy politicians in power over another when we should be working for the ongoing evolution and betterment of human civilization.  A political party dedicated to the latter aim could become nothing less than a force of nature, but we are expected to be satisfied with so much less and to kindly keep our mouths shut until after the election, no matter that elections constitute the only leverage the people have remaining.

                    In short, I really don’t like the two-party paradigm, but I recognize that we’re stuck with it for the moment.  However, this reality does not let the Democrats off the hook; rather it demands that they live up to their potential as a progressive alternative to our inhumane, self-destructive status quo.  And I want them to be afraid of losing elections if they fail in this.

                    Ok, now it’s late over here.  Oyasumi nasai, as the locals say.  :-)

                  •  Unions have (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    TiaRachel, George Hier

                    uniquivocally supported democrats, while unions regularly get kicked in the teeth by dems.

                    The dems did it to themselves.  

                    The only way the working people are ever going to participate in the productivity gains and improve their lives is by organizing working people.  Unions' power has diminished since the '70s, and the result is that working people haven't had a real raise in decades.  Most of the gains due to labor's productivity have been taken [stolen] by the top executives.

                    Dems did nothing to stop the deterioration and promoted policies that hastened the unions' [and workers'] demise.  

                    Unions owe dems nothing--and if they don't re-build, then workers can expect their economic position to further deteriorate.

                    The banks have a stranglehold on the political process. Mike Whitney

                    by dfarrah on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 07:26:21 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  As a retired AFSCME steward, I agree with you... (0+ / 0-)

                      The Democrats have NO REASON to count on Unions to automatically support them financially.
                      MOST union members will vote for Democrats, but the Union movement itself is in dire straights in the US after decades as a target of the right wingers and their big money backers. This is about survival of the middle class.

                      The Democratic Party-as opposed to individual Democratic politicians- has done very little to support Unions over the last 50 years. It is about time they started to do so.

                      mark

                      Retired AFSCME Steward and licensed gun carrying progressive veteran.

                      by old mark on Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 09:47:10 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

          •  Really? (4+ / 0-)

            So how do you think Obama's Free Trade Job Outsourcing deals are going to help union members.  I've never quite figured that out.

            Seems to me that the more Free Trade we have, the more jobs get shipped overseas - to cheaper locations.  Which usually doesn't bode well for the working 99% or unions.

            I voted for Change. Not Three Chiefs of Staff from Wall Street Banks. Not Bernanke, Summers, Geithner, Holder, Simpson, or a Monsanto Lobbyist. Not more Free Trade. Not more Patriot Act. Not defending Wall Street's Savvy Businessmen.

            by Johnathan Ivan on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 01:24:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Damn, hey somebody, the needle's stuck (0+ / 0-)

        again.

        That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

        by enhydra lutris on Sat Jul 14, 2012 at 10:48:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Ooo! Lesser of Two Evils reprises its role (4+ / 0-)

        on stage at the Kabuki Theater of the Absurd.

        Would you care for some Free Trade Job Outsourcing with those tickets?

        In a nutshell:

        Lesser of two evils has not, will not, and can never change the direction of our country.  Our direction will continue rightward economically until we have elected officials who want to change it and do not represent the 1%.

        I voted for Change. Not Three Chiefs of Staff from Wall Street Banks. Not Bernanke, Summers, Geithner, Holder, Simpson, or a Monsanto Lobbyist. Not more Free Trade. Not more Patriot Act. Not defending Wall Street's Savvy Businessmen.

        by Johnathan Ivan on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 01:23:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  a reminder to the DNC to support down ticket /nt (4+ / 0-)

    Präsidentenelf-maßschach"Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) "Ensanguining the skies...Falls the remorseful day".政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

    by annieli on Fri Jul 13, 2012 at 01:25:57 PM PDT

  •  Bravo to the union movement. (5+ / 0-)

    They should be withholding support for a convention held in territory hostile to the union movement. It is time for the Democratic party to truly support unions and working people and the poor and stop being the lapdog of the wealthy.

    Democrats should be learning through this election cycle who their friends are and where their support is. Wealthy donors are with holding donations to Obama because they perceive that Obama has turned against them even though he didn't. Their feelings are hurt and they are ready to see a scorched earth America because of their tantrums.

