ALWAYS LOOK FOR THE UNION LABEL

Gephardt & Co. Look to Service Sector for Coveted Union Label (Ronald Brownstein, May 19, 2003, LA Times)

With this year's Democratic field so evenly divided, the unions would play a commanding role if they could back a single candidate. But top union officials, including the president of the federation, John Sweeney, say they don't yet see evidence that any Democrat can reach the two-thirds threshold. Absent such a consensus, the unions will inevitably divide their endorsements among the candidates, diluting their influence.

Many union officials believe only one candidate even has a chance to reach the two-thirds figure: Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.). The game then for the other Democrats isn't so much to win the AFL-CIO's endorsement as it is to deny the prize to Gephardt. And in that quiet but intense struggle, the critical decisions may rest with the presidents of the federation's two largest members: Andrew Stern of the Service Employees International Union, or SEIU, and Gerald McEntee of the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees, or AFSCME.

The two men are in such a pivotal position because of their potential to either break or solidify the stalemate emerging in the labor federation. The big industrial and building trade unions with protectionist leanings have enough strength to block an endorsement of any Democrat who supports free trade - a camp that includes all of the leading contenders except Gephardt. But those blue-collar unions, which are likely to endorse Gephardt, don't have enough members anymore to lift him on their own to the two-thirds threshold.

To get there, Gephardt will need support from some of the large service-sector unions, such as the SEIU and AFSCME, who together account for one-fifth of the federation's membership. Conversely, both to block Gephardt and to offset the help the industrial unions will provide him even if the AFL-CIO doesn't make a unified endorsement, the other candidates need support from the SEIU, AFSCME, and other service-sector unions, such as the teachers'. [...]

Half of the SEIU's 1.3 million members work in health care, and Stern said that issue has become "an all-pervasive, unifying [concern] in the union." It's not surprising, then, that the three candidates who have released plans to provide near-universal coverage top his list: Gephardt, Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts and former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean. "Gephardt catapulted himself back into people's vision with his health-care plan," Stern says. "And the more Dean and Kerry continue to work the issue, the more they come onto our radar screen." As for Sens. John Edwards of North Carolina and Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, he says, "They haven't found their niche." {...]

Like a railbird handicapping ponies, McEntee zips through balance sheets for all of the 2004 contenders. Dean has won some converts in the union, McEntee says, but he appears dubious that the former governor's opposition to the war in Iraq will sell in a general election. He likes Edwards' energy and skill as a campaigner, but he isn't sure such a newcomer "can take off." Lieberman's connections to the centrist Democratic Leadership Council "is not in our ballpark," but he praises the senator's toughness on national security.

McEntee is impressed with Gephardt's support among his House colleagues and believes he's been bold with his health-care plan and his strong support for the war with Iraq. But McEntee seems worried about Gephardt's viability; his early fund-raising "was a bit of a disappointment," he says. Kerry clearly appears to intrigue McEntee most. In the course of an hourlong conversation, McEntee kept returning to the senator, citing his service in Vietnam (and opposition to the war when he returned), his strong record on labor issues, the quality of his campaign staff and his ability to tap the personal fortune of his wife, Teresa Heinz. The AFSCME and SEIU each has said that, after it sounds out its members, it hopes to pick a candidate by early fall.

More than any other unions, these two may decide whether the labor movement places its heaviest bet on ideological compatibility, or electability, in 2004.

This is pretty devastating for the Democrats. The key to getting their nomination is union support. Getting the support of manufacturing unions requires opposition to free trade. Getting the support of service unions requires opposition to most reform of education, government, and health care, particularly any reforms that reduce the size of government itself or that require teachers and schools to meet set standards.

If the twentieth century served any useful purpose it demonstrated the efficacy of open competition and free markets as opposed to top-down government control. Labor effectively requires that Democrats disregard this lesson and fight to maintain the status quo. Thus are Democrats become the reactionary party. Posted by Orrin Judd at May 24, 2003 7:05 AM