DOES GERRY CONNOLLY NOT RESPECT UNIONS?

One of the most important supporters of the Democratic Party is organized labor.  Those who say the party owes its own support and gratitude to labor are correct- and it's because we have shared values, even if labor doesn't always support every Democratic candidate.

Which is why I was shocked to see this!  A party being organized on Gerry Connolly stationery- and being handed out by John Jennison and George Burke- and they couldn't even bother to get the union bug on this flyer, showing they had gotten it union printed. 

Totally pathetic- a slap in the face to our union friends- and inexcusable.  

Comments

[Notgretchenbulova]

Bad News. Always get the union bug.

You're kidding, right Ben? Talk about a great excuse to attack Gerry Connolly for a relatively minor slip-up. I'm sure it's an accident and that Chairman Connolly is a staunch supporter of organized labor.

[JMU Duke]

Gerry has been in politics a long time, and the union bug on ANY piece of official printed material is a must in Democratic politics. This can only be interpreted as a direct snub to labor, likely due to the fact that they are already lining up behind Leslie. What a jerk.

[Not Larry Sabato]

I can't imagine this was an oversight 1140- this is the first thing any decent Democrat thinks of when they need something printed.

For the love of organized labor NLS, you're only doing this because you heart Leslie Byrne.

Get over it, because I'm sure Gerry and Leslie will face public questioning about their support of organized labor further down the road in this campaign.

[Jennison is a Eunich]

Gerry got his 2007 campaign literature union printed. Good for him. But that means John Jennison had to make a decision (for whatever reason) NOT to take it to their normal printer. That shows clear intent to slap labor in the face- and JMU Duke seems to have the motive down as well.

[novamiddleman]

woo hoo let the circular firing squad begin

This would be alot more fun if some democratic blogger would stump for Gerry

[Grammar police]

"stationEry"

[James W.]

Hey Ben,

We had about 1000 of the flyers Union-printed with Whipple. A volunteer printed a few extra from home to pass out last night.

I should have put a "printed in-house" box on them, but we don't use non-union printers, vendors, etc. I think you know that.

[Hunter Mill Committee]

I was there- and it was no "volunteer" who was handing them out- it was John Jennison himself! The guy who hired James W...

[Jennison is a Eunich]

That's correct Hunter Mill Committee. John considers himself the #1 Gerry person in Fairfax, and serves as his campaign manager in between campaigns.

[Aimee]

Has Gerry Connolly EVER respected unions?

Hey! Leave James W. alone!

You don't want to ruin his promising career in acting.

Aimee- Gerry did block a living wage for all county employees or contractors because we "were not allowed to do it".

Oh wait- Arlington COUNTY was able to do it? Arlington was wrong- and he had a letter from the Attorney General (Jerry Kilgore) to prove it.

Crucify him.

No more excuses- just an apology please.

12:35:

What's there to apologize for? The flyers were not printed in a non-union shop, but in-house -- thus not requiring a union bug. This is a non-story.

[Jennison is a Eunich]

Please let John run for something so we can expose him for the freak he is!!!

[James Young]

I agree, Ben. Given that unions would be in an even sorrier state were it not for the special privileges granted to them and jealously guarded by Democrats (and that Democrats would be woefully short on campaign workers were it not for union officials and staffers who work for Democrat campaigns virtually full-time between Labor Day and Election Day), EVERY Democrat should do this. It's a synergy that must be respected: Dems give union bosses the power to extract money from people who want to have nothing to do with unions; unions spend licitly and illicitly to perpetuate Democrat political power.

Indeed, the whole situation reminds me of the John Cleese comment (circa 1998) on why England is better than America: "When you meet the head of state, you only have to get down on one knee." Virtually every Democrat --- and the Democrat Party generally --- certainly gets down on two knees before union bosses.

Union endorsements in 2007 for Jeannemarie Devolites Davis:

# Fairfax Education Association
# Virginia Education Association
# Fairfax Local Firefighters
# Virginia Professional Firefighters
# Virginia chapter of the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association

Why should Democrats support unions if unions don't support Democrats?

The Fairfax Education Association endorsed Tom Rust and Tim Hugo as well.

[Church Hill Dem]

Anon 1:31---

That's a bad example. I'd be hesitant to look at one data point and show a trend. Unions are blue, and sometimes they support a bad candidate when there's not a good one to choose.

Wow, and the Connolly supporters sit silent while labor is trashed by people in order to justify their actions. Eunich may be generous.

[ZB]

Anon 12:16 PM:

You are actually missing a small buy key technicality here. Anyone who knows more about this--please correct me if I'm wrong?

Arlington COUNTY and Fairfax COUNTY are not the same type of government.

Arlington and roughly one other county (help me out here anyone---VA Beach? James City County? I forget) were admitted to the Commonwealth LATER than others, so under a different system of government. Under the Dillon Rule, they have been given a bit more authority for local government, much like cities.

Fairfax and most other counties in VA were admitted under a different plan and system of governance. As a result, they are more limited in what they can do without express permission from the state.

So, what Fairfax can do and what Arlington can do ARE NOT identical.

[Elephant Tears]

Burke has been around a long time. He should know better.

[Rowhey]

Unions suck!!!

[Not Rowhey]

Union bashers suck!!!

