<< but not having the votes is not the same thing as voting against labor. >>
In party politics, that's exactly what it means.
If you want to argue that the Democratic Party is a party in name only, fine, but then don't argue for "the Democratic Party." Argue for individual self-identified Democrats on a case-by-case basis. Which is no way to work to gain power, but acknowledges the contributions of those truly pro-labor Dems who are out there.
In the US, there are inherent structural problems that keep the labor Left from establishing a true party presence in electoral politics--that is, a party that can gain power, establish policies, and pass laws that are in the direct interest of the working class. And, no, sops to a minority member of an electoral coalition--which is labor's place in the Democratic "Party"--do not count, if what you are judging is the extent of real power for labor.
There are three basic Left responses to the Dems, all of which I have seen in various forms on this list and in too many meetings over the years: 1) Don't waste time on the US elections, spend your time organizing elsewhere; 2) don't waste time on the Democratic Party, organize a third party; 3) work in the labor-Left-minority faction of the Democratic "Party" coalition and try to take power within the organization, and then organize it along more real party lines (as, BTW, the right wing of the Republican Party has largely done).
There may be a fourth option--unspoken, because embarrassing--that goes, labor must accept minority coalition status in the Democratic Party structure because that is the best it can ever hope for, and we must treat the existing Democratic Party apparatus as a true party of labor and be happy with anything we can get because There Is No Alternative. Is this what you are arguing?
<< And without Dem filibusters and yes, even Clinton, vetos, truly hideously anti-labor bills would have passed at the crest of the Gingrich wave of power. >>
Let's be glad they do something for all that support from labor. I don't think anyone would suggest that the Dem leaders will just sit back and let their opponents suddenly destroy a key faction of their electoral coalition. However, slow destruction of the power of organized labor seems not to bother most Democrats overmuch. Similarly, an accretion of racist laws and policies over the last two decades seems to bother only a few Democrats, mostly Black, despite clear evidence that thse laws and policies are politically hamstringing THE clearly indispensible group in the Dem electoral coalition. (There are Republican counterparts. Historically, the Repugs have had a popular base in the farms. The Repugs have in fact implemented overall pro-big-capital policies that have all but finished off the family farm as an economically viable way of life, but they will still jealously hold the electoral remnant that they have so steadfastly worked elsewhere to destroy, placating farmers through typical federal sops, "emergency measure" band-aids, and the message of TINA.)
<< As for the "scandal" there is none- I think most campaign finance laws are crap and designed to gut collective power by giving only individual rich people power at the expense of coordination by collective groups like unions. >>
Well, most drug laws are racist, authoritarian crap, but if you read a press report that says you've sold someone 100 g of coke, you might wish to take it seriously.
Ron Carey might agree that campaign finance laws are crap. I'm not sure he'd agree that campaign finance laws are meaningless.
As with most scandals, there will be or won't be one depending on how the press and politicians--and federal DAs--wish to play it out. But you can bet people are worried for now, and not from "embarrassment."
----Original Message Follows---- From: "Nathan Newman" <nathan at newman.org> Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Subject: Re: AFL Had Veto Power on DNC Campaign Spending 1996 Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 10:01:54 -0400
The fact is that on the major labor union priorities, from trade to labor law legislation, the overwhelming majorities of Dems have voted with the AFL-CIO. The major exception in the last decade was welfare reform, where Dems split half-and-half on it in Congress. Bankruptcy legislation is hardly a top tier issue for labor, but I'll throw it in as another one if folks want.
Other than that, I'd like anyone on the list to mention a top priority bill... [snip]
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp