The SEIU Picks Obama
| Thu Feb. 14, 2008 5:53 PM PST
The national executive board of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) endorsed Barack Obama Thursday evening. The members of the board voted electronically following a conference call that was scheduled for 6 p.m. A high level union official tells Mother Jones there was "overwhelming support" for Sen. Obama during the call. The endorsement doesn't become official until union locals representing 60 percent of the SEIU's members actually email in their vote, the official said. The locals have until 7:00 a.m. on Friday to do so, but given the results of the conference call any change in course seems highly improbable. An email from the union confirmed it will make a "major political announcement" on Friday at 1:00 p.m.
The SEIU has stayed neutral in the national contest until now, allowing its state affiliates to endorse any candidate. Many of the state organizations backed former Sen. John Edwards. But Edwards dropped out of the race shortly after a poor showing in South Carolina, where where he was born.
The SEIU's endorsement comes at a crucial time. Hillary Clinton, who has lost eight straight contests since Super Tuesday, is leading in the polls in Ohio and Texas, two delegate-rich states that will vote on March 4. Wins there could conceivably help her narrow the lead Obama has recently opened up in the delegate count. But the SEIU endorsement could alter the balance.
Continues Below
Continued From Above
With nearly two million members, SEIU is the fastest-growing union in North America. It is also perhaps the most politically influential. A November 2006 National Journal ranking (PDF) placed the SEIU first among 20 major national interest groups in terms of political clout. The candidates the union supported had a win-loss record of 10-4 in "competitive" races during the 2006 election cycle. It registered over 4 million new voters and its members knocked on 10 million doors during the 2004 election cycle. It has won battle after battle organizing janitors in Texas, gaining 5,300 members in Houston alone in the past two years. And it has about 27,000 members-cum-potential-door-knockers in Ohio and around 100,000 total in Ohio, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. That's a lot of political action.
The endorsement could also have an effect on SEIU members from demographics that have been voting for Clinton. The union likes to trumpet the fact that it is the "most diverse" union in the United States. Fifty-six percent of SEIU members are women, and it represents more immigrant workers—who are often Latinos—than any other union in the United States. Its members also include many working-class whites. All three groups—women, Latinos, and working-class whites—have tended to vote for Clinton this year. If the SEIU's political muscle helps turn those groups toward Obama, especially in Ohio and Texas, this endorsement could prove decisive.
All this positive news for Obama comes with an important caveat: the huge California State SEIU (656,000 members) endorsed Obama five days before that state's primary. Sure, there wasn't much time before the election to get out the vote, but Clinton still won the state by around 10 points. By endorsing much earlier this time, the national board seems to have learned from the California state council's mistake. (Of course, the Washington state SEIU also endorsed Obama just days before that state's Democratic caucus, which Obama won handily.)
Another boost for Obama will come from the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union's endorsement, which was also decided today. That group has 69,000 members in Ohio and another 26,000 in Texas, according to the AP, and its political organization could do just as much as the SEIU to help Obama rally supporters and get out the vote in those battleground states.
The SEIU and UCFW endorsements should serve as a counterweight to Clinton's AFSCME endorsement, which she obtained in late October. The American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees is another labor powerhouse. By going with Obama, the SEIU and UCFW ensure that Clinton will not have a monopoly on major labor endorsements.
In its endorsement, the UFCW says: "We have the utmost respect for Senator Clinton and her tireless efforts on behalf of working people. And while both Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have a vision to change America, we believe that Senator Obama is the best candidate to build a movement to unite our country that will deliver the type of change that is needed - for good jobs, affordable health care, retirement security and worker safety."
Will that movement of Obama's be able to deliver the nomination? We'll see, but these two big endorsements can't hurt.
Comments
Interesting article. However, some advise from a long-time labour and cooperative business movement activist, if Mother Jones wants to maintain its credibility as a progressive and democratic counter-voice to the dishonest and oppressive corporate media conglomerate, please consider no longer using stupid meaningless terms like "big labour."
It means absolutely nothing in the real world, since labour unions, despite the well-known problems of corruption and bad political within various US labour groups, are in fact cooperative associations of workers that come together to address their common concerns via some level or form of democratic process. They are made up of middle and low income earners, oppressed employees, strapped owner-operators and impoverish unemployed folks. Nothing, "big," as in established or monopolistic about them at all. Just working-class salt of the earth?like the world over.