    Labor on the other hand has real issues with both Obama and the Democratic party. And they have been snubbed for twenty years by this party. Yet they remain mostly loyal, at least at the national level. Charlotte is a slap in the face to working people. Do we really expect a populist message from a convention being unwritten by Bank of America?

    •  you tell em, brother! nt (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VTelder
    •  charlotte is the most liberal city in the south (6+ / 0-)

      and north carolina is a crucial state...

      but, nevermind - go write of north carolina - and let's write off virginia and florida and ... and ... and ....

      oh, give me the pure
      and the perfect

      and then i can sit and stare at my navel while the nation falls apart around me -

      but i'll FEEEEEL good!

    •  Sure, let's say bravo! When unions have to depend (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ChurchofBruce

      on a Republican Congress and President following the 2012 elections, it might not affect you, but for unions and union workers? It could mean the beginning of the end. I'm sure you won't cry bravo then....

      •  I know (0+ / 0-)

        unless the Democratic Party endorses the repeal of the 14th amendment and the reversal of the "unlawful takings of private property" it entailed we will lose in 2012.  

        Sorry when we get to wrapped up in the idea of victory for the sake of just winning, we lose sight of what we are fighting for.  I'd rather the Democratic party lose an election , but stand for something that's worthwhile.

        Then again if we don't support the repeal of the 14th amendment, the party could lose the "crucial" white supremacist vote.  

        http://www.economicpopulist.org

        by ManfromMiddletown on Sat Jul 14, 2012 at 10:25:41 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  This is the crux of the matter, you do not believe (0+ / 0-)

          it to be important for Democrats to win this election, for as you put it:

          we get to wrapped up in the idea of victory for the sake of just winning
          So what if Democrats lost the Congress, the Senate, and the Presidency?

          Well, this is why important decisions of governance should not be made within the confines of ones own personal beliefs, because I can attest to the fact that millions of women are concerned about the potentiality of Republicans gaining such absolute power, as a result of this election, for it could mean an even further extreme shift in the Supreme Court and their losing of personal rights to make decisions concerning their own bodies.

          Millions of individuals who are depending on the Affordable Care Act legislation are fearful of the Republicans gaining such power, for they have sworn to repeal it, literally gaining the power of life and death in their own hands....

          There are millions of individuals who are fearful of the Republicans gaining ultimate power because it means the Second Great Depression that was averted by President Obama would become a reality.

          There are also many who are concerned about the Republicans penchant for starting new wars, their seeming indifference to public education, their lack of interest in a workable immigration policy, their wanton disregard for the environment, and to bring it to full circle their strong desire to eradicate union representation for workers all across this nation.

          Do you honestly think the battle in Wisconsin would not be revisited across this nation, this time aided by Congressional Legislation, should Republicans gain ultimate power? Really? Well, as the man said..."You ain't seen nothing yet."

          So, why worry about this election? It would simply be victory for victory's sake. This statement illustrates how easy it is for those of us without the responsibility of governance to make statements just off the cuff, when we don't have the concerns of millions and millions of people resting on our shoulders.  

    •  SPOT ON!!!!!!! (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PDiddie, dougymi, Blueslide, George Hier
      They should be withholding support for a convention held in territory hostile to the union movement. It is time for the Democratic party to truly support unions and working people and the poor and stop being the lapdog of the wealthy.
      The Democratic Party has rushed rightward because... they could use social issues and the "Lesser of Two Evils" to avoid accountability.
      Wealthy donors are with holding donations to Obama because they perceive that Obama has turned against them even though he didn't.
      I disagree.  They see how Obama has watered down the Democratic brand to the point that... it's time to return to full-throttle Hyper Capitalism (not that O really slowed it much).  

      And then after the GOP impoverishes the 99% even more.. the Dems can come back and offer a "Lesser of Two Evils" approach, perhaps with some unemployment benefits salve or some temporary investments in infrastructure...  Just enough to keep the populace Hoping and thinking things will get better...eventually.

