Harry Reid on EFCA

Yesterday, Senate Democrats convened the third annual Senate Progressive Summit, a day-long series of panels with the senators and various progressive media folks, Mother Jones, The Nation, Air America producers and hosts and number of bloggers. Greg Kaufmann was there and passes along these nuggets:

Sen. Harry Reid said he would like the Senate to take up EFCA this summer. An aide later said that might be optimistic -- that it wouldn't be brought up until Dems are confident they have the 60 votes needed to stop a GOP filibuster….

Reid also said he was increasing the funding for Sen. Carl Levin's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations so that Levin could look into the Bush Administration's record on torture and other matters….

Levin said he hoped to have a full report on the DoD and torture in the next couple of weeks. The Executive Summary is already available here

….

Also regarding Levin… since he's the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee it was a bit disturbing that he thought the current plan for Afghanistan calls for 10,000 additional troops. It's actually 20,000-30,000 -- nearly doubling our presence there. Later Sen. Bernie Sanders cited the correct numbers in voicing his concern about President Obama getting bogged down in Afghanistan as we are in Iraq.

Comments (32)

1. Reid knows EFCA is a fight. Too easy to portray it as "Dems want to take away the secret ballot...cornerstone of free elections...to help their union thug friends!"

   He'll need to get the blue dogs onboard solidly and pick up a Snowe or Collins to hold off the filibuster and that'll mean successful passages of meat-n-potatoes economic stimulus stuff.

   (enough cliches?...heheh)

   Posted by Mask at 01/22/2009 @ 09:44am

2. Employee Free Choice Act

   for those out of the loop...

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/22/2009 @ 10:11am

3. Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/22/2009 @ 10:53am | ignore this person | warn this person

   "For all the clamor from liberals about rights to privacy, they want to remove it when it comes down to someone's vote on unionization."

   ok...what does privacy have to do with this?

   "This is merely an attempt to intimidate workers into voting for a union, which is nothing new when it comes to unions."

   how so? how is this an effort to intimidate?

   "Intimidation is a central tactic in these marxist entities."

   marxist? how? organizing into a union is marxist? employers, like walmart for example, NEVER intimidate employees, NEVER try to exploit, do they?

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/22/2009 @ 11:14am

4. i think that words like "marxist" or "socialist" or "communist" just sort of become buzzwords for the hard right.

   i have often obversely aped this sort of high charged intellectual sloth by slinging terms like "fascist" with impunity at our marxophobic fellows on the "far right"...

   jeez, fascists, the mccarthy era ended a LONG time ago...

   hell, the soviet union collapsed a while back and china is increasingly appearing to be CINO (communist in name only).

   what? cuba and venezuela spreading commernist poison? gimme a break.

   not that socialism is dead by any means, and not that i think of it as a boogyman bad word.

   its just a natural reaction to satano-aynrando fascism you seem to love.

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/22/2009 @ 11:29am

5. The cons are attempting another propaganda regimen. You will never hear/read them talk about the intimidation, law breaking, beatings, and outright theft practiced by companies that want to hire cheap (often illegal) labor.

   Unions keep out illegal immigrants, I would think that alone would start the cons to doing some deeper thinking, instead of trying to call all unions communist plants.

   Remember, up till Nov 4th, 11:00pm, Obama was a Marxist threat. Now the cons claim they are thrilled at the upcoming Obama presidency. Do not allow the new Macarthyism to propagate.

   Posted by crabwalk at 01/22/2009 @ 11:33am

6. Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/22/2009 @ 10:53am More drivel from the ignorant. Who's going to purchase policies from you when there's no cash? Start using your head, you paper shuffling dummy. The only thing propping up the wages "awarded" by the "beneficent" employers in non-union houses is the standard set by the unions themselves!

   It didn't take long for you wing nuts to abandon your conciliatory shock after Obama taking the oath of office. Hope Katrina directs a regular purging of types like yourself. Want to see monickers like lvliberty XIII, Happyshorthorn & Yorejomama appearing here at the Nation.

   Posted by Sorelish at 01/22/2009 @ 11:38am

7. Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/22/2009 @ 10:53am

   Curious, on what SPECIFIC grounds would the USSC declare EFCA un-Constitutional?

   Posted by Mask at 01/22/2009 @ 11:44am

8. The act does not deny workers their right to vote in a union election, as some conservatives maintain but rather allows workers to choose between signing a membership card and having an election.

