Dissatisfied with anti-union statements made by the leaders of the Prince George’s County Democratic Central Committee (PGCDCC), the Metropolitan Washington AFL-CIO sent an ultimatum to every politician in the county: sign a pro-labor pledge or lose labor’s support in the next election. How did the politicians react?
Publicly, mostly with silence. Only five politicians actually signed the pledge: Delegates Barbara Frush, (D-21), Ben Barnes (D-21), Ann Healy (D-22), Doyle Niemann (D-47) and Veronica Turner (D-26), who is an SEIU staffer. But District 24 Delegate Joanne Benson sent this stinging letter back to the central labor council:
Delegate Benson’s letter is refreshingly honest coming from a politician! She admits that the central committee is “under the control of [the county’s State] Senators, which is very unfortunate. The delegates only seem to matter when we are asked to contribute money.” And then she says this: “At a time when we should be working together, we are embroiled in foolishness! Don’t send out another letter!... Signing letters and threatening those of us who have been your faithful voice won’t get it!... The time for kissing rings should come to a halt.”
Amen, Delegate! This dispute is tragic on multiple levels.
First, PGCDCC is nearly irrelevant. As Delegate Benson notes, it is utterly dominated by the county’s State Senators and cannot even discharge its sole responsibility – filling legislative vacancies – with any semblance of dignity. The odious statements by its leaders against a major power base of the party reveals their comical incompetence. MCDCC would never dream of such a thing. (Can you imagine MCDCC issuing statements cheering on the shower nuts?) So why are these people on the central committee? Because the State Senators need a place to deposit their faithful supporters. Such is their prerogative. Politicians have to be allowed to play with the toys in their sandbox. It is just compensation for the abuse they endure from their constituents!
This is not to say that labor’s outrage is unjustified – it is merely misdirected. And here is the second problem: labor is trying to pressure politicians who have little power to remedy the underlying causes of the dispute. (That is especially the case for any County Council Members who received the letter.) This will only cause resentment that is sure to be exploited by labor’s enemies.
The third problem is labor’s use of a written pledge to compel obedience. Politicians cannot be treated like dogs or robots – they are human beings. The best way to deal with potentially helpful politicians is to form relationships with them. Convince them that helping you also helps them. No politician ever delivers 100% of what you want. But if properly brought along, many of them (at least the Democrats) can deliver enough of the time to produce a tolerable record. The rest of them may be convinced to at least not stand in the way of good ideas. No, this is not a path to nirvana, but it is a path to realistic results.
Here is how labor can extract itself from this mess:
1. Go ahead and treat the central committee like the non-persons they are. Evict them from the Sheet Metal Workers union hall. And send a message that if any of them want to run for public office in the future, they will have to perform a lot of damage control to earn any union support. That message alone will divide the central committee and may provoke the leadership ouster that the unions seek. If not, who cares?
2. Quietly start calling the incumbent politicians and tell them the following: “The central committee is screwed up and we will no longer deal with them. But we know you don’t agree with them. We are ready to move on. Let’s work together on our common priorities.”
Then the central committee will return to the muck-splattered irrelevance from whence they came and the negative press coverage will stop. Pro-worker cooperation will resume with the willing. Perhaps a few of the wobbliest politicians will need to be reminded of labor’s sensitivities and perhaps not. But the labor war will end and the Prince George’s political community will settle down to business.
And what would that be? Moving on to the next big fight, of course. This is Prince George’s County after all!
Disclosure: My union, the Carpenters, is not a member of the central labor council.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Prince George’s Labor War, Part Two
Monday, August 18, 2008
Prince George’s Labor War, Part One
In a dispute that is ugly even by the standards of Prince George’s County, much of the local labor movement has declared war against the county’s Democratic Central Committee. The biggest casualty so far is labor’s relations with the county’s politicians.
The battle began last fall when UFCW Local 400 official Anthony Perez filed a zoning appeal to block a new commercial project in Landover containing a non-union Wegmans grocery store. Prince George’s County Democratic Central Committee (PGCDCC) Vice Chairman Arthur A. Turner Jr., assisted by committee Chairman Terry Speigner, sent out a mass email on 9/21/07 protesting the appeal. Turner wrote, “Why is Mr. Perez fighting against those who live, work, play and pray in our beloved Prince George’s County? Why is he acting to keep us in a subservient, second-class, substandard, marginal state?... I am prayerful that his intentions are noble and just and not part of some less than honorable scheme.” The labor movement was outraged at the criticism and Metropolitan Washington AFL-CIO President Joslyn Williams wrote to the central committee, “Labor unions have done more to create and expand the middle class in Prince George’s County than any other institution, not to mention our years of work to get Democrats elected to office... I am saddened and dismayed you would help spread such anti-union sentiments.”