[Bubby]

Keydet Football Sucks! (9-2)

[Grapes]

Are Bubby and Rowhey the same guy?

[John J]

Ben, to answer your question, yes, Gerry Connolly not only respects unions, but holds them in the highest regard. His record of 13 years in public office was endorsed by every union in the county. Gerry earned all of his endorsements, as any candidate or office holder should, and Fairfax County, that is larger than two congressional districts, voted overwhelmingly to support Gerry with his sweep of every magisterial district and electoral win of almost every precinct with just about 60% of the votes.

Thanks for highlighting the December 8 Thank You Brunch hosted by Gerry Connolly with FCDC and the 8th, 10th, and 11th CD committees for all campaign volunteers. This is the Connolly campaign’s fourth such free thank you event, and the second one with FCDC. Running such a large campaign depends on scores of volunteers and Gerry is pleased to treat them to an opportunity to relax and enjoy our shared democratic successes in Fairfax County. I recall you were one of the 500 who showed up at last year’s and enjoyed themselves. Again, at this year’s event, our union Fire Fighter brothers and sisters are helping collect personal items to send to those serving under the American flag in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Unfortunately in this age, many don’t appreciate the historical value (e.g., 40-hour work week, health care, pensions, work place safety, etc.) that unions have brought to America. I personally look forward to legislators who support the right to collectively bargain in the Commonwealth and we should start with our public safety professionals. Of course, others are free to disagree and express different opinions.

Regarding the flyer, while they were distributed on tables before I arrived, I’ll take responsibility for the omission of the union bug. It was an early working draft of the one printed at a union shop. The draft was used by a volunteer to make some quick in-house extra copies for distribution at last night’s meeting, when extra union printed ones were supposed to be used. This is a case where the exception proves the rule of the Connolly campaign of only using union printers and vendors as they add considerable value to campaigns. Thus, you were not the only one shocked to see it, seriously.

Wow, looks like he shoved that pretty far up your ass, Ben. Any further pearls of wisdom, or do we just keep coming back here to laugh at you ?

[Rowhey]

Bubby,
Keydet football does suck...but not as hard as Marcus and Michael Vick suck on the crack pipe.

[Trying2BTruthful]

Is this an attempt to hide the fact that Mount Vernon District Chair Scott Surovell printed 50,000 eight-page flyers for this year's election at a NON-UNION printer?
Apparently, Scott was slam-dunked at last night's FCDC meeting when he suggested that labor unions really doesn't do much for the Democratic Party.
As Ben says, the union bug "is the first thing any decent Democrat thinks of when they need something printed."
If Gerry Connolly is suspect in Ben's eyes, we can presume that Scott Surovell is definitely "not a decent Democrat."

[teacherken]

for ZB - the other county in the same category is Arlington is Henrico

Virginia Beach is a City, with a mayor, not a county with a board.

Unions are bad for America, worse for Virginia, and represent all that is wrong with our labor force.

Unions are good for America, better for Virginia, and represent all that is right with our labor force.

Look at the states in the U.S. where unions are strong v. where they are weak.

Then compare that list to states with strong economies & low unemployment and those with weak economies & high unemployment.

Go ahead, all you union lovers. But you won't like what you see. Strong unions equal poor economies and high unemployment.

Unions have had their heyday, and they did good things for America. But their usefulness ended over a generation ago.

[Never mind]

Posted by: Trying2BTruthful | November 28, 2007 at 04:20 PM

This must be George Burke - who quite frankly created the slam dunk. And apparently hates Scott so much that he does not have the professionalism to address the issue in such a manor that should be our hallmark as Democrats. I was appalled at the level of venon coming out of Mr. Burke at this event and in other venues address Scott and the volunteers in Mount Vernon.

It was even more appalling that it was done in secret and as a political punch without the steering committee and other members having the opportunity to review the policy and then discuss the impact. The outcome and the policy could still be the same, but the way it was done was really bad, in my opinion.

Scott made a decision be it right or wrong about the cost of trying to reach 50,000 voters in a critical election year. Due diligence was done in obtaining bids, from Union and non-union printers and there was a cost disparity in THIS ONE INSTANCE OF 300%. So the budgetary decision was do you lit drop to 10,000 household or 50,000. what is the cost of both and / or either.

There should have been a legitmate discussion of the policy of using unions printers in the majority of the outreach and material that FCDC prepares. But there also should be a discussion to ensure that the pricing and practices are competitive so that we do not create a monopolitic envirnoment where there is no market pressure to be competitive.

But no Mr. Burke decided to move a resolution to the floor with the potential political push back that if you remotely want to discuss the issue then you do not support Unions. It was a bullshit situation and I thought we were better than this.

[G]

how much extra does it cost to get the "bug" put on the paper?

I guess it's no problem to spend more when it involves spending somebody else's money, maybe this guy was trying to treat the money like his own and get a better bang for the buck.

[Never mind]

If Gerry Connolly is suspect in Ben's eyes, we can presume that Scott Surovell is definitely "not a decent Democrat."

Posted by: Trying2BTruthful | November 28, 2007 at 04:20 PM

Again - I would like to know if this a comment that is coming from an elected representative of the FCDC? If it is I am going to move for a censor resolution.

