Since the start of the year, six Senate Democratshave bowed to pressure from business groups and flip-flopped on the Employee Free Choice Act: The six Democrats who have flipped are: Tom Carper (DE), Blanche Lincoln (AR), Ben Nelson (NE), Mark Pryor (AR), Arlen Sepcter (PA), Jim Webb (VA). The chief EFCA sponsor, Iowa Senator Tom Harkin, today issued an ultimatum to the six Senate Democrats: support a compromise, or I will put the original bill on the floor, and your opposition to labor will be recorded in stone:
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), the chief sponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act, has a warning for Democratic foes of his flagship legislation: Work with me in earnest on a compromise, or I'll put the bill on the Senate floor and you can vote your conscience.
That may not sound like a grave threat, but it may well be. Two of the bills main skeptics--Sens. Arlen Specter (D-PA) and Blanche Lincoln (D-AR)--face re-election next year, and both, for different reasons, may ultimately need union support to prevail. Specter, who tacked to the right and came out against EFCA before becoming a Democrat, is facing pressure from the Democratic base and Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) to move left or face a primary challenge.
And at least one high level union official has suggested that if Lincoln doesn't come around and support an EFCA compromise, she may face a green party challenger, in addition to a Republican challenger, in the general election.
Supporting a Green Party candidate against Lincoln almost certainly won't happen. The executive boards of most unions simply are not radical enough to use such a strong tactic to defeat Lincoln, and thus send a message to other Democratic opponents of EFCA. It is actually more likely that Arkansas unions would support a Republican challenger to Lincoln than a Green Party challenger.
Given that six Senate Democrats have flipped, right now a compromise is the only path. However, there is a problem with any potential compromise. The business groups who have organized against EFCA are not looking for a compromise, and have stated publicly they want to defeat any form for EFCA:
THE POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES: In place of majority sign up -- which "probably won't" be in the final bill, according to EFCA's chief sponsor, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) -- a few alternatives have emerged. One would involve a sped-up election process, which advocates hope would blunt employers' ability to intimidate workers from organizing. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) has floated another proposal "that would use mail-in elections." Under the plan, "if a majority mailed the ballots to the National Labor Relations Board, the NLRB would recognize the union." Both of these aim to address one of the core problems with the current system for forming a union: the employers have nearly unlimited access to intimidate -- and ultimately fire -- workers who want to organize, while facing little in terms of penalties. In fact, a study released today found that "employers threatened to close plants in 57 percent of [union] campaigns and threatened to cut wages and benefits in 47 percent," while firing workers in 34 percent of campaigns. The business lobby, meanwhile, has already committed itself to opposing any compromise. "Let us be clear and frank on this matter; there can be no acceptable 'compromise' on any issue of labor law reform due to the very real threat posed by EFCA," wrote the Coalition for a Democratic Workforce, a front group composed of the Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, among others. As the Washington Post Editorial Board wrote, "That hardly sounds like bargaining in good faith."
Of course the business groups aren't interested in compromise and bargaining in good faith. The entire point of the Employee Free Choice Act is that businesses don't bargain in good faith with their employees.
The test now for the backstabbing Democrats is whether they will support a compromise that will anger both labor and the business groups to whom they kowtowed. Looking at their situation from a pure power perspective, their best bet is probably to go with the "compromise." While labor will be interested in maintaining a relationship with these Senators if such a compromise is passed, long-term there is no pleasing the business groups opposed to EFCA. |