      Labor on the other hand has real issues with both Obama and the Democratic party.
      Obama's Free Trade Job Outsourcing with Columbia and promised Free Trade w/ Asia-Pacific Nations bigger than NAFTA, for example.
      Do we really expect a populist message from a convention being unwritten by Bank of America?
      Put Another Way:

      Does anyone really think a President with Three Chiefs of Staff from Wall Street Banks who pushes for more Free Trade NAFTA like deals actually gives a shit about progressive economic goals?

      I voted for Change. Not Three Chiefs of Staff from Wall Street Banks. Not Bernanke, Summers, Geithner, Holder, Simpson, or a Monsanto Lobbyist. Not more Free Trade. Not more Patriot Act. Not defending Wall Street's Savvy Businessmen.

      by Johnathan Ivan on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 01:29:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Excellent!! (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dougymi, dfarrah, Johnathan Ivan

        Pretty speeches in support of labor, made by elected democrats, is not a good return on investment for the money that organized labor has been pouring into the coffers of the DNC. It is past time for organized labor to ORGANIZE. It is great news that money from dues paying members will not be spent on a political party that has been ignoring them for the past three decades.

        Infidels in all ages have battled for the rights of man, and have at all times been the advocates of truth and justice... Robert Ingersol

        by BMarshall on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 05:11:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Basically (4+ / 0-)

    a thoroughly deserved boycott. Maybe this will be a teachable moment for the DNC.

  •  I suspect the DNC will get more messages (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greenbell, chuckvw, Sunspots, lonespark

    There are a lot of Democrats who do not think much of the DNC, including no doubt, a host of AFL-CIO members and leaders.  Unlike the views expressed by attendees at Romney's Hamptons fundraiser, Labor has legitimate gripes.  The rift will not be patched up with schmoozing and promises.  Obama will cruise through this serenely, but staffers's careers will suffer, people responsible for tending that part of the coalition will lose their jobs.  Hopefully, some of those will be the Third Way/DLC types and those who stabbed Howard Dean in the back at their first opportunity.  It couldn't happen to a more deserving crew.

  •  Conventions should be abolished (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chuckvw

    They turn the host city into a militarized occupation freedom-free zone.  They are an embarrassment to a country that claims to be a democracy.

  •  Smoozing for priveleges (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lonespark

    It seems to me that the convention is mostly an opportunity for the elites in either party to schmooz with the candidates and get their backs scratched.

    It will be better for the unions ( as well as the general value of small-d democracy ) if they stay away and focus on organizing.      Unions should focus on getting their own people to the polls where they should be encouraged to vote their conscience.

    I don't think very many will vote for Romney, despite the public posturing before the event.

    Personally, I will vote enthusiastically for Obama, even if there are ways that he disappointed me.    If we turned our backs on family members or friends who disappointed us in some way, we would all eventually be living alone in the woods.

    Religion gives men the strength to do what should not be done.

    by bobtmn on Fri Jul 13, 2012 at 02:25:59 PM PDT

  •  so in essence obama is going to lose the election (0+ / 0-)
  •  North Carolina was the wrong choice... (8+ / 0-)

    It is not clear that the dynamics in choosing NC for the convention and not readily discussed. Quite frankly, I don't believe the selection was thought out well!  I had the opportunity of going this year, but opted out of running for the delegate seat in an uncontested rate. NC is 'anti-union' and my union earned dollars will not be spent there and neither will a bunch of my union brothers & sisters $$$ will not be either.

    A Progressive waiting on the the top 2% to pay their share!

    by theAdvocate2011 on Sat Jul 14, 2012 at 09:52:29 AM PDT

  •  I don't recall the DNC helping Wisconsin (12+ / 0-)

    or any other place where public unions were under attack.

    •  They "Tweeted". Once. nt (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mickT, ozsea1, divineorder

      The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges. ~ Anatole France

      by ActivistGuy on Sat Jul 14, 2012 at 08:38:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Then you remember wrongly. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      v2aggie2, edrie, ChurchofBruce, DBoon

      The DNC spent $1.4 million of its own money on the recall, and the Chair of the DNC went there on a fundraising trip for the recall effort.

