OK, now about the family. Anybody just turn 18? Anyone
change addresses? And the IBEW members youre working
alongside. All registered? Precinct polling places havent
moved? Are you sure? Are you willing to ask, and urge them to
register? Why are we asking all these questions? Simple. Like
the title of this message says, when we vote, we win. "We" in
this case means all members of the IBEW and their
families along with the members of the entire labor movement.
History shows that when we are registered to vote and show up
at the polls, we get elected officials who are more sympathetic
to working people. When our numbers are down, the politicians
assume we dont care and follow the dictates of other sources,
usually corporate money.
Thats why we have said it time and time again:
a modern union that is not involved in politics is not representing
its members to the fullest. The activities of IBEW-COPE
may look elaborate, because we use computer spreadsheets, election
board registration data and the latest local union membership
roster to give us the targets for thousands of leaflets, videos,
phone calls, rallies, web sites, home visits, e-mails and more.
But it still boils down to answers to the questions
above and getting union members registered and to the polls on
Election Day 2000.
Get all those questions asked, get IBEW members
registeredand out to vote on November 7and you have a model
union political campaign. Now that Labor Day is heretraditionally
the time Americans really begin to pay attention to political
campaignswe intend to mount that campaign.
With that will come the intense stage of Labor
2000, the AFL-CIO political campaign designed to reach out to
every U.S. union member, first on voter registration, then with
information about the candidates. The IBEW is deeply
involved in Labor 2000, a comprehensive game working full-time
in the election, concentrated in the key districts and our Brotherhood
will have a coordinator in each targeted congressional district
and each state where we have a large number of members.
For IBEW members, the effort this
year will be as intense as weve ever known because the stakes
are as high as weve ever knowna presidential race, elections
for 34 members of the Senate, the entire House and state races
that are doubly important because its a census year. The majority
party in the state legislatures will dictate terms on redrawing
district lines, a decision that can haunt us for the 10 years
before the next census.
All indications show that the election will be
close. Labor will be especially concentrating on the "battleground
states" of the West Coast and in a critical line of states
that starts in the North-east and stretches across the Great
Lakes.
Its amazing what one vote can do. A switch of
just one vote per precinct in 1960 would have cost John F. Kennedy
the presidency. And Hubert Humphrey lost the next close presidential
election by just .04 percent of the popular vote. Because its
winner take all on a states vote in the Electoral College, a
tiny percentage of the vote can have an even bigger impact if
its in the right states.
In 1992, after 12 years of assault on union workers
by Ronald Reagan and George Bush, union households had a good
turnout19 percent of the total national vote. Bill Clinton would
not have won without his 10.6 million votes from union households.
In that election, the union vote for George Bush
was about normal for the Republican nominee. But the siphoning
of union votes by Ross Perot raises the critical issue of third
parties. Lets face it: in U.S. history, third- and fourth-party
adventures are a formula for wandering in the political wilderness.
Your vote is precious. Dont waste it.
At the top of the ticket, the choice between Al
Gore and George W. Bush is unusually clear. Al Gore has been
part of the most pro-labor administration the United States has
seen since the days of Lyndon Johnson. Despite our disagreement
on trade, we know that a President Gore would be on our side
on the vast majority of issues, just as he has been throughout
his career in Congress and as Vice President. George W. Bush
promises a return to the "bad old days" when executive
decisions were made with corporate special interests in mind
while working families got the crumbs. Is this what the working
people of America want to go back to? The election of George
W. Bush would be a disaster for IBEW members on
everything that affects our livelihood and our Brotherhoodnational
economic policy, utility deregulation, national labor law, railroad
and other pensions, occupational safety and health, licenses
for foreign and nonunion telecommunications companies, pay equity,
Davis-Bacon and project labor agreements.
That list can go on and on and it includes the
tremendous impact on union workers from the Presidents appointment
of those who interpret and enforce federal law.
Perhaps the most surprising development in the
2000 elections from what we thought we knew after 1998 is that
the leadership of the U.S. Senate might be up for grabs. A net
change of six seats would turn over control to the Democrats,
a major change because, as they said at the Republican National
Convention, "Colin Powell may be making the speeches, but
Trent Lott is still making the policy."
Thanks to the surprisingly strong showing in the
1998 elections, the Democrats have cut the Republican majority
to 223 in the House of Representatives, where it takes to 218
for control. In a congressional district, its easy to see the
truth of "one vote counts" and how union households
can tip the scales.
House incumbents dont lose very often. In fact,
in all but one election since 1976, more than 90 percent of incumbent
members of the House of Representatives have been returned to
office. Analysts say there are 30 really competitive districts
this year, with another 20 on the "watch" list.
In recent years, the profiling of voters has been
greatly enhanced by such devices as exit polling and computer
programs that keep categories like union members in the permanent
file. The vote from union households as a percentage of total
turnout shows a surgefrom a low of 13 percent of the total in
1994, to 19 percent in the presidential year of 1996 and 23 percent
in 1998.
Demographers have an easy rule of thumb about U.S.
voter turnout. The richer, older, better educated, white suburban
voters are the most likely to vote. If we could get the turnout
patterns high enough to add "union members" to that
list, we would have a victory in every election. All elected
officials would be more thoughtful when they vote on a measure
to limit OSHA rules or to exempt projects from Davis-Bacon.
So far, through the primary election process,
columnists and commentators have given pre-dominant attention
to campaign contributions and the dollars in the war chests of
the parties and the candidates. At least that draws attention
to how badly our system needs reform.
But it also leaves the wrong impression. It suggests
money decides elections. It doesnt. You do. We have fought hard
to have a voice in the political process. Make it heard in this
crucial election year. Register and vote!
Related Articles
