Union Declines Endorsement: Powerful SEIU does not endorse, even though many leaders support Edwards

[DeepModem Mom]

NYT: Union Declines Endorsement
By STEVEN GREENHOUSE
Published: September 26, 2007

A politically potent union has decided not to take sides in the Democratic presidential battle, at least for now, even though many of its leaders support John Edwards’s presidential bid. The board of the union, the Service Employees International Union, met in Chicago on Monday, and decided not to endorse Mr. Edwards or any of the other Democrats.

Mr. Edwards has lobbied the union hard. But union officials said they decided not to endorse at this time because the 60-plus members of its board wanted to go back to their local unions to get a better gauge of rank-and-file sentiment.

Some union officials said they were mindful that Mr. Edwards was a distant third in polls of Democrats and that many members favor Hillary Rodham Clinton.

One board member said that a majority of board members favored Mr. Edwards, who has been outspoken on behalf of universal health coverage, one of the S.E.I.U.’s main goals. But those members, taken together, do not come from locals representing 60 percent of the union’s membership, the threshold required for the board to make an endorsement.

The union has been known for its political war chest and its organizational skills, particularly its ability to get union members to conduct street campaigning on behalf of candidates it supports.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/26/us/politics/26unions.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[Debi]

1. I wish all big Unions/PACs would hold their endorsements until a nominee is decided

I know, wishful thinking. :yoiks:

[jsamuel]

2. for the 20th time, they have always said they would wait until October or November to endorse

They didn't even vote in their last meeting, yet the media decides that that means that they "declined to endorse". No, it means they are still getting more info and waiting to endorse.