1199 Hearts Bruno 100,000 Times

ain't new york (4.00 / 1)

awesome?

TODAY is day one. It always is.

---

by: phillip anderson @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 23:11:09 PM UTC

The progressives who founded the modern labor movement 100 years ago (4.00 / 2)

must be rolling over in their graves

---

by: Roatti @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 23:19:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

not to mention (4.00 / 2)

MLK who was a big supporter of this particular union...

TODAY is day one. It always is.

---

by: phillip anderson @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 23:23:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sadder still (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Roatti @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 23:27:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

We haven't won yet... (4.00 / 1)

Look, I think its a little premature to be cocky. I think our chances of winning tonight are realistically a hair below 50-50, and even if we do, we still have to flip one more seat this November than they do, with a complete unknown at the top of the ticket.

I sincerely hope that Aubertine, Iannello/Ward/Mesi, Dow, Dahroug/Bodkin, Barber, Squadron, etc all win this year. But those f***ers over there across the aisle have a lot of money....a LOT of money...

---

by: Stephen Nazwisko @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 23:29:27 PM UTC

where does roatti (4.00 / 2)

claim we are going to win tonight? i agree with your analysis about tonight, but i don't see where roatti makes any claim about tonight.

that said, joe bruno and the GOP's days in the majority are surely numbered. they may squeak this one out. but the fact that this race is even close bodes awfully ill for uncle joe's crew. the day will indeed come when 1199 is going to be asked to donate to a GOP minority.

what do they do then?

TODAY is day one. It always is.

---

by: phillip anderson @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 23:37:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What Phillip said (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Roatti @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 23:39:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This: (0.00 / 0)

I wonder if 1199 will still be such staunch Bruno supporters once Uncle Joe is in the minority.  I also wonder if the Senate Democrats will remember this when they are in the majority.

---

by: Stephen Nazwisko @ Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 23:41:05 PM UTC

That's not a claim of a win tonight - (4.00 / 1)

That's a claim of a win eventually.

Demographics do seem likely to term-limit Senator Bruno's majority, despite their best efforts at gerrymandering and various other cheerful bits of corruption.

Now if only those same demographics could term-limit the abuses in the lower house...

---

by: simonstl @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 00:37:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I do think in the long term, the Dems will take the Senate (0.00 / 0)

But I am not making any predictions about tonight, nor have I in this diary

---

by: Roatti @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 00:42:19 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

who should support who? (0.00 / 0)

I remember when blogs were praising 1199. I call that time "last week."

My prediction? 1199 is eventually going to support the state Senate Dems. But it hasn't happened yet. And Spitzer picking a budget fight with 1199 last year didn't provide much motivation to do so. All the same, I think rapprochement between Spitzer and 1199 will happen. But if it doesn't, 1199 knows Bruno is on the way out, so I can only imagine they're open to working with the Dems that will work with them.

I also wonder if the Senate Democrats will remember this when they are in the majority.

So, if I understand you right, you think 1199 should be supporting the Senate Dems, and if 1199 were to support them - you think the Senate Dems should screw them over? Say again?

Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/SteveinNYC

---

by: SteveinNYC @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 01:16:28 AM UTC

I don't think the Senate Dems should screw over any union (0.00 / 0)

However, I think that the Senate Dems should be more inclined to be more receptive to unions that have supported them through the bad times than a union that will support them only because they have power and tried like heck to prevent them from obtaining that power in the first place.  That said, most legislation that 1199 would want will be supported by the Senate Dems anyway because Democrats are in favor of legislation that helps working people.  And that is another reason why 1199's support for Bruno is so baffling.  

How about you Steve?  I know you're a big union guy- why on earth should 1199 support Republican control of the Senate?  What has Bruno ever done that's good for unions?  I am not being snarky here- seriously, why do you like Bruno?  

---

by: Roatti @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 01:30:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

wrong question (0.00 / 0)

First off, I think 1199 will, and should, support the Senate Dems. But I think pretending the Senate Dems are without flaws and Bruno is without virtues makes it harder for that day to come.

I think you meant to ask, what's to like about Bruno. I don't know why you'd think I like Bruno. But I do understand why groups that endorse Senate Rs would do so. Bruno's earned a reputation as someone who is not ideologically driven and a reliable partner. That makes it possible for groups to deal with him, and explains why groups endorse Senate Republicans for practical reasons rather than ideological ones.

I think you also know that this question does have an answer.

What has Bruno ever done that's good for unions?