Discuss the issue on the face of the facts - but this name calling is not appropriate. I cannot think of a more blue blooded Democrat than Scott - the sacrifices both personal and professional to get Democratic candidates elected has been tantamount to FCDC and in particular Mt. Vernon district.

Why in the world would you ever say anything like that? He made a decision, it pissed alot of people off - he has been scolded tenfold (as Mr. Burke point-en out last night) but to question his character and dedication as a Democrat on a blog is beyond the pale.

[Lowell]

Scott Surovell is one of the hardest working, smartest, most creative, and most dedicated Democrats I've ever met. We would all be better off with a few more Scott Surovells around. For now, though, I just wanted to express my appreciation for the ONE Scott Surovell that I am honored to call my friend.

[proudvadem]

I don't know Connolly but that is pretty much a rookie mistake for any Dem,
Hell...I'm gonna have the bug on my wedding invites :-)

[Never mind]

It wasn't a rookie mistake it was a budget decision.

[Phil Chroniger]

ZB did make a valid point about county governments earlier...I'm surprised nobody else noticed that. Whether or not that is true or applicable, can we at least acknowledge his application of Virginia history and government?

[LAS]

Why does George Burke hate Scott and the Mt Vernon Dems so much?

Is he still holding a grudge because of Jim Webb?

[Ghost of Henry Howell]

Scott is a bad MF. Mess with him at your own risk. You go Scott!

Why isn't anyone discussing the fact that Connolly's event is in a non-union hotel? And Burke supports that event wholeheartedly and hasn't said anything's wrong with that.

How about it, Burke?

This Burke character is one arogant SOB.

Wait, so Ben hates Scott Surovell for not using a union bug on the Mount Vernon flyers? Scott is Chap's law partner. Why does Ben hate Chap?

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

This resolution passed at FCDC sounds like a big mistake. We all support unions as Democrats, but this thing wasn't even discussed by the steering committee?

What the heck is the protocol for binding resolutions on magisterial district committees?

MVDDC should not be bashed for being effective and efficient in reaching voters. Anyone who thinks the pamphlets produced this year weren't amazing is simply stupid. At a cost of 300% more to use a union printer, this is an obvious choice.

Democratic Committee's jobs, INCLUDING THE FCDC, is to ELECT DEMOCRATS.

Any resolution passed that makes magisterial district committees jobs harder (they don't have as much as money as the bigger county committee has) is simply foolish, and poorly thought-through.

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

Republicans at the polls this year were heard saying "WOW!" when the MVDDC pamphlets were discussed.

They were excellently produced and gave a large amount of information about DEMOCRATIC candidates to almost every household in the district!!

Arlington does the same type of thing every year, where Scott got the idea.

Why does the FCDC hate electing Democrats?

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

Excuse me, perhaps the question should be, why does George Burke hate the MVDDC electing Democrats?

I don't know, but this is possibly one of the best examples of a personal vendetta resulting in a CLASS-A STUPID reactionary resolution that won't change anything and won't help elect a single Democrat.

We all support unions. That should not be in question. And bringing that into question as well as inferring someone isn't a "true Democrat" just exposes the ugly underbelly of the motivation behind this colossally ignorant and hate-inspired mistake.

I thought Democrats were giving up on this idea of ideological purity at all costs?

Gee, maybe I should demand a resolution that all magisterial districts must note "Gay Rights Now!" on their printed materials, despite the extra cost of requiring printing by gay union printers (who also need a donated kidney), OR ELSE!!!!

Hello, Buehler? Buehler? Burke?

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

Anon 6:03 makes an excellent point as well.

Are George Burke and the gang going to be held to the same standard they themselves railroaded through the FCDC themselves last night?

It just exposes the fraudulent notions that the resolution was proposed to address an actual concern.

That resolution was perceived simply as an opportunity to, yet again, bash Scott Surovell and the MVDDC. Why? These are all very hard-working and dedicated people who want nothing more than to elect Democrats and do our part to make Fairfax and Virginia better places to live in the one way we know how.

Because we are creative and innovative with our time and talents, and we want to try different approaches to improving our election performance with OUR FUNDS, why does anyone else feel we've acted inappropriately?

Can you please tell us why, Mr. Burke? Why the vendetta? Why aren't you being observed following the same requirements that you apparently skewered others (who you incidentally are well-known to dislike) for doing the exact same thing!??

Why didn't the members of the FCDC stand up and vote down this travesty that was motivated by a personal vendetta instead of any effort to actually help working people (like, perhaps, electing pro-union Democratic candidates?).

[Interested Observer]

WOW!

Ben is deviating from his usual strong support for Gerry Connolly to criticize him for what is, apparently, a limited oversight. Thank goodness that Ben has no agenda and is not trying to undermine any attempt by Gerry to run for Congress against Leslie Byrne (because we know Ben isn't vested in the results of that race).

We support _____ (fill in the blank)...
then throw those folks under the bus when not useful. Just further proof of democrat hypocrisy.

“We are with you” (until you cost us too much or don’t agree with us 100%) rah.. rah.. rah..

I love watching the true colors shinning through.

[brimur]

Does no one see that Ben is pointing out the hypocrisy of the Connolly clique?

I fully expect that no FCDC member will attend the event at the non-union hotel.

[James Young]

To answer your question, G, there is no additional marginal cost for putting the union bug on printed materials. Indeed, unionized printshops will omit it or add it as requested. The premier printer of Supreme Court briefs (one that I am using on a pending cert. petition) is unionized, and specifically asks.

