Previous weeks' news: Oct. 18-22 -- Oct. 11-15 -- Oct. 4-8

This morning, New York Gov. George Pataki makes a campaign appearance in Washington state on behalf of Republican gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi. The two have more in common than their party affiliation, they both share a right-wing anti-worker ideology that includes opposition to basic labor standards like the minimum wage and overtime pay. Plus, both have "Read My Lips" records of campaigning as budget-balancing tax-cutters when, in fact, both have raised taxes and fees that disproportionately hit working families. Take a look at their records:

MINIMUM WAGE:  Gov. Pataki just vetoed a bipartisan bill to raise New York's state minimum wage, which has remained frozen for seven years at the federal standard of $5.15 an hour, or $10,712 a year for a full-time worker. The bill, a compromise between the two houses of the New York Legislature, passed with only 26 dissenting votes in the 212-seat Legislature.

"I am disappointed," said Republican Assemblyman Robert Prentiss, R-Colonie. "I've heard from so many of my constituents who supported raising the minimum wage. (The veto) hurts the working families I represent."

OVERTIME PAY:  Gov. Pataki and Dino Rossi both support President Bush's overtime pay takeaway which exempts millions more U.S. workers from the right to time-and-a-half wages for their extra work. Today, workers in Washington state are largely shielded from the negative impact of Bush's new overtime rules because of state statutes that mirror the pre-existing federal rules about who qualifies for overtime pay. 

TAX INCREASES:  Gov. Pataki's own campaign pledge to impose no new taxes, ended in 1999 with a $400 million cigarette tax hike, but hit a new low among New York's fiscal conservatives in 2003 when Pataki fought for increases of "almost every conceivable tax and fee," according to a report entitled "New York's Republican Stumble" in American Enterprise magazine. Pataki's handling of the budget caused his approval ratings to plummet to a new low.

Like Rossi, Gov. Pataki brags that he balanced his state's budget during the recession without raising taxes. But the truth is, there were many tax increases in his proposals, just not increases in the personal income tax or major corporate taxes. Instead, he imposed new "revenue measures" and "fees," dramatically raised tuition at state colleges, sought a new tax on sports tickets and tires, proposed to reinstate the sales tax on clothing, and fought for a whopping 33% hike in New York City's transit fares. Pataki's critics railed against him for targeting new taxes at people who can least afford to pay them, especially working families in the African American and Latino communities.

In Washington state, Rossi has done the same thing. His single legislative accomplishment he touts at every campaign stop is that he balanced the state budget during a revenue shortfall without raising taxes (a claim that dismisses Democratic Gov. Gary Locke's role in proposing a no-new-tax budget upon which Rossi based his proposal). Rossi's last-minute television attack ads against Democrat Christine Gregoire repeat this claim and falsely accuse her of wanting to raise taxes.

The truth is, Rossi is the ONLY CANDIDATE IN THIS RACE WHO HAS RAISED TAXES. Take a look at Rossi's record:

On the other hand, when Christine Gregoire was pressured during the primary election campaign to support higher taxes, she said “no.”  When Dino Rossi had the chance, he imposed new taxes.

Union members and their families should beware of salesmen like Rossi and Pataki, right-wing ideologues who talk a good game about being "compassionate conservative" Republicans, but have records of raising taxes on working people (not corporations) and opposing basic worker protections like the minimum wage and overtime pay. 

Learn more about Dino Rossi's shameful 6% voting record on working families issues.

The Public Disclosure Commission upheld the Washington State Labor Council’s political action program as a legitimate political education program at its meeting yesterday in Olympia. The PDC dismissed all counts of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation’s complaint against the Labor Council by a 3-0 vote with one abstention and one absent.

The EFF complaint alleged that the WSLC's internal member communications about election issues should be subject to campaign finance disclosure laws. The complaint cost the Labor Council thousands of dollars in legal fees, an expensive attack aimed at harassing the chief voice for organized labor in the state during a major campaign season. The U.S. Supreme Court has twice ruled that laws restricting the right of a labor organization to communicate with union members regarding political causes raises “the gravest constitutional issues,“ and infringe on the First Amendment right of free association.

Ironically, the attack comes from an organization that maintains near total secrecy about its funders and expenditures, and claims to be a non-political and charitable 501(c)3 organization.  The secret funders of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation are believed to be many of the same business and corporate groups that fund attacks on candidates who represent the interests of working families.

The Washington State Labor Council’s chief political action effort involves direct communication with union members. In this state, union members and their families account for nearly 25% of the vote in elections. The “Labor Neighbor” program was pioneered by the Washington State Labor Council and has been adopted nationwide by organized labor. Beginning in 2001, when the first effort included 300 volunteer shifts, the “Labor-Neighbor” effort has grown to more than 5,000 volunteer shifts so far this election cycle.