      The DNC has directed $1.4 million to Wisconsin so far in the 2012 cycle with $800,000 of that coming since November, according to figures provided to the Fix. Nearly a quarter million of those dollars have been directed to the state party.
      DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz is headed to the state to raise money for Barrett later this month. And, Obama for America state director Tripp Wellde is also working on the recall effort.
      This is an interesting example of how internet rumors overtake actual information.  The number of people who think the DNC didn't help in Wisconsin is amazing.

      Art is the handmaid of human good.

      by joe from Lowell on Sat Jul 14, 2012 at 08:49:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  pssssst..... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        joe from Lowell

        joe, you're breaking into the "dnc=bad" meme ....

        •  Not deliberately. The DNC is very meh. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          divineorder

          Believe me, this comment has nothing to do with any particular affection for the DNC.

          I just can't stand it when people believe their own bullshit.  Someone anonymous operative in Wisconsin thought that some trash-talk about the DNC might be a good way to get the race more attention and money.  There's nothing wrong with that.

          But then it turned into the Holy Gospel, and now people are actually using this  made-up talking point as the basis of their political reasoning.  It's frustrating.

          Art is the handmaid of human good.

          by joe from Lowell on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 05:56:43 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  To keep things (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        divineorder, George Hier

        in perspective, the Walker side spent 45 million, the other guy spent 9 million, 3 of his own, 6 was outside spending.

        As they saying goes, the silence [by the DNC] was deafening, even if they coughed up a 'whopping' million dollars.

        The banks have a stranglehold on the political process. Mike Whitney

        by dfarrah on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 07:42:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  "The DNC" vs. "The Walker Side." (0+ / 0-)

          Do you see the problem here?  You just compared the DNC - ignoring the Democratic Governors Association and other Democratic groups, ignoring the unions, ignoring direct donations to the campaigns, ignoring the state party, focusing only on the DNC - and compared the spending of that one group up against "The Walker Side."

          The alleged "silence" of the DNC was nonexistent.  They made plenty of noise; you just didn't want to hear it.

          Art is the handmaid of human good.

          by joe from Lowell on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 07:51:13 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It doesn't matter (0+ / 0-)

            what 'side' I looked at.  The dem effort was weak compared to the other side.  

            And considering the DNC's 'prominence' as a fundraiser and funder of candidates, compared to the other groups you mentioned, it's still a very poor showing.  

            And the unions could also have done better, but then why should they have?  Wasn't the guy anti-union or knocking some of the prominent unions in the area?  Yeah, that's the way to get funding from unions.

            And if he was knocking the unions, then why didn't the DNC provide even more funding?  After all, the DNC is anti-union too.

            So, even considering the other groups you mentioned, it would seem that the DNC should have coughed up much more $$$.

            The banks have a stranglehold on the political process. Mike Whitney

            by dfarrah on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 08:00:28 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  The DNC makes the mistake of believing itself (7+ / 0-)

    to be necessary. It is not. And the farther right it drifts, the less of a reason any of us have for supporting it.

  •  After the lack luster support the union got in WI (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    xaxnar, mickT, ozsea1, dfarrah, George Hier

    I am not surprised in the least that this is happening.

  •  Who's Zoomin' Who? (5+ / 0-)

    In the suburbs of Philadelphia, the unions regularly back & endorse Republican candidates.  I'm helping run a campaign for a State office candidate; the local construction unions told us that the endorsement already went to our Republican opponent, but that we were welcome to talk to the rank & file at upcoming meetings - big whoop...  

    I've seen this happen almost every election year; and even though I realize the dynamic is much more complex that 'weak Dems' or 'unsupportive Unions', its still disheartening.  

    •  Half the Republican State Senators in NY (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ChurchofBruce, ozsea1, divineorder

      were elected with union support.

      Now, it happens that the NY Senate Republicans are for the most part precisely the kind of Republicans the TeaPartiers hate: Big Spending High Taxers. Somehow the Reagan Revolution missed most of NY. But they'd be a lot better off with a Democratic NY Senate.

  •  It's sound like the unions are embarrassed... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    edrie, NedSparks

    about the stupid boycott of North Carolina, and are post-facto trying to frame their decision as having nothing to do with the location.