Bruno overrode Pataki's veto to raise the minimum wage in New York. And Bruno has been supportive of unions in a number of ways throughout the years. Funding New York's health care system (and health care workers) instead of shortchanging it being the relevant (to 1199) example, but not the only one.

most legislation that 1199 would want will be supported by the Senate Dems anyway because Democrats are in favor of legislation that helps working people.

Right. I can want to elect a Democratic Congress, and still not be surprised that winning the '06 elections was insufficient to end the war in Iraq. Clapping louder isn't convincing.

Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/SteveinNYC

---

by: SteveinNYC @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 19:30:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

it's pretty bizarre (4.00 / 1)

to see how a lot of unions have invested in both the Working Families Party and the coffers of the State Senate Republicans, especially given a lot of the rhetoric that comes from our cheerful Senators.

The late-night gift that Pataki, Bruno, and Silver gave to 1199 that led to 1199's endorsement of Pataki is, in my view, one of the lowest moments of New York State history - and there are a lot of low moments in competition.

Perhaps it's too much to ask that unions consider their politics in terms of motivating ideas rather than who can provide them the most patronage?

As for punishing them, I can't say I'm interested - but the leadership sure hasn't tried to make friends.  

I guess I probably shouldn't look to those folks for help in actually reforming our broken state government.  (But times change, eventually...)

---

by: simonstl @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 01:35:54 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It really boils down to the so-called "liberal checklist" (4.00 / 2)

One one side, you have anti-reform unions who just have their checklist and will suck up to anyone who has power in a misguided attempt to get what they want.  On the other, you have the reform unions who know that to stop the systemic assault on working people that the government has done since the Reagan years it takes fundamental change and support to progressives across all levels of government.  

This is essentially what caused the exodus from the AFL-CIO by the unions that now comprose the Change to Win coalition.  

What is ironic is that the leader of the Change to Win coalition is 1199's parent Union, the national SEIU, which is headed by Andy Stern who is a true visionary. It's a shame that the local chapter is so much less visionary than the national union.    

---

by: Roatti @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 01:55:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

it varies by level, I guess (4.00 / 2)

I definitely support my local unions, whenever I get the chance.  Different levels of leadership seem to set different priorities, though, even within the same broad organization.

I'm curious what'll happen after the Democrats finally take the Senate, but I worry about that too.

---

by: simonstl @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 01:59:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

we definitely agree on this (0.00 / 0)

Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/SteveinNYC

---

by: SteveinNYC @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 19:37:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think you're really torturing this theory (0.00 / 0)

I do agree there are "anti-reform unions." I don't think 1199 is one of them, the Donna Edwards race being the latest example.

Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/SteveinNYC

---

by: SteveinNYC @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 19:40:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

1199 endorsed Donna Edwards? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Roatti @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 20:30:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

yes, 1199 endorsed Donna Edwards (0.00 / 0)

1199 represents workers up and down the eastern seaboard.

Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/SteveinNYC

---

by: SteveinNYC @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 22:42:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think the WFP (0.00 / 0)

is the leading edge of where unions are headed.

Perhaps it's too much to ask that unions consider their politics in terms of motivating ideas rather than who can provide them the most patronage?

So you think hospital nurses are working patronage jobs? They're just sitting around, doing nothing? New York's health care system is overly generous? There's no health care crisis in New York and these are easy, underworked jobs? Because hospital nurses are the kind of jobs we're talking about.

It may come as a shock, but, yes, if people have to choose between making ends meet and "reforming our broken state government" then they will pick putting food on the table.

Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/SteveinNYC

---

by: SteveinNYC @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 19:36:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I said patronage, not sinecure (4.00 / 1)

And no, I don't think hospital nurses are underworked or the health care system is overly generous.

However, the late-night 1199 deal really is about the bottom of the barrel for recent NYS legislative history.  Giant, expensive bill, no debate, passed instantly.

Sure, some of the effects are positive - but a really painful example of "the ends justify the means" in a way that makes citizens doubt the value of their government.  In the long run I can't see how that can possibly be good for the unions.

---

by: simonstl @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 20:46:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bingo (4.00 / 1)

One thing that the leadership of some unions unfortunately tend to forget is that public opinion of unions (outside their own members) matters.  One can look to the example of John Lewis overplaying his hand during World War 2 that set off a spike of anti-union sentiment among the public that resulted in the "do-nothing congress" that passed some of the strongest anti-labor legislation before the Reagan era.  

---

by: Roatti @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 21:21:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Still waiting for your response (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Roatti @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 17:31:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

this may have gotten buried in last night's fun (0.00 / 0)

---

by: simonstl @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 18:05:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

it did (0.00 / 0)

Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/SteveinNYC

---

by: SteveinNYC @ Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 19:09:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]