That's far different than corporate or state capitalist institutions, which are run dictatorially either by select private individuals or bureaucrats or governed by undemocratic share-based voting systems designed to keep a parasitic power clique always in control.
Personally, I have no use for either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, since they have both proven to be slick-talking white-washing guilty liberals, talking progressive garb, while still sucking up to powerful corporate elite interests, which fund most of their campaigns. I think both the SEIU and the UFCW are wasting their time and resources backing either of them.
But if that's the way they voted, then so be it. I just see that they, like most working class US citizens, will end up being let down and disappointed after backed either and will end up not voting or voting republican in protest (which will hurt them even worse) as a result?like usually happens.
Interesting article. However, some advise from a long-time labour and cooperative business movement activist, if Mother Jones wants to maintain its credibility as a progressive and democratic counter-voice to the dishonest and oppressive corporate media conglomerate, please consider no longer using stupid meaningless terms like "big labour."
It means absolutely nothing in the real world, since labour unions, despite the well-known problems of corruption and bad political within various US labour groups, are in fact cooperative associations of workers that come together to address their common concerns via some level or form of democratic process. They are made up of middle and low income earners, oppressed employees, strapped owner-operators and impoverish unemployed folks. Nothing, "big," as in established or monopolistic about them at all. Just working-class salt of the earth?like the world over.
That's far different than corporate or state capitalist institutions, which are run dictatorially either by select private individuals or bureaucrats or governed by undemocratic share-based voting systems designed to keep a parasitic power clique always in control.
Personally, I have no use for either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, since they have both proven to be slick-talking white-washing guilty liberals, talking progressive garb, while still sucking up to powerful corporate elite interests, which fund most of their campaigns. I think both the SEIU and the UFCW are wasting their time and resources backing either of them.
But if that's the way they voted, then so be it. I just see that they, like most working class US citizens, will end up being let down and disappointed after backed either and will end up not voting or voting republican in protest (which will hurt them even worse) as a result?like usually happens.
Submitted by Thank you SEIU (not verified) on Thu Feb. 14, 2008 7:04 PM PST.
Thank you.. You will never regret a vote to Obama.
Hillary is a trader and she is a strongest supporter of NAFTA and H1B Visa program..
Shame on Billary and her co.
More visas are needed because our country is incapable of educating enough technical talent to fill the positions. I don't know if we have raised a generation of dumb asses or if they are all becoming lawyers. Either way, things are screwed up and the level of thinking that got us into this mess isn't going to get us out.
"More visas are needed because our country is incapable of educating enough technical talent to fill the positions. I don't know if we have raised a generation of dumb asses or if they are all becoming lawyers."
Some of them became "creative" mortgage brokers as well. Let's face it: our youth is indeed reading the tea leaves and the "best and brightest" have been entering academic fields which they believe would reward them financially. The market spoke clearly and they listened. All the more reason to re-assert SOME power of government. Maybe my youngest child will want to be a fireman ... if it doesn't mean taking a vow of abject poverty....
"More visas are needed because our country is incapable of educating enough technical talent to fill the positions. I don't know if we have raised a generation of dumb asses"
If we have raised a generation of dumb-asses it's because of the Reagan revolution, and the fact that the right resents paying taxes to support a functional educational system.
We are reaping what we have sown for the past 25+ years.
Submitted by Double Donkey (not verified) on Fri Feb. 15, 2008 8:13 AM PST.
What's the truth about H1B?
Software professionals require the same level of training, experience and initiative as professionals in fields such as law, medicine and accounting -- except those kind of professionals have a 'union' and IT workers don't.
IT workers often get treated like crap -- the same people who'd go nuts if you called a black person a word that starts with 'N' will tell you that IT workers should just accept being called "geeks" and "nerds". IT workers often end up spending years on projects that fail because the people directing them don't understand the technology and human issues involved.
White students have almost entirely disappeared from some schools of computer science: it's no wonder -- IT workers aren't treated like whites...
