Campaign 2000: A Labor Perspective compiled by Jeff Burman With the California and New York presidential primaries rapidly approaching, it's encouraging to see labor issues enter the cautious, high-stakes arena of presidential campaigning. Beyond the safe, bread-and-butter issues of increasing the minimum wage, improving education and giving patients the right to sue their HMOs, there's been riskier talk of an "income gap" from Vice President Al Gore and bold promises of labor law reform by former New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley. Both have championed the issue of federally guaranteed health care for children and both have pledged their support for organized labor. McCain Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona comes to the campaign as a bona fide national hero, having endured five and a half years as a prisoner of war in Hanoi. This galvanizing ordeal seems to have given him a singular sense of autonomy. McCain's disdain for the influence of corporate money in politics led him to cosponsor the McCain-Feingold bill to reform political fundraising. Candidate George W. Bush recently took a jab at McCain's plan, saying it would hurt the G.O.P. since it allows unions to contribute to Democrats. McCain agreed, and then went further, calling for unions to ask each member for permission to use a portion of their dues for political advocacy, an idea that was the crux of failed California prop. 226 in 1998. McCain-Feingold, however, contains no such language. McCain has also gone where few Republicans have dared to go-- calling for cuts in corporate welfare and "military welfare." Compare McCain to Richard Nixon. If Nixon, with his anti-Communist credentials, was able to open up trade talks with China, then perhaps McCain, with his impeccable military credentials, could slow down the expansion of Pentagon spending and redeploy funds to neglected, worker-friendly programs. Accusing elected officials of misdirecting "defense dollars to their political priorities rather than to vital needs," McCain proposed cutting $6.4 billion from the Defense budget, as well as a reduction of $975.2 million in military construction. He also wants to cut $5.4 billion in corporate welfare. Buchanan As the Democrats try out pro-labor messages, letting them dance before the American electorate like brightly colored balloons, another candidate does a different kind of dance. Pat Buchanan appeals to union rank and file with his slams at big business and his opposition to the job flight caused by NAFTA and globalization. But this is the same Pat Buchanan who, on CNN's "Crossfire", gloated over Reagan's firing of union air traffic controllers and the same Buchanan who praised former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet as a "soldier-patriot". So, it should come as no surprise that in his recent book, "A Republic, Not an Empire", Buchanan suggests that America should have encouraged the Nazis when they turned toward Eastern Europe in 1941, aiming their weapons at Stalin's Soviet Union. Bush Texas Governor George W. Bush, or "Dubya" as he's known in Texas, is not exactly a friend of labor. "I can't think of a single issue of substance where he has been on our side," said Texas AFL-CIO director Rick Levy. The Texas Workers' Compensation system has been largely dismantled. The days when labor would try to throw its weight behind something like a farm workers' minimum wage are gone, and labor conventions where delegates called for the repeal of the state's anti-union, right to work law are now relics of the past. Governor Bush crushed one labor initiative that required the Texas Alcohol Control Board to tell its agents why they were being fired. Bush vetoed the measure, saying "The bill would grant [employees] a due process property interest in their employment positions." In his appointments, Governor Bush has been just as chilling. To fill a vacancy on the Texas Supreme Court, Bush appointed a Houston lawyer who had written what some believe to be the most radical anti-labor decision handed down by one of the most conservative courts in the nation. "Texas-Mexican Railroad v. Bouchet" eliminated all job protections for workers who take employment related complaints to attorneys. So, if workers were to file suit against their employer, they would very likely lose their jobs. Bush says that states should be able to opt out of national increases in the minimum wage. More important, he wants to use 83% of the anticipated federal budget surplus for tax cuts rather than to revive job training, workplace safety inspections, daycare, and other social programs cut to the bone in the 1980s. Bush also fought to hold the line on health insurance for children whose families earn too much to qualify for Medicaid and too little to buy private health insurance. If eligibility maximums were to be set at 200% of the federal poverty level, more than 500,000 kids would qualify for low-cost insurance. Bush insisted, instead, that the line be drawn at 150%, eliminating 