Un-accomplishments in a Union Town--Part 3

Madison, Wisconsin, has a reputation as a Union Town. In Part 1 of this series we noted the slow decline in the standard of living of unionized workers in the area and our ineffective efforts to stop that slide. In Part 2 we examine the non-existent organizing. In Part 3 we look at labor’s political work, here in our Union Town

With Friends like These

In his first term, Democratic Party Governor Jim Doyle froze our wages and shifted $65 a month in health insurance costs our families. He refused to support the state AFL-CIO’s universal health care plan, froze in place tax give-aways to corporations and continued one of the most oppressive welfare systems in the country. He contracted out janitorial jobs to an anti-union outfit, killed local minimum wage ordinances and promised to cut 20% of our members’ jobs.

Last fall our union spent an estimated $200,000 to get him re-elected.

This spring, several high-ranking union officials held a series of “listening sessions” across the state, not so much to listen as to sell the idea of adopting the AFL-CIO’s New Alliance model. The presentation included talking points backed up by PowerPoint, complete with maps of the state showing various densities and trend charts.

The problem the New Alliance was intending to address was that we weren’t electing enough Democrats. This, although the presenter noted, labor had experienced some recent successes in that we managed to re-elect the Democratic Party Governor and a Democratic Party majority in the state Senate.

The solution was to divide the state into electoral districts, hire political operatives in areas without functioning labor councils and begin year-round electoral organizing. Timelines were stated in terms of electoral cycles.

With all of the problems facing our movement—falling standard of living of our members, union busting, our inability to organize—the AFL-CIO’s only initiatives in recent years have been designed to elect more Democrats. When called on that from the floor, speakers began substituting “progressives,” “family friendly politicians” or “friends of labor” for the word “Democrats,” and it was noted that the New Alliance model could aid in organizing and strike support work as well. But no one lost the meaning.

How Subordination Works

For the past several years in Wisconsin, labor’s stated number one legislative priority has been universal health care. The state AFL-CIO and its associated think tanks have come up with a sophisticated plan we call Healthy Wisconsin.

But we didn’t hear much about that plan in the months leading up to elections. We could have gotten the plan on a statewide referendum or we could have made labor endorsements contingent on support for the plan. We could have held mass rallies and chained ourselves to the Capitol door. But our number one legislative issue seemed to have been lost, at least until after the elections.

The reason is obvious. Many of the candidates the unions endorsed—and spent millions of dollars and millions of volunteer hours to elect—don’t support the unions political agenda and have long records of screwing working people. If we had made support for labor’s political agenda the test, we wouldn’t have had a candidate for governor.

Or, maybe we would have endorsed Nelson Eisman, a Chief Steward for his union and Green Party candidate for Governor. There was no doubt that Eisman support labor’s stated political agenda.

Eisman seemed genuinely surprised that he didn’t even get an endorsement hearing from labor. But he should have known better. Unions’ COPE committees are tightly controlled by two-carders: people who hold a union membership card and a Democratic Party membership card. And there’s never a question of which card trumps.

Direct Action off the Table

One thing you get from reading the left and international press is that unionists in the rest of the world tend to take direct action in the face of political attacks. When the Indian congress threatened privatization and cutbacks a couple of years ago, 10 million workers staged a 1-day general strike. When the Greek government proposed changes in overtime pay, transportation unions shut the country down. When Berlusconi tried to cut retirement benefits, millions of Italian workers walked off the job. In France, England, Mexico, Ireland, Korea, Iraq…just about everywhere except the U.S., workers respond in the past few years to reactionary government policies with direct action.

[Yes, of course, immigrant workers in the U.S. and their allies staged general strikes on the past two May Days. That will be the subject of an up-coming discussion.]

In the U.S. unions generally respond to political attacks with strongly-worded press releases. Followed by unconditional support for the Democrats.

In 1992-93, the AFL-CIO’s stated number one legislative priority was defeat of NAFTA. But passage of NAFTA was President Bill Clinton’s number one legislative priority. And it was left to his vice president, Al Gore, to line up enough Democratic Party votes to pass it in the Senate.

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney was mad when NAFTA passed. But a couple of years later he was endorsing, (his words) “that great friend of labor Bill Clinton.” Next time around it was that “great friend of Labor” (and NAFTA Senate ramrod) Al Gore. Next time it was the “great friend of labor” (and pro-NAFTA voter) John Kerry.

What if, instead of sending out a strongly-worded press release and then supporting NAFTA supporters, U.S. labor had announced a general strike if the Senate passed NAFTA?

That Which Cannot be Spoken

The obvious response to this sad situation is for labor to form its own political party.

Based on nothing but the material interest of the working class, we could put together a platform that would appeal to organized and unorganized workers, the unemployed, retired people, immigrant workers, women, environmentalists and minorities.

With 400,000 union members as the core and the money we now spend on the Democrats, we could put together a powerful grassroots organization in every legislative district of the state. Such a party could lead the fight for a working class government that would put the Republicans and Democrats out of business.

Perhaps because the need so great, the solution so obvious—and the threat to the status quo so palpable—it is an idea that cannot be spoken in the union halls of this Union Town.

In this 3-part series Un-accomplishments in a Union Town we discussed the inability of unions to defend our standard of living, the lack of organizing and the state of our political work.

Starting in the next edition of LaborLeft we will run a classic 1985 essay entitled How to Win Strikes by long-time labor activists Harry DeBoer. We think his analysis offers some perspective and direction as we consider how to build a militant, mass labor movement here in Madison and across the country.

As always, this project relies on responses from labor activists like you. Click on “comments” and share your ideas with your brothers and sisters. Click on the envelope icon to send this to a fellow union activist.

In solidarity,

Ron Blascoe
Steward AFT 4848