It looks like this race will come down to the super delegates. It may come down to someone the majority of voters want not being the democratic representative. This will look very bad on whoever that person may be. Hopefully if it comes down to this the super delegates vote along with the majority of voters. This could be another blow to democracy, much like the electorial college.
Nick's got it right. If it comes down to the Super Delegates to decide who is to be the Democratic candidate, and they don't follow the majority of voters, the results will be catastrophic!
It would be a repeat performance of the 2000 election in Florida with the SD's playing the role of Jeb Bush, Katherine Harris, and the Supreme Court. Many would leave the party in protest, and some might not even vote. The McCain camp would be dancing in the streets.
Response to Kirkbrew:
Those H1B visa's are used to bring over Engineer's and IT people, that Corporations can pay half the wages to!
My husband, with a duel masters degree in Electrical Eng., found a job listed at the State Unemplyment Office. He fit the criteria perfectly. They wouldn't refer him to it, "The job's just being posted to meet the legal requirement, the company already has someone overseas their bring over to fill it"
Don't buy into 'Their' (The Corporations) B.S.!!
As a MoJo subscriber and Climton supporter, I can;t stand the constant "whats new and great for Obama" emails I get landing in my inbox each day. Lets just hope SEIU members join their colleagues in Nevada and say "I support my union! I support Hillary!" Who knows what record Obama has with labor? Anyone?
At least The Nation does some parsing and analysis of Obama and Hillary. MoJo has simply drank the koolaid on Obamania!
The national press and TV news commentators are feeding the We Hate Hillary frenzy. The media is poisoning the minds of those who are easily persuaded. Not me, I know Hillary Clinton and she is the best candidate we could have. Look at her record of helping women and children, her work for health care, the honors she has been awarded all her life. This woman is extraordinarily intelligent, gifted, and experienced. She is the one we should be supporting for President of the United States. I am wondering how much of the Kill the Witch syndrome comes from people simply not able to support and respect a woman, no matter how talented, to be in charge of this nation. The prejudice is not really about Hillary, it's all strong, smart women. To continue this bias is to lose half of our nation's leadership talent.
Give Hillary a chance. Give our daughters a gifted role model.
I think it's sad that, when they are losing, strong, smart women -- among whom I like to count myself -- resort to whining about people not being able to handle strong, smart women. There are lots of reasons to vote for Hillary, but there are also many good reasons not to vote for her, and none of the ones I'm thinking of include "witch".
I am a disenfrancised Michigan Democrat. My choices were not on the ballot because THEY followed the rules. HIllary DID NOT. I am PAC chairman of our union local so I vote always!
Hillary is NAFTA. Her husband promoted it, she spoke in glorious terms regarding the New World Order and now the American wrokers, both blue and white collar are suffering......OBAMA..keep repeating the mantra, NAFTA, NAFTA IN YOUR SPEECHES IN OHIO..
SOONER OR LATER, WHEN THEY GO BACK TO THE SHUTTERED NEIGHBORHOODS, CLOSED MILLS AND ENDANGERED AUTOPLANTS, THEY SHOULD GET IT. IT IS BECAUSE OF THE CLINTONS AND THEIR BELIEFS THAT WE ARE SUFFERING!
It's Hilarious when you realize that the Whirlpool plant in Illinois, (where Obama was the state senator and now Federal senator) lost 1600 jobs and he did squat. What's even funnier is that that plant's union supports Hillary! Gee, I wonder why?
Some people have the gift of gab and the ability to enrapture beings, like the pied piper but once these beings wake up they find themselves in the sewer.
H1-B is another fascists tool to cheat the American worker, remember H1-B is part of the Bush Reagan economic ideology. OH Obama said Reagan made the right moves for our country!!
And finally any man who works for the largest slum landlord (Rezko) in Chicago as his attorney ain't helping the little guy, quite to the contrary. Not only that Obama was affiliated with Rezko for 15 years and had accepted large donations from him someone ratted him out about Rezko!
So go ahead shoot yourself in the foot again.
If only Americans would just check the records!
For 35 years Hillary Clinton has worked for children, women and families. Just check her record on line and then vote for real change and for some one who has actually worked for the little guy. Why do you think she was reelected in New York with over a 60% majority. You don't have to take my word for anything here. You can go online and do some digging, a little sweat, a little time and you will get the same answers I got and believe it or not its for your own good!!
