I'll take Max's side of the bet: the EFCA will pass in some form in 2009. How much it has to be modified to get through the Senate depends, in part, on the unresolved Senate races, including the Georgia runoff.
Specter voted for cloture when EFCA was before the Senate before. Assuming that Specter's position holds, and all Dems, Sanders and Lieberman vote for cloture - that's what happened before - and that there are no more Dem pickups - Stevens, Coleman, Chambliss prevail - then labor is shy two votes in the Senate. If Franken prevails in Minnesota and Martin in Georgia - that's a long shot - that's the two votes. Otherwise, two votes shy. I would expect a first round frontal assault, attempt to get the legislation through the Senate as is, pressuring e.g. Collins and Snowe to vote for cloture. Then, I would expect meetings between e.g. the AFL-CIO, C2W and the moderate R Senate holdouts: what do you need to vote yes? That could include e.g. some sweetener tax breaks, it could also include leaving on the floor parts of the bill most vulnerable to court challenge anyway. It would be worth a lot to labor just to get the card check and enhanced penalties for employer violation provisions of the EFCA. It should be always be noted that the benefits of belonging to a union aren't all economic, in the sense of wages. It's also about voice at work, protection from arbitrary and abusive treatment and favoritism. That's true all the time, high unemployment or low unemployment. Even in a deep recession, most workers are employed, and they have a strong interest in the protection of their right to organize. Thea Lee says "this is the AFL-CIO's top legislative priority." I believe her. On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 7:48 AM, Max B. Sawicky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'll take that action, though it might be changed before passage and > signing, > so there could be some ambiguity about the outcome. > > > Jim Devine wrote: > >> I'd bet $10 (payable to Miracle Max) it won't pass during 2009. >> >> On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 5:42 PM, Max B. Sawicky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> One test case for BHO & the Ds is the Employee Free Choice Act, which >>> makes >>> it easier for >>> unions to form with card check rather than secret ballot. It's on the >>> top >>> of the unions' wish list. >>> >>> Assuming you think this is not a trivial piece of legislation, where do >>> all >>> you hot lefts stand >>> on the prospects for the bill? Are you prepared to be >>> embarrassed/pleasantly surprised? >>> >>> I'd say if we get this it's a very good signal of good things to come. >>> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- Robert Naiman Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ambassador Pickering on Iran Talks and Multinational Enrichment http://youtube.com/watch?v=kGZFrFxVg8A
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
