California's largest union is trying to help elect...Republicans? And the GOP is ticked

[Newsjock]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

With 700,000 members, the SEIU is California's largest labor union and on Thursday it announced they would be doing something a bit un-SEIUish: The were starting a political action committee to help moderate Republicans reach office.

Waaaa?!? You mean the same union that spent $85 million nationally to put President Obama in the White House and were the foot soldiers for Guv Jerry Brown's winning California campaign?

Yup. SEIU California has 87,000 Republican members (216,000 Dems and 80,000 decline-to-state and others) and at Thursday's rollout of the PAC, a few of the Republican ones said they felt the party of Reagan had deserted them. Now, it is held captive by social conservatives and anti-tax types who had no interest in the art of compromising. And that -- along with extremists from the left -- were the source of the state's political gridlock.

... California Republican Party chair Tom Del Beccaro ... admitted that its existence concerned him. "We have to take it seriously and we are ready to fight this effort up and down the state. You can't underestimate the power of the public employee unions."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=90664&tsp=1

[Arugula Latte]

1. "Extremists from the left"?

Who may they be?

[Scuba]

6. You know, people who want to hold the SS and Medicare ages at 65.

[valerief]

9. Insane hippies.

:sarcasm:

[Tempest]

11. It is the SF Chronicle

It has a right leaning head editor.

[Le Taz Hot]

21. +1

:shrug:

[Posteritatis]

43. From the GOP's perspective lately, that would be the entire left and most of the center. (nt)

[Arctic Dave]

2. Extremist from the left?

Where?

[Drale]

3. I suppose its better to spend money to get some

moderate republicans elected in strongly Conservative districts, instead of spending nothing and letting an extremist republican get elected.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Unions in Kansas support moderate republicans

That's not so unusual in a red state.

[No Elephants]

22. What does that have to do with California?

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. Just pointing out this is not unusual

[No Elephants]

25. No, you pointed out this is not unusual in a red, red state like Kansas. It's highly unsusual in a

blue state like California.

[joeglow3]

27. You realize even blue states have red disctricts?

You play the hand you are dealt? Sure, Ben Nelson sucks as a Senator, but in Nebraska, he is the best we will ever get.

[proud2BlibKansan]

29. I'd take my blue dog Dem congressman back in a heartbeat over the tea partier we have now

For that matter, I'd take Nelson over Pat Roberts.

[joeglow3]

30. Agreed

I am just saying some people go for the most liberal candidate because they are most aligned with our views. Unfortunately, in many places, you are simply guaranteeing a right wing Republican win. The strategy should be to get the most liberal candidate you can get. However, that strategy requires you to accept that in some districts, you may have to even support a left of hard right republican.

[No Elephants]

35. Of course--and that was evident from my Reply 24.

As far as Ben Nelson, suffice to say for purposes of responding to your post that the OP article is about donating money and effort to electing Republicans to the California state legislature, which is majority Democratic under a Democratic Governor and which state legislature does not have the same rules as the U.S. Senate.

Nelson is a Blue Dog Democrat serving in the U.S. Senate. Entirely different considerations apply to that set of facts. Please see also my Reply 37.

[proud2BlibKansan]

28. And I suppose there are no republicans in CA?

[No Elephants]

36. Kindly point out where I even so much as implied anything that ridiculous. ( Die, Straw Man!)

[Liberty Belle]

34. I hear they are only going to do it in solidly "red" districts.

CA is only a couple of votes short in the Legislature of passing a sane budget, but they need a couple of GOP votes. So getting moderates elected in a couple of Republican districts could accomplish that.

[No Elephants]

38. Yes, the OP article says that. In theory, it could work, but please see Reply 37.

It's chancey. Maybe it's worth a try for one cycle?

[Name removed]

5. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madrchsod]

7. moderate republican`s need love too......

the republican party has shifted so far to the right that republicans with a conscience have no where to go.

illinois afscme council 31 endorsed a republican for state treasurer in the last election.

[dameocrat67]

8. good

this is payback for koch funded antiunion dems like rahm emanuel and andrew cuomo.