If you watched NBC evening news, you will see that a few little "problems" are starting to leak out about Obama. And, very few are talking about one of the 'elephants' in the room --- what to do about Florida and Michigan. If this does indeed come down to super delegates, don't think for a minute that Florida and Michigan voters will be forgotten in the back room dealings.
Well Al, your candidate's husband gave us NAFTA, and we all know what that did for American jobs.
All you have to do is follow the money and you'll see where Hillary has gotten the bulk of her campaign contributions. Obama, on the other hand, doesn't take money from corporate lobbyists what does that tell you? Lots of people like me gave his campaign twenty bucks, and I mean LOTS of people!
And then there's the Iraq war. Your candidate supported the Bush Administration's war time and time again and can't even admit the mistake. What does that say about her judgement? As you know, Obama has been opposed to the war since the beginning.
Yet another Clinton Administration isn't going to end corporate control of our government. How can it when they've got her in their pocket already? I have checked the records, done the digging, sweated the sweat, and spent a little time. My conclusion is that Obama is the better candidate.
"Who knows what record Obama has with labor? Anyone?
Posted by: Jhorner on 02/15/08 at 1:43 PM"
I DO know the Clinton record on labor.
And it sucks.
And that's even BEFORE we deal with Hillary's good buddy and chief strategest, the union-busting Mark Penn.
Tool.
Just because Hillary has done some good in the past doesn't make her the right candidate. I like her somewhat, but too many people absolutely dispise her, which could fire up the Right and lead to another Republican nightmare, which this country just cannot afford.
As a Chicagoan, I wonder why she moved to New York to run for the senate instead of running in Illinois? Does she have any loyalty to her home state? Seems to me she just wanted to be a senator in a state with a lot of delegates so she could get them when running for President (which she denied wanting to do but we all knew was her agenda). Also, she talks about growing up 'middle class' in Chicago, which is false. She grew up in the affluent suburb of Park Ridge, which is certainly NOT middle class.
She also certainly does not 'inspire' me like Barack does. Never in my life has a politician given me goose bumps or moved me to tears, which Barack does almost every time I watch him speak. I know people say that 'inspiration' doesn't make up for experience, but Bush Jr. had no (or bad) experience, his VP and top advisors had a ton, and look where we are now.
I'm willing to take the chance on OBAMA '08!
I know Sen. Clinton's advisors/volunteers probably read this blog -- if so, listen to what the pundits said on PBS tonight on their evening news show and the following Gwen Ifills show. Everyone knows HRC can do the hard stuff, knows HRC has the plans to get the job done & has all the details. What we need from HRC is some of that impassioned speaking.....some of what she and her husband offered to win in the 90's. Hope doesn't belong to the Obama campaign exclusively -- that was once your message. HRC needs to remind everyone that hope was her message long before Obama came into the picture.
That was an awesome, well-argued piece. Well worth sharing with friends. This has been a bit of a heartbreak for me. I so admire John Edwards. I begin to wonder if I have to settle for the "devil I do know, and the Devil I don't" Bravo Mr. Obama for hearing what the people of this country have been screaming for years, even if it took Mr Edwards to force him to take principled stands.
I'm happy to vote for either Hillary or Obama, just so we get the Repos out. If Dems will not rally around whoever wins the Dem nomination, then the Bush/Cheney Evil Empire will continue to rule your country. If you want war for another 25 years, national bankruptcy, foreign takeover of American interests, then stay away from the polls and let the Repos win by default. Stop bickering over Hillary / Obama. Just go and vote for whichever Dem wins.
Thank you.
Well its true Hillary's "HUSBAND"!!! enacted Nafta but it was going through anyways because the GOP controlled Congress. But I guess if Hillary is responsible for Nafta then she is responsible for Bosnia and the quick and decisive victory by Americans and the UN there and lets not forget healthcare, the cost of which was really reasonable, as was gasoline and hmmm, the employment rate, the standard of living in a robust economy and the federal budget was really low, low, low, just about to turn in the green until Bush squandered your children and their children's future. Yeah is there anything else about Bill's term we can blame on Hillary? Lets see; how about our standing in the world; about as high as it's ever been. Ah yes she can take the blame and certainly the credit, its a two way street, you know!
