Tweet
Karen Ackerman, the political director of the AFL-CIO, just held a conference call/victory lap touting their success in a number of primaries last night, particularly PA-12 for Mark Critz and AR-Sen, where Blanche Lincoln was held to 45% and a runoff. Labor came out strongly in support of Bill Halter and against Lincoln during the campaign, citing her stances against working Arkansans on health care and the Employee Free Choice Act. They spoke to 90,000 people in Arkansas through canvassing and phonebanking, sent almost 2 million pieces of mail for Halter, and spent close to $3 million dollars. And they plan to do so again for the next three weeks. “We look forward to the runoff, we’re in it to win it,” Ackerman said. “We are ready and able to spend whatever we need to spend on behalf of Halter.”
I asked Ackerman about the latest twist in the financial regulatory reform, where Lincoln’s “tough” derivatives bill got targeted for watering down on the night of her election. Would this become an issue now in the campaign for the AFL-CIO, in messaging to their constituents in Arkansas?
“Her timing is fascinating,” Ackerman replied. “She came to her position on this in the midst of a primary fight.” Ackerman suggested that union voters are smart enough to see through Lincoln’s transparent games on derivatives, and this is especially true considering how it’s set to all fall apart within the next day or so. Voters are “looking at her record over time,” Ackerman maintained. “Her record over time was no on EFCA, she waffled on health care, was not for public option, and then she voted with right-wing Republicans against (NLRB nominee Craig) Becker… if you look at her record over the last year, there’s no question why union voters would reject her.”
AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka echoed this in his post-election statement, saying that “Halter gave voters a clear choice between someone who fights for the working families of Arkansas or a DC insider like Lincoln who is in the pocket of Wall Street and big business.” Clearly the Wall Street issue will loom large over the next three weeks. Ackerman did not mention whether the AFL-CIO would specifically target the derivatives kabuki, but I’m looking for a follow-up answer to that.
UPDATE: Two things:
1) AFL spokesman Eddie Vale clarifies: “This is 100% going to be a huge issue because it is yet another example she has no intention of fighting for families in Arkansas. Her bill was just an election ploy, and it is glaringly telling that the amendment to gut it was introduced ELECTION NIGHT.”
2) As I said, the best thing for Wall Street reform would be a runoff. Because now, Dodd spokesman Kirstin Brost is saying he won’t bring up the derivatives amendment he filed. Saving Lincoln’s bacon, again. The banks might actually lose this one!
7 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
BIG MO
Wow, so that I understand — Dodd was going to substitute for Lincoln’s amendment, but now he’s not?
So her original amendment language stands in the bill?
Do I have this straight?
Lincoln introduced a derivatives bill that actually did something. Dodd introduced an amendment last night that would weaken the provisions of Lincoln’s amendment but now Dodd has said that “it’s only a proposal,” whatever that means in Congress, and that Lincoln’s amendment remains, for now, untouched.
OT,
Sorry, no immigration posts up lately and this is breaking news.
Politicians in LA voted last week to impose a boycott on Arizona which will affect about $8 million worth of contracts with the state. City officials will also stop travelling to Arizona.
In a letter to the city Arizona Corporation Commission member Gary Pierce said: “If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation.
“If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona’s economy.” Mr Pierce said if Los Angeles was “serious” about its boycott and not just “posturing” then it would have to consider supplying its own power.
On Hardball tonight they were almost writing Blanche Lincoln off
Important discussion over at Democracy Now about the results of yesterday’s primaries. I think Katrina’s take about sums it up
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/5/19/in_mini_super_tuesday_primaries_defeats
“AMY GOODMAN: Katrina vanden Heuvel, your take on Arkansas right now and what this means, having to—she’s forced into a runoff now?
KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: I think it’s a very important test for progressives to organize in a conservative state and try, in a primary, to change the balance of forces. Even if Bill Halter, who’s no lefty insurgent but does pose a challenge to Blanche Lincoln and her corporate, conservative Democratic policies—I think it’s a test. I do think what happened is that Blanche Lincoln became a kind of reborn populist fighting for tougher derivatives to curb these speculative instruments. So I think there’s a value in that. And I think, you know, we need primaries across this country to change the constellation of forces inside the Democratic Party.
I don’t think this is necessarily a left-right issue. I think it’s about working people versus Wall Street, the banks, corporate interests, the Wal-Marts of the world. And in that sense, this becomes a kind of interesting petri dish, Arkansas, and a state which needs better representation for its working people.”
“I don’t think this is necessarily a left-right issue. I think it’s about working people versus Wall Street, the banks, corporate interests, the Wal-Marts of the world.”
Indeed! I’m really tired of the rhetoric about how this is all so incredibly liberal/leftie. Fooey. NO, no it’s not. It’s about average citizens being treated with the respect that we deserve. It’s about average citizens *attempting* to have our gov’t – purportedly OF the people and BY “the people” NOT the corporations – do the correct thing in terms of serving the needs of our nation and its citizens, and by extension to people everywhere.
Yes, the corporations are very clever at framing the discussion to make Tea Partiers, and even Indies, quake in their shoes at the allegedly leftist “insurgency” (dumb terminology but spewed out for scare-tactic value). While really, the Tea Party, in theory, *should* be happy with what we’re trying to accomplish, which is make Congress be accountable to “the people,” to do the correct thing by “Main Street,” instead of being in the pockets of insatiably greedy Wall St.
Good post. Let’s see what happens. Again: Halter’s no huge progressive gift, but if this sends *any* kind of message to Congress that we, the people, aren’t going to take it lying down… it’s a good thing.
What a co-winky dink. They all cover for each other to benefit the big money interests. Some days you get to play good guy, others you have to play bad guy but it all evens out in the end and everyone gets the dough and all go out to dinner together and laugh and laugh…