[FiveGoodMen]

10. I'll quickly join the brigade of union-haters if THAT keeps up.

Fuck those god damned motherfucking sons of bitches to hell.

And then punish them some more.

Our future seems to be revolution or Soviet Union.

[sendero]

39. You seem to be laboring...

... under the DELUSION that everyone with a D after their name is better than everyone with an R.

You clearly have not been paying much attention.

I'm betting that the SEIU knows what they are doing and that they are not wasting their limited resources.

[Historic NY]

12. Good luck with all the communist signs they had out on May day.

[thelordofhell]

13. Isn't this what happened with the police/fire-fighter unions in WI

They supported republicans and they promptly got their ass handed to them with union-busting legislation.

NEVER TRUST A REPUBLICAN!!

[No Elephants]

26. +1

[chollybocker]

14. Teabag Remorse.

These "Moderate" Rethugs who now seek "the art of compromise" were the same idiots who attended teabag rallies last year. Own it, thugs.

[Brother Buzz]

15. This is a fifty percent of everything or a hundred percent of nothing situation

The SEIU will be targeting anti-tax at any cost Republicans with pro-tax candidates in solid Republican districts.

<snip>

Former CA GOP chair Ron Nehring raises a point about the REAL motive behind the SEIU's Republican outreach:

"Notably absent from this PAC's plans are to increase the total NUMBER of Republicans in the caucus. Rather, they are interested only in changing the COMPOSITION of the caucus by electing Republicans in Republican districts where there is no chance of electing a Democrat."

Ron tells us: "The SEIU effort is unquestionably about replacing anti-tax Republicans with pro-tax Republicans. Obviously the Republican Party has no interest in that."

[emulatorloo]

16. Thanks for the clarification n/t

[iemitsu]

17. i applaud this action on the part of the SEIU.

while i question why any union member would be a republican it is not really that hard to believe. they are sportsmen who fear creeping socialism and someone taking away their guns (this is an over-simplification). if 87,000 of the union members are republicans some of their political action dollars should go to supporting those member's candidates. this move will strengthen all the member's commitment to their union.
since the SEIU is not supporting republicans where democrats might win there is no real conflict of interest with the goals of the larger union constituency who support progressive democrats.
i see this as a win win strategy.

[iwishiwas]

20. umm. Thanks for the post. I had not looked at this issue in that way.

[NuttyFluffers]

18. ha ha, awesome! my "swap out the crazies at the primaries!" tactic needed the help!

this is genius.

this gets the lunatic no-tax RWers in a real bidding war against no-so-crazy OK-maybe-a-little-tax RWers. that's exactly what we need! because certain districts will vote republican mindlessly (just like how people talk about 'yellow dog' democrats). so to enact change and break the gridlock from a recalcitrant bunch o' mooks, you need to beat them in the primary -- you can't beat them anywhere else.

i don't understand how people are confused by this -- unless they didn't read the article down to the important SEIU goals part. pushing the republican party to field leftier candidates at the general makes for a leftward shift. y'know, just like how the right as been foisting rightier candidates upon democrats to make democrats go right? yeah, fire v. fire, baby.

good on the SEIU.

edit: this primary issue was one of the big reasons i registered as republican. 5th column that SOB.

[StarsInHerHair]

33. actually THAT is a good idea, register as a Republican.........that'd get them

in a really unexpected way.....I like turnabout against the Right

[w4rma]

19. That. Is. Awesome. (nt)

[No Elephants]

24. Any way I look at this, it seems like folly.

216,000 Dems to 87,000 Republicans, so the decision is to donate to moderate Republicans? How do Republican minorities always seem to override Dem majorities?

Oh, wait, it's to avoid gridlock. But, Democrats hold a majority in both houses of California's legislatgure and California now has a Democratic Governor.

Seems as though electing Republicans of any stripe at this point will, if anything, increase the possiblity of gridlock.