Yes the economy was booming under Bill, health care had federal oversight as did most corporate entities including the oil entity. These greasy oil boys got called on the carpet for trying to gouge the American public. Now they pull athletes on the carpet to prove that Congress is working for you.
And if you really checked the record of Hillary and Obama you would know that she has indeed worked for families for 35 years and if you really are concerned about a better tomorrow you have no choice but to vote for Hillary.And remember amongst the things Hillary did while she was first lady was to reach out to women and children around the world and she tried to get Universal Health care passed but the GOP controlled Congress shot it down!
But Obama has taken care of Obama, like when he was an attorney for the largest slum landlord in Chicago, Rezko and maintained an affiliation of 15 years, with Rezko who is being investigated for wrong doing right now. But hey what's a little slamming of the tenants in the slums? And his plans are Hillary's plans only a month or two later.
And Obama has indeed taken money from lobbyists directly but mostly in a different way. Most lobbyists firms don't give him money directly but their employees bundle up money and donate it him, to the tune of 216,000. Slick huh? Check it out.
All true!!
You said a mouthful Al! I'm disgusted by the Obama fans who think he's the second coming. Do his supporters think McCain, Limbaugh, and the GOP machine are going to give him a pass on REZKO?
He will be torn to shreds in a national campaign and debate and the GOP will be gleefully celebrating another stolen election. Wake up folks -- the GOP want Obama to win the nomination -- they can't wait. And then we'll be blogging and crying in our beer about it. It's pathetic.
35 years ago, Hillary was working for Barry Goldwater. After she failed the bar, she went to work with a law firm and was adamantly anti-union, backing Walmart against workers' rights. It's a shame working people don't look deeper into this so-called experience of hers that has enriched her and her husband at the expense of the American worker. My husband lost one job under Clinton, and now another one under Bush. No more of the same old same old for us.
I am a true believer that people learn from their mistakes. Most of us can say that we have done some less than savory things in our lives...and most of us can say that we are not the same persons we were 5, 10, 25, or even 35 years ago. I know I'm definitely not the same. I think a good person is someone who can say that they have made mistakes and are willing to learn from those mistakes and strive to become a better person as a result. Yes, Hillary may have done some less than savory things in her past...but that does not define what she has done since and the overall good things that have come about because of her.
Capitol Hill is a huge political game, with its own set of rules of engagement. One cannot refuse to play by the rules and expect to get anything done...ehem...Bush Administration is a fine example. Hillary has learned those rules well, to the point where she knows how to use them to her advantage. That is a good thing when you want to bring about change. She is a hard worker who geniunely cares about people and I think she has the ability to lead this country back into prosperity and earn back the respect the United States once had as a world leader.
Interesting article. However, some advise from a long-time labour and cooperative business movement activist, if Mother Jones wants to maintain its credibility as a progressive and democratic counter-voice to the dishonest and oppressive corporate media conglomerate, please consider no longer using stupid meaningless terms like "big labour."
It means absolutely nothing in the real world, since labour unions, despite the well-known problems of corruption and bad political within various US labour groups, are in fact cooperative associations of workers that come together to address their common concerns via some level or form of democratic process. They are made up of middle and low income earners, oppressed employees, strapped owner-operators and impoverish unemployed folks. Nothing, "big," as in established or monopolistic about them at all. Just working-class salt of the earthlike the world over.
That's far different than corporate or state capitalist institutions, which are run dictatorially either by select private individuals or bureaucrats or governed by undemocratic share-based voting systems designed to keep a parasitic power clique always in control.
Personally, I have no use for either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, since they have both proven to be slick-talking white-washing guilty liberals, talking progressive garb, while still sucking up to powerful corporate elite interests, which fund most of their campaigns. I think both the SEIU and the UFCW are wasting their time and resources backing either of them.
But if that's the way they voted, then so be it. I just see that they, like most working class US citizens, will end up being let down and disappointed after backed either and will end up not voting or voting republican in protest (which will hurt them even worse) as a resultlike usually happens.
