HuffPo:Bernie Sanders, Not Hillary Clinton, Deserves Union Endorsements

[LiberalElite]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ben-spielberg/bernie-sanders-not-hillary-clinton-unions_b_8205288.html

-snip-
The National Education Association (the union to which I used to belong) is considering an early endorsement of Hillary Clinton. This decision, like the American Federation of Teachers' endorsement of Clinton on July 11, would be a huge mistake.

One reason is that it would violate members' trust. As Peter Greene, Steven Singer, and Anthony Cody have noted, teacher voice is too often ignored in education reform conversations. If the NEA follows the AFT and makes a presidential primary endorsement without ample membership involvement, its teachers will feel silenced by their own union. Not only would that likely depress voter mobilization efforts and spark a backlash within the union, it also runs counter to the very principles of what a union is supposed to be.

An early Clinton endorsement would also be a mistake because she's a suboptimal candidate. While Clinton is far more union-friendly than anyone running for the Republican nomination, her labor credentials are significantly worse than her main challenger in the Democratic primary, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders.

Sanders has been a steadfast union supporter since the 1970s. His advocacy on behalf of workers as mayor of Burlington, Vermont in the 1980s helped foster the growth of the city's socially-responsible business culture.
-snip-

[Duckfan]

1. I cannot remember a time when Hillary gave a big speech or

effort for education and teachers in general. And though I was 6000 miles away during the 08 campaign, I was able to follow closely from a distance.

[Dustlawyer]

2. She will only give lip service to unions like Obama has. She is being given lots of money to

specifically not to back unions! The union's money cannot compete with the money from business!

[zentrum]

3. Lord, yes.

[99th_Monkey]

4. Interesting, this pattern of establishment "leadership" deciding for everyone else

"what's good for you little people" ... democracy be damned. Membership participation be damned.

First the DNC, and now this. A major union's very well-paid and "well connected" establishment
executives, pre-empting membership input, to force a "preordained" candidate on the membership,
which in itself is bad enough. But to force a candidate with a sketchy union record, who supports
the job-killing TPP, and who midwifed NAFTA as first lady ... well ... let's just say, I'm glad this is
getting some notice and some media coverage ahead of the NEA's final decision.

Just maybe the union leadership will wake up in the nick of time, to remember what unionism is really
supposed to be all about, i.e. democracy & participation by the membership in the interests of "the
little people" who otherwise have no voice.

[PATRICK]

5. Three standards for choice of endorsement

Who has done the most and most consistently for Labor
Who will shake up things to improve the terrible state of things for unions today- beyond actual legislation
Who has the best chance of winning and gaining the hearts and minds of the membership(or just backing the winner)

Sanders is closing in on a trifecta of traditional, revolutionary and pragmatic reasons that are generally inescapable in capturing Labor in toto- except for certain beholden leadership groups. There is still a long road to go- which may be inevitable- but Labor is smart enough politically not to endorse too early. Take nothing for granted.

[Enthusiast]

6. K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations!

I guess they need to read this one. http://www.democraticunderground.com/128057165