Tag Archives: teachers

Los Angeles Area

Happy Labor Day.

1 Comment

Invariably these days, Labor Day is occasion for progressive intellectuals all over the country to show up on community radio talk shows, academic symposia, and newspaper op-ed pages to ponder the question: Whither labor?

With union density what it is (13% overall, less in the private sector), it’s a discussion worth having, and having often.  Happily however, here in California, we have as muscular a labor movement as ever (or maybe not ever, but in living memory).  If I could post pictures here, I would put up a nice one from this morning’s L.A. Labor Fed breakfast at the Cathedral of Our Lady of Angels, where just about every Southern California Democratic officeholder above dog catcher showed up to honor the organizations that fight for what we now apparently refer to as the “middle class,” and that we once knew better as the working class.  With that kind of political juice, breakfasters were safe to table the discussion of Labor’s Future in favor of that of what unions need to get done between now and November to get a new governor in Sacramento.

The big news of the night: the California Teachers Association has worked out an agreement allowing it to affiliate with the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor.

That may sound less than earth-shattering to those who have other interests than the political machinations of union bureaucrats, but it is actually quite significant.  The 335,000-member CTA is an unaffiliated union, meaning that it does not belong to the California Federation of Labor, the state’s governing body of the AFL-CIO, and by extension, nor to the L.A. Fed, the county’s AFL-CIO governing body.  Yet the teachers union is, arguably, the single most powerful campaigning and lobbying organization in the state.  And the L.A. County Labor Fed is not just another Central Labor Council — it is a legendarily capable labor council.  It has helped launch the careers of many California political stars, including Antonio Villaraigosa.  Fabian Nunez was the L.A. Fed’s political director before winning his seat in Sacramento.  The combination of these two formidable outfits is promising indeed.

So, some good news for Labor Day in California, an occasion usually devoted in progressive circles only to nostalgia and hand-wringing.

Uncategorized

Proposition 89 – Teachers, where do you stand on clean money?

(I posted much of this on DailyKos yesterday, but what with Lieberman, 100K users and terror, it’s probably better to share with more of a California-oriented audience!)

Riding on the wave of energy stemming from YearlyKos, I’ve been enjoying my involvement in the California Clean Money Campaign.  The more I learn about this effort, the more I believe in it and its promise. Is it perfect? No. But Californians have a historic opportunity to enact real reform, one we might not get again soon. And clean money proponents are aware of some shortcomings and already looking to the review process to remedy them should it pass.

I was therefore disappointed to read this press release from the California Teachers Association stating their opposition to Proposition 89, the California Clean Money and Fair Elections Act. I’m apparently not alone. In fact, in volunteering I’ve met several CTA members who have expressed concern about the union’s stance. 

So here’s a question for California teachers — what are you hearing?  And do you agree with the CTA? If you listen to the CTA, you are certainly not hearing the whole story. In the release, we hear several one-sided arguments:

It does nothing to enforce current campaign contribution limits or to limit how much the wealthiest citizens can spend on their own campaigns, while limiting the participation of small businesses, labor unions and non-profit organizations in the political process,” said Barbara E. Kerr, President of the California Teachers Association.

It may not limit what wealthy citizens can spend, but she neglects to note that it does have a provision so that their opponents receive matching funds to level the playing field.  And it’s interesting that she leaves large corporations of her list of organiziations that would be regulated.  As it is, the individual voter is the one whose participation is most limited without Proposition 89. 

“California faces many public finance challenges,” said Larry McCarthy of Cal Tax. “Our roads need fixing, our schools need help, and our health care system is in trouble. What we don’t need is to spend precious tax dollars on political campaigns by candidates and elected officials.”

What we DO need is to see our precious tax dollars spent efficiently and on projects that benefit Californians. When money controls the process, this can’t happen – we are instead faced with a litany of abuses. The amount set aside for Prop 89 amounts to about 0.1% of the California budget. Doesn’t it seem like a worthwhile investment to help make sure the other 99.9% is wisely spent?

Significant portions of similar measures in other states have been declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Ah, and so that means that the crafters of this initiative haven’t learned from those measures?  Give them some credit. Adam B did a great job of explaining some of the differences when the Vermont campaign finance laws were invalidated.

It’s ironic that the CTA calls the initiative “deceptive” when their press release seems to deceive the membership through selective withholding of key facts. And what a sad shame that an organization that rallied along with the nurses against Arnold for denouncing them as “special interests” are now living up to that designation.  Teachers, I hope you’ll learn more on your own about the initiative and then join the nurses and individually  support Prop 89 for real election campaign reform. Just remember the words of our own Governator:

“Special interests have a stranglehold on Sacramento. Here’s how it works: Money goes in. Favors go out. The people lose. We need to send a message: Game over.”