Site Presented By
Friday, Nov 27, 2009
Al Gore gets the nod from the AFL-CIO. But will it translate into strong support from the union rank and file?
Oct 14, 1999 | When Steelworkers President George Becker arrived here for the biennial convention of the AFL-CIO, he remained undecided about whether to join a growing number of fellow labor leaders in endorsing Al Gore for president.
"Nobody has had more problems with trade than the Steelworkers union," lamented Becker, a tenacious and intense crusader on behalf of industrial workers. Becker had been deeply disappointed with the Clinton administration's policies on trade. He would have been a strong supporter of House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt if he had decided to run, but despite a half-dozen meetings with the vice president in recent months, Becker had not been persuaded by Gore's labor pitch. "We were prepared to sit this one out," Becker said. "That's not my nature or the Steelworkers' nature."
But on Tuesday afternoon, on the eve of the endorsement vote by the labor federation's 51-member executive council, Becker and a few of his union's vice presidents sat down with Gore one more time. After nearly an hour, Becker was willing to take a chance with a candidate who had infuriated union members across the country with his impassioned advocacy of the North American Free Trade Agreement in a TV debate with Ross Perot. "I got definite signals from him that he believes these trade laws represent corporate and financial interests, and they should represent people," Becker said. Gore later told AFL-CIO delegates that he would "insist on and use the authority to enforce worker rights, human rights and environmental protections" in future trade deals, a bare minimum requirement in Becker's eyes.
Though the AFL-CIO endorsement gave a small boost to the flagging Gore campaign, it is still unclear just what the endorsement will mean. Polls of union members, which unions did not release, apparently show a less than overwhelming margin of support for Gore. Many union leaders -- even in the unions that supported an AFL-CIO endorsement -- are more interested in local or congressional races or in their organizing work than in a presidential primary.
The endorsement of Gore did not come without strong objections. In the executive council meeting just before the convention vote, two unions -- the United Auto Workers and the Teamsters -- voted against endorsement, and eight others abstained, including the Machinists, Government Employees, Paper and Chemical Workers and the Electrical Workers. Several other unions, including the big Service Employees and Food and Commercial Workers, only decided to back Gore at the last minute as well.
Teamsters President Jim Hoffa has flirted with Bill Bradley and any Republican who will meet with him (even Orrin Hatch, at one point), and while he was in Los Angeles for the convention, Hoffa talked trade over dinner with potential candidate Warren Beatty. It's an opportunity for Hoffa to get publicity and make the Teamsters appear to be a powerful player. There's a history to the maverick behavior. After all, until Ron Carey was elected president of the union in 1991, Teamsters had for many years backed Republican presidential candidates, even after they were readmitted to the AFL-CIO under Jackie Presser's reign. Hoffa also wants some specific concessions, especially agreement from the White House and any endorsed candidate to stop free entry of Mexican trucks to U.S. highways, as NAFTA originally provided.
Internal Teamster politics play a role as well in Hoffa's calculations, according to aides. He has to run again in two years, and his reformer opponents could criticize him for high-handedness if he pushed an endorsement that members weren't involved in deciding. On the other hand, the strong Republican contingent in Hoffa's camp within the Teamsters is not likely to be happy jumping quickly for Gore. Despite that Republican faction and sympathy among Teamsters for the trade views of potential Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan, Teamster Vice President Chuck Mack said that he was confident that the Teamsters ultimately will be in the Democratic camp.
While few unions had such specific quid-pro-quo goals as the Teamster ambition to block Mexican trucks, the debate over endorsement did center around the issue of how much power labor would have. If Gore and Bradley had to fight it out for union member votes, their campaigns might take on a more economic populist tone. But Stewart Acuff, the savvy head of the Atlanta Central Labor Council, argued that delay might give more leverage over the candidate and the campaign, but early endorsement would give more influence over the eventual officeholder, who would remember that help. In truth, unions are likely to have to fight for influence no matter when they endorse, and they can only win that fight if they have their members with them.