    Art is the handmaid of human good.

    by joe from Lowell on Sat Jul 14, 2012 at 08:34:06 PM PDT

  •  I think this could also be problematic for unions; (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    joe from Lowell, edrie, ChurchofBruce

    they have been losing support more and more over these past number of years. The election in Wisconsin proved that unions are facing rough times.

    The Democratic Party will also be hurt by this. Both could hurt all around. But I believe in the final analysis that the Republicans winning the House and Senate and perhaps the Presidency will not do the unions one bit of good, but further erode their standing. This could possibly mean their death knell, would this separation then be worth it?

    Regardless of emotions on both sides of the issue, it has always been the Democratic Party, coupled with union partnership which has paved the way for a stronger middleclass.  Now is the time for leadership on both sides, not separation based on emotions.

  •  Good for the unions (4+ / 0-)

    The Democrats have been taking the union vote and money for granted for years while they pursue anti-labor policies in D.C.  It is the old Rahm Emmanuel philosophy in that unions can't go anywhere else during election time, so why bother to be responsive to the union movement's needs?  We got them in our back pocket, and if the try to complain,  they are "fucking retarded."

    Yeah, lack of money and support for Democrats leads to Republicans in office, but how else to get a Democrat's attention than with money?  It is a Catch 22 for unions, and I can't blame them for wanting to focus on membership drives than useless Democratic politicians.  

  •  When Barack Obama wins this election.... (0+ / 0-)

    he's going to have to decide what his priorities are going to be in his second term.

    I hope he remembers who stood by him.

    Art is the handmaid of human good.

    by joe from Lowell on Sat Jul 14, 2012 at 08:52:42 PM PDT

  •  DNC sees unions as the kiss of death (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Utahrd, ozsea1, Simplify

    You could ask why Obama didn't go to the NAACP.

    Similar reasoning. Republicans have spent decades describing the Democratic Party as the tool of union bosses and free loading minorities. The DNC is terrified of doing anything that reinforces that framing. A term I heard on an NPR story the other day explains the problem: stereotype threat.

    It's a phenomenon where someone is so afraid of seeming to reinforce a negative stereotype by some action, they end up crippling their own performance. Hence we get things from Democrats like the infamous Sister Souljah Moment. Stereotype threat is what Karl Rove is using when he turns a target's strength into a weakness.

    It's not such a problem for Republicans because A) it's only a big deal for people who give a shit about what anybody else thinks, B) they throw giant screaming hissy fits if anyone calls them on stereotypical behavior (i.e.: Republican racism) and C) they've perfected the art of projecting their stereotypes on their targets.

    This is why the Obama campaign attacks on Romney precisely for his emphasis on his business experience are so effective - the more they can turn his alleged strengths into weaknesses, the more trouble Romney is going to have responding. And it doesn't hurt that Romney's 'virtues' are actually crap despite the best efforts of the GOP to paint them otherwise.

    "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

    by xaxnar on Sat Jul 14, 2012 at 08:56:26 PM PDT

  •  On this the unions are right (8+ / 0-)

    There are SO many workers in America who would benefit from being in a union, and much of the labor movement has spent more time protecting the status quo than in expanding to help more workers. For example, other than in supermarkets, how many retail employees are unionized? I can think of four Macy's stores in the NY area, but that's about it! Why aren't the rest of Macy's stores -- all of whom were originally owned by other chains that got merged into Macy's -- given the same representation? And why aren't Wal-Mart, Sears, and Target unionized?

    And there have been times when Democrats have had control of the governor's office and both houses of the legislature in right to work states -- why are those states still right to work? We don't have to support everything the AFL-CIO wants, but this is a huge one.

    And why a totally non-union city for the Democratic Convention?

    I support the AFL-CIO's efforts to rejuvenate the labor movement.

    •  Just because an (0+ / 0-)

      area is not unionized does not mean that unions aren't working to unionize.

      You are apparently completely unaware of the drastic steps that places like Walmart and Target will take to avoid unions--like shutting down stores.

      And this is absurd: much of the labor movement has spent more time protecting the status quo than in expanding to help more workers.

      What 'status quo' would that be?  Their whopping 20% -odd of the workforce?  Workers have allowed themselves to buy into the anti-union notions promoted by the right.