[TomPaine]

The statutory language of both the Urban County Executive Plan (Fairfax County) and the County Manager Plan (Arlington and Henrico Counties) do not authorize either of these counties to set wages (other than for local governmental employees); the external function in practice has been reserved to the Commonweath, thus the Dillon Rule prohibits local governments from legislating in this area.

A number of Northern Virginia jurisdictions over the past several years have been advised by the courts that they (the local governments) lack authority to legislate in a number of areas.

What George failed to address in his viscous rant against Scott was why the Magesterial Districts, who had no chance to review the language, should have to vote on the proposal immediately. Scott reasonably asked for a chance to review it and discuss it with his members. Why the rush?

I have another question for George. Why should the policy stop at printing? If the Districts are forbidden from printing mass mailings in-house on home computers, shouldn't they also be forbidden from cooking food for District events on home stoves? Will the next mandate be to require that all events be catered by union caterers? No home made cookies allowed? No more salad molds unless they come from union stores?

Can anyone find a picture of George shopping at WalMart?

[Interested Observer]

Is Leslie Byrne reporting in-kind contributions that this web page is giving her in the way of support on her next disclosure statement? If not, then WOW! SCANDAL! RESIGNATIONS DEMANDED.

Posted by: | November 28, 2007 at 10:02 PM

When does support have to include not being able to have input to legitimate economic and efficiency issues?

Come on - Are you turning the debate into a statement that says - no one should ever have to weigh the value and / or cost of doing business with someone - Only that they should do business with someone because they can charge what they want?

I avoid Walmart like the plague. I try to support local business with all of my purchases, but guess what - sometimes I have to make a decision to run to Walmart to get something because of time / cost / and convenience.

It has nothing to do with my overall support and disdain for the corporate conglomerates.

I was thinking last night - this argument has all the earmarks of a Republican type of discussion.

"You do not support the war - so you do not support the troops"

or

"You disagree with the President - so you are not a patriot"

It is quite disgusting in my opinion when the issue is specifically crafted so with the threat of political consequences does not even allow us to have important discussions to find a solution that helps all parties.

In this instance - should Scott have gone back to the Union printer and say "boy I really want to use you - but you are 300% higher, can you review your bid"? Of course, but then with the exclusive agreement now - they can come back and say - I do not have to adjust my price because YOU HAVE TO USE ME!

[James Young]

Anon 7:57 says that "You do not support the war - so you do not support the troops" or "You disagree with the President - so you are not a patriot" are "a Republican type of discussion."

No, that is the Democrat caricature of "a Republican type of discussion."

The only people whom I see making such assertions are Democrats trying to claim victim status.

7:57 "YOU HAVE TOUSE ME"

That is exactly the attitude the union management has persuaded the workers to take through the years. That is the reason the unions are in the shape they are in and that many U.S. jobs have been moved overseas (steel, auto, etc..). I am glad to see that some democrats are now looking at the cost of unions versus the value received. Maybe these same folks will also look at other issues with less political blindness.

[ignoreland]

James Young - you're full of crap. I had the union bug on print materials and it cost anywhere from $75 to $150 extra to include it.

The larger debate I'm curious about: given the choice between going to a union printer 75 miles outside your voting area or using an independent small business in your district, which carries more impact?

Posted by: James Young | November 29, 2007 at 09:36 AM

I have to disagree whole-heartily. This is a Republican frame - end of discussion. Never debate the issues always look for a straw man argument to hide behind.

It is a strategy that has been hone with a fine tooth comb in the last 12 years - since the rise of "Newt" and "Rovian" politics.

It is specifically crafted to make the person who actually has a valid debate be the "bad guy". It is bullshit when it is in the form of above and it is bullshit when done internally within a political party.

BULLSHIT!

Posted by: ignoreland | November 29, 2007 at 09:51 AM

Here Here!

It is only B.S. when someone through ignorance or arrogance decides that they are the only one who posses enough knowledge to speak intelligently on an issue and unilaterally declares "end of debate" All debate is healthy until it turns to name calling or becomes vindictive; then it is just useless.

[Anonymous Is A Woman]

While you are all attacking George Burke, this time you are totally misdirected.

If you want to have a discussion of labor's value to the Democratic Party, it's monetary contributions, it's foot soldiers, it's countless hours spent phone banking and it's contribution to candidates, fine have it.

The simple truth is George Burke did not ram through anything the other night.

The FCDC Labor Caucus and the NoVa Central Labor Council have been annoyed at Mount Vernon and Scott Surovell for quite some time now about the non-union printed material.

You can argue about proper parliamentary procedure all you like, but the simple fact is that FCDC Labor Caucus wanted this resolution of support for labor. And yes they wanted to send a message to Mount Vernon and Scott.

I don't care how hard working he is. Does he use the same excuse about buying the cheaper product to shop at Wal Mart? To make statements that workers will have to get used to lower wages, as Harris Miller did?

And by the way, addressing the issue of cost, if a candidate prints up a flyer on his home computer, he only has to put "printed in house" on it. Unions only object when a non-union printer is used for a professional job, not when an in house job is done on a home computer and then xeroxed.