The unions sought the ouster of both Speigner, the central committee Chairman, and Turner, the Vice-Chairman, threatening to evict the committee from its space at the union hall of Sheet Metal Workers Local 100. Ultimately, while neither Speigner nor Turner left, they did agree to add six female union members to the central committee as a compromise. But the central committee broke that deal and added six members approved by the county’s State Senators instead.
So in June, the Metropolitan Washington AFL-CIO dropped a nuclear bomb on every politician in the county: sign an all-encompassing pro-labor pledge that included opposition to the central committee’s leadership or receive no labor support in the next election. We reproduce labor’s ultimatum below:
We’ll find out how the politicians reacted in Part Two.
Thursday, February 07, 2008
More on the Politburos
Today's Post contains a few tidbits about the Montgomery and Prince George's County Politburos... err, excuse me, Democratic Central Committees.
First, the Post reports that PGCDCC used an open roll call vote in selecting District 47 Senator Gwendolyn Britt's replacement. Hmmm, very interesting. Does anyone know how long PGCDCC has been using open votes for appointments? Delegate Saqib Ali had to threaten MCDCC with state legislation before they agreed to open voting.
Second, the same article supplies even more details about County Executive Jack Johnson's maneuvers to thwart his enemy, former Delegate Rushern Baker, from getting the appointment. Apparently, Johnson employed an eyeball-to-eyeball staredown (probably in addition to other tactics) to reverse a vote that was previously pledged to Baker. Now do you think Johnson could have personally stared down the thousands of voters who would have participated in a special election to fill the vacancy? I think not.
Third, in an article chronicling County Council Member Marilyn Praisner's long and distinguished career, the Post notes her support for special elections:In an ironic twist, Praisner and former council member Betty Ann Krahnke, who died in 2002, were the driving forces behind a measure that in 1999 created the mandatory special election for replacing council members. They didn't want to leave those decisions to the political activists on the Democratic and Republican committees.
Actually, I believe the County Council appointed its own replacements prior to 1999 and MCDCC had no role. But Mrs. Praisner favored special elections for vacancies and worked to pass them at the county level. And unlike MCDCC spokesman Milton Minneman, Mrs. Praisner believed in the capacity of voters to choose their own leaders. Remember Minneman's infamous quote in the Examiner?...The county’s Democratic Central Committee spokesman Milton Minneman believes his team is best equipped to make the selections. Because the group’s purpose is to get Democrats in office, and because it spends time interviewing potential replacements and hosting public forums, it is far more knowledgeable than average voters of each candidate’s suitability.
That's right, I thought you remembered that.
“Special elections are often held rapidly, and voters don’t have time to get to know the candidates,” Minneman said. “We think we’re more representative.”
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Thank God for MCDCC (Updated)
Now I know you're shocked to read that statement from me. But I mean it, I really do!
Yes, we didn't know who the Frick was Bill. Yes, we got a bit ticked at them. Yes, we think they eat too many bon-bons in that castle of theirs. Yes, the House Majority Leader made fun of them in a roomful of bloggers. And now MCDCC Member Marc Korman wants to jack up my gas tax. But things could be worse. We could have the Prince George's County Democratic Central Committee.
Consider the silky-smooth job they did in selecting Senator Gwendolyn Britt's successor. Their pick, County Council Member David Harrington, endorsed Michael Steele for Senate in 2006. The runner-up, former Delegate Rushern Baker, refused to rule out running for County Executive. (The reigning County Executive, whom Baker ran against last time, cheered his defeat.) The only female candidate, Delegate Jolene Ivey, received no votes. Another losing candidate, Delegate Victor Ramirez, immediately vowed to run against the winner for Senate. (He told the crowd, "I’m going to ask for this seat the way I should. I’m going to come to you for your vote." So why was he running for appointment?)
But the line of the night belonged to the former Senator's husband, Travis Britt, who was also running for the seat. According to the Gazette:Britt, [county substitute teacher Kenniss Odetta] Henry and Ramirez withdrew their names from consideration early in the meeting, with Britt citing the vicious politics – he claimed backroom deals and mudslinging were rampant – for the succession race.
OK, I promise here and now to never call the MCDCC evil spirits. That is, unless you select someone who endorsed Michael Steele to fill one of our seats!
"These demons are after me, but I’m going to dispel these evil spirits. I am withdrawing," Britt said to the crowd, who gave him a standing ovation.
Update:
The Washington Post's story makes clear that Prince George's County Executive Jack Johnson lobbied hard to defeat Baker and possibly even decided the outcome. Now that's understandable: many politicians will go to great lengths to punish enemies. But the thought of how easily the District 47 appointment process was manipulated makes my skin crawl. It requires much more effort for politicians or political power brokers to manipulate thousands of real, live voters than a handful of Central Committee members. That's why so many politicians are so comfortable with the status quo. The District 47 case makes at least as good of an argument for special elections as anything MCDCC has done.