It seems alot of people, politicians and unions are behind Obama. Sorry, I see a wonderful speaker, but I need to see more than the message. We've elevated this man to a status that I don't believe he has earned. I'm simply not willing to vote for a man just because he sounds good. This election should not be based solely upon a movement and one's ability to excite the masses. Governing this country in this time requires more experience than he has brought to the table. I think we need to begin to apply some serious thought to who we think can really handle the presidency and not let our emotions appoint someone who again claims he will unite, not divide, and be willing to reach across the aisle.
I agree with the people for Clinton. Obama is good but I'll trust Clinton more. I thought Edwards was the best for the middle class. I just want the war over and the money to come back here to help the economy. I don't care what the surge is doing or not doing, it's not helping our roads and bridges. We need to help ourselfs. I sound like a Republican but I'm a super 61 year old liberal.
Comparing Obama to Hitler are we? Well let's just compare JFK and MLK Jr. to the fascists while were at it, cause all that makes a lot of sense (LOL). Oh and Rezko, the only legit news source I heard on it said that Obama did a few hours of work with a church group that had ties to Rezko, wouldn't the legit news sources be grabbing for ratings with the story if there was anything there? Obama in a radical madrasa, not saluting the flag etc. is a bunch of right wing garbage too, and actual TV news shows (that aren't Fox) say so. I see nothing that seems legit from the Obama haters, but the anti-Clinton crowd generally points out things like NAFTA that the Clinton's legitimately did to give us the shaft. What is with the blind faith and half truths? We need change not family dynasty.
The problem I have with unions is that some of them are advocating things like basically continuing to shade immigration law. I know Barack is trying to help people, but there's an issue, there. We live in these Interesting Times, and one way that people have gained entry to this country before for nefarious purposes is by exploitation of the sob-story immigration policy that's existed for years, decades even. Call me paranoid, but...
You want change that a one armed monkey couldn't do, or do you want specifics? How about change from a two family dynasty? How about changing our leaders so we'll have some one who might bring an end to the Bush/Clinton free trade policies instead of creating new ones? How about this time around we pick some one who had the common sense to oppose a useless war? There are so many reasons not to pick some one who's republican lite and so little time to list them all...
The notion that NAFTA was forced on Bill Clinton by the GOP majority in Congress is emblematic of the way Clinton governed--cave into everything the Republicans demand, govern like a Republican yourself, offend no one, do nothing to defend or fight for your principles (assuming you have any), and then try to make peace with the liberals by whining that you just couldn't help it--those mean ol' bullies in the GOP put a pen in your hand and waterboarded you until you were forced to sign their right-wing legislation--but if only the liberals will re-elect you, then right after the election, you'll fight to overturn all the nasty stuff they made you do (NAFTA, welfare reform). Does anyone remember that in 1996, right after signing the welfare reform bill, Clinton argued that he had to be re-elected because he was the only one who could overturn the welfare reform bill that he himself had signed--and that getting rid of it would be his #1 priority after his re-election? Yeah, right. We're still waiting, Bill.
What has this got to do with Hillary? Simply this--she's cut from the same cloth, she's being advised by the same people who taught Bill how to triangulate his way to the White House. That's the pattern--say anything to get elected, sell out your supporters the minute a hint of GOP opposition arises, then whine about how you're really a liberal but your hands are tied by a vast right-wing conspiracy. Yes, Hillary says all the right things and pushes all the right butttons to get the liberal vote, but if she gest to the Oval Office (God forbid), she'll sell out every progressive ideal in a New York minute. In the 90s she was a big NAFTA supporter. Now she runs gainst it, promising that when she is President she'll go right to work on eliminating its worst aspects. Don't hold your breath.
But of course, none of this matters. Ya gotta vote for Hillary because she's a strong, smart woman! Never mind that she's also a liar and a phony--if you vote against her, it's because you're threatened by a strong, smart woman.
As a strong, smart woman myself, I'm supporting Obama.
So happy for you Hollie that all the strong, smart women struggled and battled for equal rights, civil rights and women't liberation, so you now have the right to so arrogantly and cavalierly toss it away. Perhaps, because of those same women, you have been able to think about other things and move up in the world. Maybe people should think about this: If it was a charismatic woman who was delivering inspiring speeches, but had so little experience and was the same age as Obama, she would be laughed off the stage!! She would never have gotten nearly so far in the process.