Also, if somebody is having monetary difficulties, talk to the labor folks. They are remarkably sympathetic and want good people elected. They will actually be helpful.

So, this is about taking material to a professional printer, not in house printing.

What is at issue here is core Democratic values and how much Democrats value labor and working people.

And btw, for those who think that organized labor is bad for the economy, I have a question: Why does New York have a better overall economy than Alabama or Mississippi?

The truth is any place where labor is strong, all workers, including those not unionized, have better, safer working conditions, better benefits and higher employment. And management gets better trained workers.

The reason companies go overseas is not because of the expenses of union workers. It's because they are greedy and don't want to pay Americans a living wage. Republicans don't understand this.

That's why they look at the GDP and can't understand why the average American today is anxious about the economy and is voting Democratic.

It's because profits have not trickled down from the boardrooms to the employees' paychecks.

However, if the Democrats wish to be anti-union, anti-working people, and pro-business as usual, they will lose elections.

As Will Rogers said, "when given a choice between a Republican and a Republican, the people will always vote for a Republican."

However, give them a choice of a real Democrat, who stands for something, and guess who wins?

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

AIAW--who is the FCDC Labor Caucus? Does that include George?

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

"And yes they wanted to send a message to Mount Vernon and Scott"

Thank you for proving my point that this resolution was done for all the wrong reasons, AIAW.

[James Young]

Well, ignoreland, being "full of crap" is an occupational hazard, but I don't think personal attack is called for. Your post is the first I ever heard of such a thing. My experience has been different, but I have no reason to doubt yours.

As for Anonymous Whomever, I note that you failed to cite a single instance of a Republican calling a Democrat "unpatriotic." I can think of such an instance ... oh, wait. That was DEMOCRAT Senate Leader Harry Reid calling either President Bush or VP Cheney "unpatriotic." As for this being a "Republican frame," you seem to ignore the credentials of our host. Were he anonymous, I suppose that could be surmised. But as a well-known activist in Democrat circles, your charge of a "Republican frame" is too elaborate to be maintained.

[James Young]

Oh, and AIAW, thank you for the skewed analysis provided by the AFL-CIO and the union-funded Economic Policy Institute. Of course, what you fail to mention when you parrot the lines about "New York ha[s] a better overall economy than Alabama or Mississippi," and that "any place where labor is strong, all workers, including those not unionized, have better, safer working conditions, better benefits and higher employment," of course fails to take account of/correct for higher taxes and higher overall costs of living, and less choice, which negate your claims.

[Anonymous Is A Woman]

Thank you once again, Doug, for showing the true core Democratic values for which we all fight - parliamentary procedure and penny pinching over support for working men and women.

No, it wasn't done for the wrong reasons at all. Any candidate who doesn't want labor support is invited not to accept its money and its help in GOTV efforts. Please, ask your candidates how much difference labor made in Lee District this year. In Jim Webb's election. In other very close races in Virginia.

And George is not part of the FCDC Labor Caucus. If you are a member of the FCDC, you would get their newsletter, which has a column by the labor caucus chairperson, Shannon Sullivan.

Shannon is second generation, at least, labor in Fairfax. Her father, John Sullivan, was active for years in Providence District and in the NoVa CLC.

Other members include FCDC members from both teachers unions, OPEIU, NTEU, and most of the other unions. It is not limited to AFL-CIO unions as the Central Labor Council is. There are several unions not affiliated with the AFL-CIO such as the VEA/FEA and NTEU who are members of the FCDC labor caucus.

Ironically, in being opposed to labor, you are allied more with Gerry Connolly and Harris Miller than with Leslie Byrne, Larry Byrne or Jim Webb. Welcome to the un-progressive unDemocratic wing of the Democratic Party.

[Anonymous Is A Woman]

James,

My view and that of the Economic Policy Institute, which has real economists, as opposed to National Right to Work, is far less skewed than yours.

So, do you actually want to dispute that New Yorkers are better off economically than Alabamans? I have relatives in both places who provide anecdotal evidence, in addition to info on employment figures, salary discrepancies, labor laws that protect working people.

As for higher taxes, etc., all I can say is you get what you pay for. Your version of low taxes benefits businesses and the wealthy. It does nothing to improve education (or do you also think Alabama has a better school system than New York, California, or Virginia, for that matter).

We can put junk economics and skewered facts up against evidence all day.

Posted by: Anonymous Is A Woman | November 29, 2007 at 01:44 PM

Again the straw man argument that you are against labor because you believe in a democratic process by being able to have input to the process.

The argument was not about what the end result would be - but more about the process.

The resolution was pre worded, with no steering / executive committee review - that some individuals felt they should have the opportunity to discuss and reflect before passage.

There were non-FCDC members (union members) there to place pressure on this vote. This should not have turned into a zero sum debate - where you better vote or you are an evil person. But that is how it was presented and by your very arguments is presented again.

I don't know about you but when "threats" and comments are put against me I tend to go to the extreme of non-support then support.

In the end the result of strong support for Unions in various ways would still be upheld (with probably the ability to place a price variance on the budget decision). but no that was not allowed - it was YOU BETTER, DON'T PRESENT AN OPINION - OR YOUR NOT A DEMOCRAT.

I would truly hope that even with your strong support for the issue that you do not support a NON-DEMOCRATIC process.