Scott Brown was sold as a moderate Republican. Indeed, when he ran for the U.S. Senate, he (falsely) portrayed himself as fiercely independent (after he kicked off his campaign pretending to be JFK's anointed). However, his voting record showed he had voted in the state legislature with his Republican Party fully 96% of the time.

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. In the land of the lockstep Republicans, a 4% variation = moderate.

[NuttyFluffers]

CA has a stupid 2/3rd super majority req. for raising taxes, fees, etc.

holding a majority in both houses and governorship means nothing, unfortunately. stupid, stupid, stupid super majority requirement... if ever there was a better argument for destroying the propositional system. proposition systems asks for majority general populace rule on issues they can't possibly understand the ramifications. it further renders legislatures redundant because you can just buy a stupid law by ads.

[No Elephants]

37. Thanks. That is helpful. If you know, what would repealing that requirement take?

(Not asking you to do my googling. Just thought you might know off the top of your head).

Still, I am very skeptical that any such thing as a "moderate" Republican under the age of 70 or so exists anymore. Moreover, I would not necessarily trust any politician, esp. a Republican, to vote any certain way once s/he's in office, no matter what s/he says while running, mor do I believe Republica voters in California will nominate a pro-tax candidate. That would be like Democrats in Massachusetts voting for someone who was against equal rights for anti-African Americans or women.

[Dark]

42. They were constitutional amendments. So you'd need another amendment.

And considering they passed by relatively wide margins, that ain't going to happen. Californians want to take care of the poor, the sick and the helpless -- but they want someone else to pay for it.

Sorry, but that's the truth.

[NuttyFluffers]

32. CA has a stupid 2/3rd super majority req. for raising taxes, fees, etc.

holding a majority in both houses and governorship means nothing, unfortunately. stupid, stupid, stupid super majority requirement... if ever there was a better argument for destroying the propositional system. proposition systems asks for majority general populace rule on issues they can't possibly understand the ramifications. it further renders legislatures redundant because you can just buy a stupid law by ads.

[davsand]

31. The GOP has moved the discussion right of center for too long. This changes the game.

I am happy to see SEIU adapting its strategy. From a union perspective, the goal behind supporting ANY candidate is to elect somebody that is favorable to the union. Historically, that has been a lot of Democrats, however, it is not a foreign concept that a union would endorse/support a Republican. California does tend to be more Democratic than other states, but it does, in fact, have areas that are strongly Republican. It makes good sense that if SEIU wants to try and slow down the attacks on unions they might want to try and elect a few Republicans who are favorably inclined toward unions.

Frankly, speaking, I know an awful lot of rank and file union members who are Republicans. Here at DU there seems to be some kind of sweeping assumption, on some people's part anyway, that unions are somehow the exclusive domain of the Dem party be it local or national. Well, it just ain't so. Unions are groups that exist to further the goals of their rank and file--their members in other words. If it is an area that is made up of mostly Republican union members wouldn't it make some sense that just MAYBE they oughtta look at the local candidates and work to get somebody elected that is good for them? Something else that cannot be ignored here is the reality that some Republicans have held the attitude that it does no good to even approach the unions because they are the tools of the Dem party. That has not exactly been much of an incentive to support union initiatives, either.

The GOP has been dragged right by both the fundies, and by the guys who are not true fiscal conservatives. I know quite few Republicans that feel abandoned by their own party (you know--kinda like the folks here at DU who feel Obama has not delivered up enough to the leftward branch of the Dem party?) and this move by SEIU will help move the discussion back to where maybe the government can function. Instead of being all about raping the folks who work for a living or anyone else the fundies hate (like it is in Wisconsin) maybe they can now have a discussion about what it will take to make California solvent without stripping people of fundamental rights.



Laura

[JosefK]

40. What else is a Democrat...

but a moderate Republican?

[Dark]

41. Speaking as someone from northern california (the wilderness beyond Sacramento),

They only elect Republicans up here. ONLY republicans can win. So, supporting moderate republicans in primaries in parts of cali makes sense.

[librechik]

44. "Hey, that's OUR dirty trick. How dare you do the same???!!!"

idiots