   Posted by crabwalk at 01/22/2009 @ 11:46am

9. Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/22/2009 @ 11:49am | ignore this person | warn this person

   ok...no problem. i would indeed suspect that many union leaders and workers have socialist tendencies. most people in this country do, whether they would think of it as such or not.

   but i still wonder about the term "marxist". there were and are many veins of socialism and marxism was simply the most famous or notorious. are they really "marxists?

   but why were/are unions formed in the first place? because evil, greedy, slothful workers just want to push around management? are such organizations formed in a vacuum of causality other than the moral/ethical shortcomings of the workers?

   it would be a wonderful world indeed if ANY group, including management/ownership as well as unions were perfect, but that ain't the world i live in, nor you.

   look - i am NOT saying that unions are perfect nor am i saying they have not from time to time pushed a little too hard for their own good...

   but demonizing the labor movement while ignoring the reasons it exists is a tad disingenuous, is it not?

   ps: how you doing, larry?

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/22/2009 @ 12:00pm

10. Marxist? So what?

    Employers negotiate with all their suppliers, with banks, and with government agencies. They can negotiate with labor, too.

    In other words, Miss lvliberty1, tough feces.

    BTW, if you can call labor "marxist", can I call business "fascist"?

    Cause I like to do that. It says a lot about their tactics when it comes to dealing with working people not satisfied to accept crumbs brushed off the tables of the rich.

    Posted by MrJayTee at 01/22/2009 @ 12:08pm

11. "This new company is pretty much recession proof in a state like California where everyone who drives a car and/or has a mortgage is required to have insurance. And many apartments now require renters insurance."----Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/22/2009 @ 12:06pm

    Larry, that "required insurance" is a GOVERNMENT MANDATE, is it not?

    Ergo, your recession proof business, that you will do so well with....comes at the price of the car and home owners LIBERTY....does it not???

    Posted by Mask at 01/22/2009 @ 12:21pm

12. Looks like another round of Neo-conumdrum

    Marxism bad, Marx had no use for religion

    Socialism bad.

    Christianity at it's core has socialist philosophies.

    The military is run under socialist papadigm, give up freedom , get security. Fre healthcare, free child care, money for college, free laundry

    Both Christ and the military are beloved by the right.

    bzzztttt.

    Easy answer, attack those that want a fair days pay for a fair days wage. Accuse them of being communists, even though socialism and communism are just cousins, much like free markets and black markets.

    Meanwhile, many on the right support MFN status for communist countries, mainly because the neighbors of those on the right want too much to make widgets.

    Example, Republic Window and Door. The owner lives in a 2 million dollar house. He could not continue that lifestyle while paying a whopping $14/hr. So, in order for HIM to keep his 2 million dollar home, he has to close his factory, attempt to violate US law and contracts, and move to Iowa, where the immigrants will work for $9/hr.

    Meanwhile, back at the ranch, their former VP candidates husband joined a group whose leader pronounced "hatred for the American government" and cursed the American flag as a "damn flag." "The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government,"

    The founder was killed in a plastic explosive sale gone awry. But, they focused on Bill Ayers.

    Who hates America?

    Posted by crabwalk at 01/22/2009 @ 12:22pm

13. LUVSLIBERTY is opposed to MFN for China, for the record. The problem is, those he votes for are in favor of it.

    Posted by crabwalk at 01/22/2009 @ 12:33pm

14. The Employee Free Choice Act does not take away the right to vote it gives that decision to the the employees instead of to the employer. Under the original NLRA the employer had no right to interfere with the decision of the employee in uniojnizing. The employer currently uses the six weeks aor more between filing a petition for an election and the date of the election to intimidate emplyees. When 25% of employers fire workers during organizing campaigns, that is behaving as a thug. As a union organizer, i.e. labor agitator I have seen the intimidation used against workers with one-on-one meeting, captive audience meetings, threats of business closing. Even when employer are found in violation of the rights guaranteede under the NLRA, the only punishment is to post a notice of bad behavior.

    Labor Agitator

    Posted by wpjk at 01/22/2009 @ 12:59pm

15. Now THIS is a saver...(and good LVLIB flip-flop material for the next round of domestic policy discussions)--

    "Not at all, liberty does allow you to be foolish...So I feel like I'm helping people get through this economic cycle.

    Furthermore these so-called mandates when it comes to auto insurance are to protect the consumer against people who don't have coverage such as illegal immigrants.

    And getting people the right coverage on their homes is often a real lifesaver."-----Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/22/2009 @ 12:44pm

    So let's see...government regulation which "stops people from being foolish"..."helps people get through this economic cycle (recessions)"...."protect the consumer"....and is a "lifesaver".