Posted by: James Young | November 29, 2007 at 01:39 PM

Really? Do you want me to start now with quotes by Cheney, Bush, Coulter, Limbaugh, etc. etc. this tread would go on for days.

[Anonymous Is A Woman]

I strongly support the Democratic process and respect anybody's right to not support unions. I might disagree with those who don't, but I respect their right to do so.

What I am tired of is hypocrisy. I'm tired of those Democrats in leadership who take for granted those who comprise their base including labor, femininists, blacks and gay rights groups.

At election time, they certainly take our donations. They gratefully accept our GOTV efforts on their behalf.

But when they've won election, they stare right past those who have worked hard to help them win their seats. Instead, they cater to those who were least likely to support them to start with.

There is a saying, "you leave with the same one who brung you to the dance."

It's a lesson all politicians, regardless of party, would do well to remember. Republicans do a better job of it than we do.

Could you even imagine Karl Rove ignoring his base, the religious right?

No. He catered to them. Democrats do the opposite. And then they wonder why we don't stay united as a party.

But even more important is the issue of core values.

Is support for working men and women, and support for labor, part of those values? Is respect for gays and blacks and dedication to their full rights as American citizens part of our values? Is support for the environment, for ending the war in Iraq, and ensuring women's reproductive freedom?

How many serious issues do Democrats run from? The issue of supporting labor is the tip of the iceberg. Many people, right now, are feeling betrayed by Democrats. And not just in Virginia.

We need to stand for something and defend the interest of our base or we won't have one at election time.

Many valid points. but you know I am a hard working American and I do not belong to a labor union. Does that mean my services and support as a Democrat have any less value? Does that mean that my contributions and count less volunteers hours are of any less value?

Again - In my opinion the end result would have been the same to ensure that as an organization FCDC gets back to the value of supporting its base, both in making monetary decisions from supporters and elected officials.

But this was a political we are going to bitch slap you Scott and Mt. Vernon. The labor council can be mad, but what they should not have done is politicized the issue but try to resolve it. Did they talk to Scott? Did they try to reenforce the soft cost of the decision not just the hard cost of producing the piece? Was there outreach at all? With their professional expertise did they offer Scott resources for future printing needs where all can be pleased with the outcome? NO NO NO NO NO.

They sprang a resolution onto the floor without prior consideration. That is NOT DEMOCRATIC. Cannot say that any clearer. And if you do not support that first and foremost how in the world can you support any resolution or position or candidate?

AIAW, just how far do you go on this issue of supporting union businesses? What's your opinion about the Connolly event being held at a non-union hotel? And didn't your friend, George Burk, get his 11th CD committee to co-sponsor that event? Doesn't that committee have a lot of big-time labor people as members? And aren't you related to one of them?

So did they all vote to co-sponsor an event being held at a non-union hotel? What's the matter with the 11th CD? Don't they support all labor business, or just the printing business?

Seems like some people talk out of both sides of their mouths.

Nobody who supports unions should show up at an event held at a non-union hotel.

[Anonymous Is A Woman]

As a hard working person, 02:44, you are most definitely valued. At its best, labor's fights have benefitted those who are not union members too. There are many people, who for many reasons, are not union members. But they are still workers who deserve a decent day's wages. That is all labor's fight is for.

As for bitch slapping poor Scott Surovell. He was most definitely not blindsided. He was, in fact, asked repeatedly to go to a union printer.

Had there been a genuine issue of cost, he should have spoken to Shannon Sullivan or Dan Duncan just to make them aware that his intentions were good but that it was unaffordable for Mt. Vernon to use a union printer.

Believe it or not, there are ways to get around use of the bug.

The same goes for events held at non-union hotels.

In Virginia, especially now in Fairfax, labor is not unreasonable. And these requests to use union services are not written in stone.

I fully admit that I don't know the circumstances behind the hotel where Connolly's event is being held. I suspect that somebody approached Dan or Shannon and told them why the event was being held at a non-union hotel and Dan and Shannon probably didn't have a problem with it.

For all my support of labor, I don't belong to the AFL-CIO and cannot be a member of the NoVa CLC myself. So, I'm not privvy to everything they decide.

But Scott Surovell was asked by several people and several times to not go to a non-union printer. So this was not simply done to blindside him.

In fact, I knew about it long ago. As a blogger, I wanted to write something about this issue and his response months ago. I was asked not to because people in labor had hoped to settle it more amicably.

They couldn't and this resolution grew out of that.

It was about respect for labor, not blind subservience to it. Again, if cost were a genuine issue, there were ways Scott and Mt. Vernon could have still worked with labor. He just didn't want to.

Karen - you obviously have no clue as to the actual facts of what occurred and your version of the facts is so far off from reality its no wonder you hold the position you do.

Perhaps if you gave Scott Surovell the same courtesy you gave Ken Cucinelli and actually spoke to him before you went on the attack you might post up an apology.

Your reputation as a blogger is going down with every keystoke. I thought you were better than this.

[Anonymous Is A Woman]

So, if I disagree with you, my reputation goes down with every keystroke?

As for your reference to my post on Ken, he called me, I didn't call him. This, however, is not my story. If Scott wants to comment and give his version of the facts, he's certainly welcome to come on here and do so. So are you if you know that version.

I actually don't have an obligation to do an investigative report before commenting on somebody else's post on somebody else's blog.