      The banks have a stranglehold on the political process. Mike Whitney

      by dfarrah on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 07:50:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Good for them. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    divineorder

    it was astoundingly tone-deaf and arrogant of the DNC.

    "Hey Joe Walsh, when did you stop deadbeating your wife?"

    by wretchedhive on Sat Jul 14, 2012 at 09:02:47 PM PDT

  •  oh, yummy! another "divide the dems" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NedSparks

    before the election - type diary.

    how productive is THIS little gem?

  •  In any strategic calculus involving limited means (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    phoebesdatter

    choices will have to be made.  Union leadership clearly feels that this effort will be a better use of their modest funding than giving it to the DNC.  I can't say I blame them.

  •  I think union members themselves (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dfarrah

    prefer  an emphasis on organizing. Real Union strength doesn't ultimately depend on the number of Democrats in office. When have Democratic administrations & congresses stopped the decline in union membership over the past 40 years? Political influence comes & goes. Unions have bought it & still they bleed  members. Industry unions are not beholden to taxpayers, as the public unions are. Once the protection of industry unions & their benchmarks for pay & benefits were lost, public unions became vulnerable, The very idea of a "living wage" is now a Republican joke.

    "There ain't no sanity clause." Chico Marx

    by DJ Rix on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 12:03:39 AM PDT

  •  As it should be. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wsexson

    For more, though, it represents a desire to shift resources away

    from Democratic Party support and into grassroots organizing
    You do not shift the party by giving them money, IMHO. You do it by kicking their ass from outside of it.

    ePluribus Media
    Collaboration is contagious!

    by m16eib on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 12:06:45 AM PDT

  •  About Effing Time! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cassandraX

    Was a time when the DNC represented the Democratic wing of the Democratic party. Now they tell us there's a Third Way, that we must follow that Overton window ever rightward.
    Democratic wing to the DNC: We got your Overton window.

  •  OMG. Could they be waking up? (4+ / 0-)
    shift resources away from Democratic Party support and into grassroots organizing, including promoting a "Second Bill of Rights" and a rally in Philadelphia on August 11.
    Now that's Change I Can Believe In.

    Perhaps the unions are realizing that Free Trade Job Outsourcing doesn't help working Americans?  Mayhap they don't like Bankster Chiefs of Staff?  Who Knows?  Maybe giving Lieberman - a NON Democrat - the powerful Chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee instead of someone far more deserving (such as Bernie Sanders) has finally woke them up?

    Next Up:  Banning Wall Street Predators from moving into the WH as Resident Lobbyists (as in no more Savvy Bankster Chiefs of Staff).  One can still Hope, right?

    I voted for Change. Not Three Chiefs of Staff from Wall Street Banks. Not Bernanke, Summers, Geithner, Holder, Simpson, or a Monsanto Lobbyist. Not more Free Trade. Not more Patriot Act. Not defending Wall Street's Savvy Businessmen.

    by Johnathan Ivan on Sun Jul 15, 2012 at 01:19:03 AM PDT

  •  Go Labor! (0+ / 0-)

    I've been an IBEW member for 20 years and I couldn't be more pleased with this. While I agree that the Democrats need to win this one(like we need to win every election, because the fight is NEVER over) more than ever. Labor saw the total ass kicking that happened at the state and local(WI was the biggest eye opener) and are going with a bottom up approach because that's where people feel it.

    Most people don't have a clue what is going on in Congress, but they know more about what's going on in their state, county and city. And that's where we'll get the biggest bang for our hard earned Union money. Personally, I would like to see the rise of a labor party in this country, a REAL labor party...

  •  good for the (0+ / 0-)

    unions, who are one of the last organizations left of center in america, and that includes obama and the vast majority of dems.

  •  bunch of whiners (0+ / 0-)

    You decided to go play in Billy's yard... so I won't come and play with you...

  •  I just had a union organizing campaign (0+ / 0-)

    for 2000 workers in the heart of the South sputter to a halt because we couldn't scrape together $20,000 to file a court suit.

    The DNC would spit in your eye if you only offered them $20,000 but that money would be the difference between re-organizing unions, or instead continuing the race to the bottom, in places like Port Arthur, Texas and vicinity.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site