    WOW....Now, folks, what kind of political ideology does THAT sound like????

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 01/22/2009 @ 1:02pm

16. Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/22/2009 @ 1:23pm

    Again, Larry, it boils down to THE GOVERNMENT mandating certain things...things that the citizen/consumer MUST purchase, else face legal sanction....in order to "protect them and others from accidents and misfortunes that they may not have the resources to cover".

    So, if "others" get stuck with emergency room bills from people who have no health insurance....isn't that a liability "infringing on someone else's rights"???

    Posted by Mask at 01/22/2009 @ 1:37pm

17. Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/22/2009 @ 2:02pm

    So basically when it comes to States' Rights, as long as it's not the Fed...you have no problem with a State being "socialist"?

    In fact, in your case, it has enhanced your own business?

    Posted by Mask at 01/22/2009 @ 2:20pm

18. I have a very bad feeling about the EFCA. If this bill passes, it will prove to be absolutely devastating. This bill makes no exceptions for small businesses. EFCA will allow uninformed and misinformed people to strong arm every business that they come across.

    And if you're a mom and pop that can't afford the additional cost of paying to have union workers, you're gonna suffer from heavy penalities and fines handed down by the feds because you didn't give the workers what they wanted. God forbid if they file for bankruptcy or go completely out of business.

    Posted by ACook at 01/22/2009 @ 2:40pm

19. Posted by ACook at 01/22/2009 @ 2:40pm

    I have to disagree. If all employers acted fairly toward their employees, there would be no need for unions. Since that is not the case, here we are. I will admit that power does corrupt and, for unions, the more people the more power. But that's with any entity. The larger it gets, the more opportunities for misconduct. Anyway, I've seen the intimidation by employers. There are working class people who get screwed everyday by their employers, public and private. If businesses are doing the right things for their employees, they have nothing to worry about. Their workers will see no need for a union and will reject it. Of course, intelligence and common sense isn't endowed upon everyone, so manipulation can occur. Those actions, however, are not indicative of all unions. Everyone bitches and moans about unions but I live in the south where unions have little power and are much needed. The most we can do is hold businesses accountable to their own rules and regulations as well as to the letter of the law.

    Posted by k330k at 01/22/2009 @ 2:57pm

20. Posted by k330k at 01/22/2009 @ 2:57pm

    Now, I disagree with you. Many small business (with fewer than 7 workers) don't have corrupt business practices nor do they mistreat their employees. They're honest and very hardworking.

    I see EFCA causing one of two situations for small businesses: 1. the business may deliberately go out of business to prevent unionization or 2. the business will operate under a family-runned entity and never hire outsiders.

    Perhaps we'll see a boon in self-employment. Everyone will be their own boss/employee.

    Posted by ACook at 01/22/2009 @ 3:31pm

21. Posted by ACook at 01/22/2009 @ 3:31pm

    Try this for some enlightening info-

    unionreview.com/small-business-owner-labor!

    Posted by Sorelish at 01/22/2009 @ 6:43pm

22. EFCA will pass in some form in this 111th Congress. And it's been a long time coming. Having been involved in organizing a union a number of times, I have seen some unbelievable abuses carried out by employers in the 2 or so months that it takes between filing and voting. It's like living in a spy vs. spy game world of intrigue, intimidation, deception, secret meetings at an undisclosed location, betrayal and subterfuge. And not in a FUN way.

    It will be a fine day when this legislation passes and a victory for the American worker.

    Posted by chaoszen at 01/22/2009 @ 7:13pm

23. Posted by Sorelish at 01/22/2009 @ 6:43pm

    I read it and it wasn't enlightening at all. The person that wrote the letter owns a bakery and doesn't realize that his suppliers will go up on their prices due to EFCA rules. In turn, this guy will pass those costs directly to his customers because if he doesn't, his bottom line gets eaten away. Which means he'll have to cut back somewhere and quite possibly, in the process, lose some of his reqular paying clients. In short, this will effect many small businesses.

    BTW, someone should write to the Denver Post and remind them that Sam's Club and Costsco are not opened to the public like Walmart is. You have to pay a membership fee every year or have another member sponsor you in.

    Posted by ACook at 01/22/2009 @ 7:27pm

24. The person that wrote the letter owns a bakery and doesn't realize that his suppliers will go up on their prices due to EFCA rules. In turn, this guy will pass those costs directly to his customers Posted by ACook at 01/22/2009 @ 7:27pm

    In the event that suppliers prices go up (which may not happen at all) and the bakery has to raise prices a little (maybe 10 cents a loaf). The customers will have to pay slightly more. But guess what! Due to higher wages and better benefits in the workplace, the consumer probably won't care. Amazing huh?