I do know that people asked Scott to go to a union printer and he refused. And others on the Mount Vernon committee - and I won't mention their names - agreed that it wasn't important and labor wouldn't - or shouldn't - mind.

They were wrong. Labor does mind.

I'd be more than willing to listen to Scott's version of what happened and why. But it's not my job to contact him unless I decide to do an actual post on it on my own blog.

[Not Larry Sabato]

AIAW, I have a problem with one thing you said, and it is a problem I have had with labor in Fairfax over and over for the entire time I have been involved.

It is NOT ok for Dan, Shannon or anyone else to give blessing for certain people to have events at a non-union hotel or print things non union, and then attack others for doing the same thing because they failed to get their blessing. Either it's ok to use non-union printers and hotels or it is not.

I have never organized an event at a non-union hotel. I always take stuff to John Dwyer to be printed, even after he showed up to Braddock meeting we both remember and voted against YDs on the committee. It's the right thing to do.

However it is NOT ok to allow some people to not go to a union hotel and union printer, and some people are forced to. Either we respect unions and ask everyone to play by the same rules of supporting them or it's a free for all. But as soon as you get into "talking" to certain people to "work it out", you cross the line from supporting unions to allowing individuals to bless activities of their friends while busting the balls of their enemies. That's wrong, and I will not stand for it.

"In fact, I knew about it long ago. As a blogger, I wanted to write something about this issue and his response months ago. I was asked not to because people in labor had hoped to settle it more amicably."

So this was their idea of trying to settle something amicably?

NLS- Great point, and this is an issue about personalities, not the printing. Want proof? Scott got it printed at the same place Arlington Democrats have printed their newspaper (since the 1980's) which is non-union. Do they march into ACDC and say a word for twenty+ years? No. But when it is Scott Surovell it is a travesty. Anonymous Woman please explain that.

"In Virginia, especially now in Fairfax, labor is not unreasonable. And these requests to use union services are not written in stone."

Apparently they are now.

Boy was this a terrible idea for labor relations with friends. But doesn't everything Thomas Paine Patriot (George Burke) touch go to shit?

Can we all finally agree - that this thing was the clash of the titans. I do not know what was communicated to whom when? But did Scott communicate to who ever that the cost was 300% more and they still said you have to use a Union Printer? At that point when he explains his position of wanting to lit drop 40,000 pieces of literature to every household in Mt. Vernon and he could not do that with the cost of 300% more. Did the communication say - to bad you have to use a Union printer? Are we talking about a one sided zero sum game on this thing? That only certain people (apparently two) have the highest level of what, how and how much a committee can do?

Apparently every decision has to be made through the labor committee. I am so relieved. I am going to pull my membership, and sleep in next November on election day because apparently everything anyone can do has been predetermined.

[James Young]

Anon 2:14, I would love for you to "start now with quotes by Cheney, Bush, Coulter, Limbaugh, etc. etc." Even one would do. Please, indulge me.

Problem for you guys is actually sustaining your inaccurate generalizations with evidence. I gave one well-known example of a Democrat engaging in the conduct which you ascribe to Republicans. You don't dispute it. Even one opposing piece of evidence would aid your case.

As for your comments, AIAW, I don't have a problem with people who want to belong to unions. What I have a problem with is forcing people to support organizations they loathe. As for "real economists" who support Right to Work goes, how does Nobel Prize-winner Milton Friedman grab you? Nobel Prize-winner James M. Buchanan, Jr.? Those names ring a bell? Then there's Leo Troy (Rutgers) and James Bennett (GMU). And the funny thing is, theirs is actual, independently-funded academic research, not union-funded hit work.

As for whether New Yorkers are better off than Alabamans, I'd say that immigration is the sincerest form of flattery. Look at the Electoral College. While forced-unionism states have been losing voting strength for decades, Right to Work states have been gaining. Isn't immigration the sincerest form of flattery. And I'm certain the Virginians (in a Right to Work jurisdiction, barring public-employee monopoly bargaining) are far happier with their schools than Pennsylvanians, or Hawaiians, or Californians, or D.C. residents, or for that matter, citizens of the City of New York) (forced-unionism jurisdictions all). By the way, are parents in D.C. (a high-tax, forced-unionism jurisdiction) getting what they pay for in comparison to Virginians?

So you can put "junk economics and skewered facts up against evidence all day," huh?

BTW, it's certainly interesting that you would pick Alabama as your example. Wasn't recent Democrat Alabama Governor Don Siegelman a real champion of the Alabama Education Association and its agenda?

[Anonymous Is A Woman]

Ben, in principle, you are right that there should be consistency and that all Democrats who claim they support core Democratic values should patronize union shops for printing, hotels, etc. And you have been one of the best supporters of unions and have consistently done just what you preach at every thing you have been involved in.

The problem is that there sometimes are legitimate cost issues. And sometimes, union venues are not available. Specifically with hotels, there are a limited number of hotels that have union employees and if their dates are all booked for the time period when a Democratic event needs to take place, no union should sensibly object to a Democratic group taking their event some place else.

The reason to ask Shannon or Dan for help isn't to get their approval. It's because if you really do support unionism, they will work with you to try to make it affordable or to get the hotel to find a date. If it can't be done, at least everybody knows the effort to help was made on both sides.

