Employee Free Choice Act dead

BUT BUT BUT (4.00 / 1)

The Republicans now have to go through the rest of the legislation with WET POWDER! Good luck, suckers, stopping the bills you *really* oppose after failing to keep your powder dry!

–7.25 / –7.28 | http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tw...

---

by: mattw @ Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 01:49:39 AM UTC

CT & NE votes (4.00 / 1)

Lieberman and Dodd voted for cloture.  In New England, Collins & Snowe (Maine) and Judd & Sununu (NH) voted against it.

All of the CT House delegation voted for it, as did other reps in New England.

From the AFL-CIO:

But the people have the majority on their side. Nearly 1,300 lawmakers in 60 state, county and city legislative bodies passed resolutions supporting Employee Free Choice; 16 governors signed on to a letter backing the bill, as did 115 religious leaders. Workers staged nearly 100 actions in the past week in support of Employee Free Choice, and middle-class Americans generated 50,000 phone calls to the Senate, 156,000 faxes and e-mail messages and 220,000 postcards, including 120,000 delivered to the Senate last week.
......
The momentum is on our side.

---

by: mikect @ Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 02:33:00 AM UTC

Geez... :( (0.00 / 0)

Dems will get as many useful things done if they just shut down the Senate completely. At least there would be no more war funding.


Drinking Liberally in New Milford
ePluribus Media

---

by: Connecticut Man1 @ Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 07:58:25 AM UTC

reaction (0.00 / 0)

Via Sirota:

So again the question is why? Why would Democratic leaders bring up EFCA as a standalone bill - that is, in a form that is most politically easy for the average Republican to oppose? Is it just that Democrats have no “strategery?” Or is it something more insidious?

Does it have something to do with Democrats wanting to set up a situation that allows them to claim they care about workers and labor rights, while making sure that those labor rights continue to get trampled? This wouldn’t be unprecedented…at all. In fact, we saw this situation recently on the Iraq bill, where Democrats manipulated parliamentary procedure to deliberately engineer a situation that let them simultaneously claim they were doing all they could to oppose the war while helping make sure the war continues. Are we experiencing the same thing now with worker rights? And if we are, does it have something to do with the spate of stories about Big Business showering top Democratic leaders in cash and throwing Democratic Hill staffers offers of six-figure corporate lobbying jobs?

I honestly don’t know the answer, as it can sometimes be very tough to tell whether the behavior from folks in Congress is driven by short-sightedness or corruption. That said, its not like Senate defeat of EFCA was a surprise - Democrats knew from the get-go that it would lose as a standalone bill, meaning it really is possible they don’t truly want it to pass in the first place. Nonetheless, moving forward, the bottom line is clear: If Democrats really want to get EFCA passed - as American workers need them to and as they should as the supposed party that represents those workers - it’s going to take a hell of a lot more than setting up legislative scenarios that make sure EFCA doesn’t pass.

Couldn't help but think the same thing when I read your diary Joe...


Drinking Liberally in New Milford
ePluribus Media

---

by: Connecticut Man1 @ Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 08:16:05 AM UTC

This is what drives me crazy (4.00 / 2)

After last November there was talk about a major realignment in American politics in the next few cycles - the Bush presidency basically being the stake in the heart of the Republican party, as moderates abandon the theocons and neocons. This would require Democrats taking strong stands to differentiate themselves to the average voter and build new identity. Like Sirota, I think if the Democrats were to embrace economic populism - starting with real election finance reform, embracing the middle class and poor instead of taking them for granted, building unions and institutions, and going forward from there - it could trigger a real paradigm shift.

However, it looks like the current crop of Dem leadership is doing everything they can to steer the boat in the other direction... they're following the blueprint of DeLay and the K-street project, all the while trying to appease their base by throwing up their hands and saying "well... we tried!" It's as bad as an athlete shaving points. But I keep saying it - voters aren't dumb, and if Democrats can't draw a contrast between their way of business and the other side, the Democratic party will pay the price. They have a once-in-a-century opportunity and they're gonna piss it away for business as usual.

"There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning." - Warren Buffet

---

by: joesaho @ Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 16:22:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Change of Consciousness... (4.00 / 1)

I believe that a paradigm shift is essential, if we are to find our way out of our present state. We need less politicians,(in the pejorative sense), and more people willing to courageously embrace a new way of looking at the world.
  I believe this goes to the heart of many people's attitude toward Dennis Kucinich.Essentially, he is challenging us to a new consciousness. What Dennis advocates is not really new, but it seems radical, because it is not part of our socio-economic system. 

But let justice roll down like waters...Amos 5:24a

---

by: Jake Blount @ Thu Jun 28, 2007 at 17:02:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]