    Posted by chaoszen at 01/22/2009 @ 7:36pm

25. Aren't repugs fond of saying "A rising tide raises all ships"? Unions are responsible for a thriving middle class. A thriving middle class is responsible for a robust economy. A robust economy is responsible for more business startups small and large which employ more people. And on and on..

    Posted by chaoszen at 01/22/2009 @ 7:44pm

26. Posted by ACook at 01/22/2009 @ 7:27pm

    Oh gosh, the old " they'll just pass the cost on to the consumer" line.

    Think along those lines next time the prospect of a pay raise comes your way. Why, you'd just be fueling inflation! And since you're in the health industry, maybe destroying a family in the process.

    Of course you would probably lobby for a staff reduction so you could get the raise & please your bean counter bosses at the same time. Or maybe no raise & just keeping your job.

    Posted by Sorelish at 01/22/2009 @ 8:27pm

27. mployers, like walmart for example, NEVER intimidate employees, NEVER try to exploit, do they?

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/22/2009 @ 11:14am

    As Union Nears Win, Wal-Mart Closes Store by Adam Geller

    NEW YORK - Wal-Mart Stores Inc. says it will close one of its Canadian stores, just as some 200 workers at the location are near winning the first-ever union contract from the world's largest retailer.

    •••••••••••••••••••••••••

    Furthermore these so-called mandates when it comes to auto insurance are to protect the consumer against people who don't have coverage such as illegal immigrants.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/22/2009 @ 12:44pm

    such as.....

    ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶

    And saving people money through a business transaction is not the same as a govt run transaction.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/22/2009 @ 1:18pm

    well, my brother pays about a quarter of what i do because his province has gov. car insurance.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/22/2009 @ 10:47pm

28. Posted by chaoszen at 01/22/2009 @ 7:36pm

    What if I'm a budget and can't afford the additional cost? Then what?

    Posted by ACook at 01/22/2009 @ 11:10pm

29. Think along those lines next time the prospect of a pay raise comes your way. Why, you'd just be fueling inflation! And since you're in the health industry, maybe destroying a family in the process.

    Of course you would probably lobby for a staff reduction so you could get the raise & please your bean counter bosses at the same time. Or maybe no raise & just keeping your job.

    Posted by Sorelish at 01/22/2009 @ 8:27pm

    I do and but I won't be the one destroying the family, it'll be your beloved democrats. Actually, we're on a hiring freeze right now.

    Posted by ACook at 01/22/2009 @ 11:18pm

30. Posted by ACook at 01/22/2009 @ 11:18pm

    So are you on an admissions freeze too?

    Those nasty unions are sooo concerned about staff to patient balance.

    You must be in admin. I can't believe you're in patient care.

    Posted by Sorelish at 01/23/2009 @ 12:19am

31. You must be in admin. I can't believe you're in patient care.

    Posted by Sorelish at 01/23/2009 @ 12:19am

    You're only partially right. I'm not on the unit floor as much. I found out late last year that myself and 3 other nurses were going from hourly to salary. Of course I was very pissed.

    Posted by ACook at 01/23/2009 @ 12:52am

32. 'Martha's neighbors know her as a high-ranking district official of Zimbabwe's ruling ZANU-PF Party, the woman who drills local children each Friday in the party doctrine. But in her heart, the 38-year-old widow supports the opposition and keeps a Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) membership card hidden in a cooking pot.

    "We just want someone who can give us food, hospitals, school fees. A better life," says Martha, explaining why she voted for MDC candidate Morgan Tsvangirai.

    There are many Marthas here, people who marched to ZANU-PF anthems and cheered President Robert Mugabe at rallies, while secretly planning to vote for Mr. Tsvangirai. "People pretend to be ZANU-PF because they are afraid. They wear the T-shirts and go to the rallies, but inside, they don't believe," she says.

    ...

    "I am happy because I finally got to vote," says a jubilant Colin Chipepera, after waiting for more than 12 hours in one Harare voting line.

    "I think this is the final nail on the government's coffin. Even with all their tricks, there are too many of us."' -- 11 March, 2002 -- Christian Science Monitor -- http://www.csm onitor.com/2002 /0311/p06s 02-woaf.htm

    Posted by HonestLiberal at 01/23/2009 @ 10:26am