Labor wants to be helpful, not dictate. You'd be surprised at how often Dan has stepped in to work with hotels to find available dates or with printers to make it more affordable. Sometimes it can't be done. But let's make the effort.

The point was Scott Surovell was asked by a number of people to at least try to work it out. And some of those were candidates and elected officials - and no I'm not going to name names because I don't want those people drawn into a blogger-activist "food fight."

As for Scott, for me, it's not about his personality. I don't even know him. I know that Lowell thinks highly of him and normally that would be recommendation enough for me to respect Scott.

I just think he made a wrong decision here and did it for the wrong reasons. That doesn't make him the devil incarnate. It makes him a human being whom I think is mistaken in this instance. This is not an attack on the man, just a disagreement on one decision he made.

And yes, labor did try to handle it amicably. They did not bring this up before the election. They deliberately did not want to embarrass any candidates or jeopardize anybody's chance of winning by turning this into an election issue. That's why I was asked to not blog on it and I agreed with that request.

But after the election was the time for unions to make their displeasure known. If not now, when?

It's not about villifying a person or forcing the Democrats to pay exorbitant fees to support unions. It's about friendship and alliances.

Unions support a lot of Democratic candidates in many ways that add value to their campaigns. Labor has contributed to Democratic victories and gains. And will continue to do so.

But, yes, the union bug matters to them. Patronizing union hotels whenever possible also matters to them. But so does realism about affordability and availability of dates for events.

Communication and trying to help each other matters to labor. Flat out rejection also matters as it would to any individual activist who was dissed after working hard for Democratic victories.

[brimur]

So then AIAW- that means you would have opposed the resolution FCDC passed as it was written. It had no mention of "affordability".

[Anonymous Is A Woman]

I would have supported a resolution that the Democratic Party support labor and patronize union shops.

Apparently, the vast majority of the FCDC also supported this. I was not there, but I hear that the resolution passed by a wide majority.

I find this amazingly eye opening. It's the so-called "progressives" who are digging in their heels and sounding more and more like James Young, who at least has the benfit of being ideologically consistent.

aiaw, "It's about friendship and alliances."

what is the old saying...

"with friends like that.. who needs enemies?"

[brimur]

Unfortunately AIAW you're not understanding the context of what happened.

This was never about the principle, only about a nasty attack on a single individual. Any hope there might have been among the good-intentioned in the mob for a real validation of progressive principles was easily overwhelmed by the nastiness and spew of pathetic insecure people like George Burke/TPP/perverse Napolean complex man.

[Anonymous Is A Woman]

brimur, I agree with some of what you say. But I think it's time to move beyond this fight.

First, I want to say that I don't wish to attack Scott Surovell. I do believe he is a well-intentioned person who got caught in the cross fire of a long simmering dissatisfaction. This discussion certainly needs to stop being about him.

I also don't know that George Burke was behind the actual resolution that was presented and passed at the FCDC. Let's move this discussion beyond him too. And any other specific person.

The FCDC labor caucus has, for some time, hoped for more support from the Democratic Party.

The most important support they would like is for a progressive legislative agenda that benefits not just organized labor but all working Americans.

It's not just organized labor that is concerned with loss of American jobs to outsourcing, shrinking benefits, the health care crisis, rising inflation and stagnant wages. There is a great deal of pessimism about the U.S. economy right now and it's not coming just from labor but from ordinary Americans.

Labor, additionally, would like to see Democrats patronize union printers and union hotels for official Democratic events. That is a bread and butter issue as well as a matter of principle.

The reason union businesses cost more is because they pay their workers higher salaries and provide more generous and expensive benefit packages, including health benefits and paid time off, than their non-union counterparts do. That means that the cost of doing business is more expensive for them.

How can progressives claim that the economy should be more than a race to the bottom for American workers or be opposed to outsourcing of American jobs and then look for the cheapest products and services provided by the cheapest sources of labor, themselves?

At the same time, I would hate to see a progressive, Democratic candidate lose an election because campaign costs were so prohibitive that he or she couldn't afford that last mailing or that last TV or radio spot to answer an opponent.

There needs to be compromise on all sides as well as commitment to Democratic principles.

Believe it or not, there's more that unites all Democrats than separates them.

In addition, the 2008 races are fast approaching and it would be more beneficial for us to heal our wounds.

This coming year could be our best shot at defeating Republicans, winning the White House and getting even bigger majorities in the Senate and House. It would be a shame if we squandered that opportunity by working to defeat each other instead of Republicans.

brimur,

Your insults about Burke are nastier than anything he said at the FCDC meeting.

Burke took Surovell to task because he ignored repeated requests in person and by email from the FCDC chair to make sure that the Mt. Vernon mail piece was printed union because it was listed as Paid for and authorized by FCDC, not Mt. Vernon's committee.

Many FCDC members were embarrassed.

Scott only got six votes out of the hundred or so people there. Everyone else supported the resolution. What does that tell you?

Brian, you weren't even at the meeting. Someone who wants to be an attorney should know the facts and stick to the facts.

In the interest of full disclosure, you should tell people you XXXXXXX.

(Comment Edited by NLS- I will not have personal information disclosed on this blog in order to attack people)

[brimur]

Cool, I have a stalker. You know you're striking at truth when you get a stalker.