200,000 children in a state second only to California in the number of uninsured children. "It shouldn't even be a fight," said Austin Democratic Representative Glen Maxey, who then pointed to several Republican governors who had agreed on higher levels. "[New Jersey Governor] Christine Whitman is even going to 300%," he noted. Gore What Al Gore lacks in charm, he makes up for with impeccable insider access and a superior field operation. He is also the resounding choice of organized labor. Over the last seven years, when then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich tried to gut OSHA and the NLRB, block an increase in the minimum wage, end Davis-Bacon protections for strikers, and kill the Patients' Bill of Rights, Gore was in the trenches, shoulder to shoulder with organized labor. Earlier, during his seven years in the Senate, representing a state in the heart of the anti-union South, Al Gore voted to protect workplace health and safety and community wage standards. He also defeated attempts to bring back company unions and to undermine the 40-hour week. The centerpiece of the Vice President's campaign is called "Closing the Opportunity Gap." Vowing to revolutionize public education, Gore has offered a $115 billion plan to provide universal preschool for 3- and 4-year-olds, financial incentives to reduce class size and direct financial support for teachers' salaries in impoverished school districts. He has also offered a five-year $22 billion program to give tax incentives to employers that provide on-site daycare. He promises to raise the standard of living for all by closing the "Innovation Gap," including a business tax credit for training and a promise to invest more in improving the prospects for American manufacturing. On health care, Gore is calling for a higher level of support for uninsured children. Gore proposes to expand the eligibility maximum to 250% of the poverty level, or $41,000 a year for a family of four. The Vice President also would allow uninsured parents of children who qualify, the right to buy insurance at reduced rates. This would help as many as 7 million adults. On trade issues, Gore and the AFL-CIO do differ. Gore supports the World Trade Organization and NAFTA, as does Bill Bradley; organized labor wants specific guarantees that are enforceable. Gore supports China's entry into the WTO, organized labor does not. Based on his overall record, organized labor believes that their interests are best served with Vice President Gore. Bradley In an Associated Press comparison of 2,137 roll call votes that both democratic candidates cast from 1985 to 1992 (when their Senate tenures overlapped) they voted alike 79% of the time. On bills favored by the AFL-CIO, their records were virtually identical: Gore 88%, Bradley 86%. Yet Bradley did vote for President Reagan's 1981 budget cuts, which led to larger federal deficits and reduced social programs. Bradley has distinguished himself by offering a $65 billion plan to provide universal health insurance for children, including a subsidy for uninsured adults. "The lesson that our leaders-- and Al Gore--seem to have learned from the health care defeat of 1992 was that big, bold solutions to a national problem cannot happen in Washington, so let's do a few small, symbolic things," Bradley said. "That was the wrong lesson." Bradley proposed a $400 million a year plan to help community colleges train workers, young and old, to prepare for the job market. He called for a $2 billion a year matching grant to help states create partnerships with private providers of childcare and education for preschoolers. He also called for an extension of the popular Family and Medical Leave Act-- which guarantees workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid family and medical leave-- to firms with as few as 25 employees. The current minimum is 50. The total annual bill for Bradley's new initiatives is $77 billion. Bradley has also spoken directly to labor law reform, boldly calling for a ban on the practice of hiring replacement workers during union-organized strikes. Bradley told the Iowa State AFL-CIO convention that if someone is fired for organizing co-workers, the employer should pay three times back wages plus punitive damages. Current law calls for only the simple payment of back wages. The "Vision Thing?" Is this just a case of liking a red balloon over a crimson one? Are these candidates defenders of the status-quo, or are there really some meaningful proposals here? As Joe Klein, author of "Primary Colors" wrote, "This time, just about every major candidate has proposed at least one significant, politically risky initiative. Unfortunately, never have so many been so admirable to so little effect." The trick here, is to get out and prove the cynics wrong.   Reprinted from The Motion Picture Editors Guild Newsletter Vol. 21, No. 1 - Jan/Feb 2000   Guild Home | Newsletter Home | Top of Page   Copyright © 2000, All Rights Reserved by The Motion Picture Editors Guild, IATSE Local 700