Labor Neighbor is a way to have union members directly talk with fellow union members at work and at home. Between worksite leafleting, in-house mail and tens of thousands of door-knocks, the grassroots effort has developed a powerful punch.

“Labor Neighbor been a wonderful chance for me to connect with fellow members and for us to rediscover our common concerns,” said volunteer Dale Bright of Bellevue who has personally doorbelled union members in more than 30 precincts of the  41st District, where there’s a close race between incumbent state Sen. Jim Horn and challenger Brian Weinstein. Dale is a member of Laborers Local 242.

“I have really enjoyed talking with union members at home. They tell me they can’t get the information we offer about the candidates’ positions on issues important to working families anywhere else.  We’ve all learned a lot,” said Mike Witmer, AFT local 4985 member and a psychology instructor at Skagit Valley Community College.  Mike has volunteered in the 1st legislative district’s Labor Neighbor effort.

The Washington State Labor Council has invested in the Labor Neighbor campaign this year because it is both effective and helps build the labor movement by motivating individual members.  “Every time rank-and-file members volunteer for Labor Neighbor, I see not only another victory for labor’s endorsed candidates but also strong advocates for working families being trained and energized,” said Rick Bender, President of the Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO.

“We are not spending one dime this year in independent expenditures, because our focus is on a grassroots rank-and-file program that actually helps our members learn about candidates and the issues. Unlike our opponents, we don’t engage in personal attacks or unfair tactics,” Bender added.

The Labor Neighbor internal member contact program has covered every county and legislative district in the state. Some of the targeted legislative races include the 41st District of Mercer Island and Bellevue, the 49th District in Vancouver, the 28th District in Fircrest and the 6th District in Spokane.

Although final numbers have not been compiled, it appears that nearly 1,000 volunteer shifts have been put into the final two weeks of this campaign season. 

CALL TO ACTION:  As if you needed another reason to participate in the WSLC's Labor Neighbor effort, send a message to right-wing groups like Evergreen Freedom Foundation by making Labor Neighbor's get-out-the-vote campaign the biggest and most effective ever. VOLUNTEER this weekend or on Election Day!  Check out the schedule (below) and call the coordinator in your area to RSVP.

For more information, contact Dave Groves or Karen Keiser at (206) 281-8901.

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 26
Sen. Murray to attend picket today at Seattle VA Medical Center

MONDAY, OCTOBER 25
Judge rules against BIAW's "secret list" of cities

The following news release was distributed Friday by the Washington State Labor Council regarding the latest developments on the Building Industry Association of Washington's use of taxpayer money to finance its political agenda (also see the Oct. 14 posting: Public dollars being diverted for politics):

OLYMPIA -- It was revealed in court today (Friday, Oct. 22) that at least 20 public entities have joined with the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW) in a program that generates tens of thousands of dollars in political donations to state and local campaigns.  Today, Thurston County judge Richard Hicks ruled that the BIAW had failed to meet the burden of proof necessary to keep the names of their participants secret. However, the judge granted a 15-day stay for the BIAW to appeal his ruling to the Court of Appeals.

“We’re confident the Court of Appeals will uphold the trial court,” said Rick Bender, President of the Washington State Labor Council.  The case began when the State Labor Council filed a public disclosure request with the state Department of Labor and Industries for the names of the BIAW’s “retro refund” participants.   The state agency administers the retrospective rating program for workers’ compensation premiums. A BIAW newsletter had welcomed the city of Mount Vernon into its “retro” program last month.

In court today, the BIAW argued that its “retro” program participants were a “trade secret” and therefore exempt from public disclosure.  It was also argued in court today that when an individual company enrolled in the state’s retrospective rating program, it would be subject to the public disclosure act.

The BIAW uses the refunds from the “retro” program to fund its aggressive political activities.  Past reports indicate the BIAW takes a 20 percent fee from each participant’s retrospective refund.  Another “secret” BIAW participant, the city of Kennewick, received a $100,000 refund this year, according to the Tri-Cities Area Journal of Business October edition.  That means under the 20 percent calculation, the $20,000 of Kennewick citizens’ tax dollars were used without their knowledge or permission for political campaigns throughout the state. 

“It’s wrong for public monies to be used in partisan politics,” Bender said.  “How can we know what’s going on unless the public disclosure act is followed and the names are revealed?” he asked.

For more information, contact the WSLC's David Groves at 1-800-542-0904 or (206) 281-8901.

MONDAY, OCTOBER 25
'Competitiveness' handout omits good news on workers' comp

The Washington state business lobbying community continues to selectively report information about the state's business climate in order to support its legislative efforts to cut benefits for injured workers and their families.

A group of Washington state business organizations that calls itself the Washington Competitiveness Council publishes a compilation of statistics called the Competitiveness Redbook, which lists state-by-state rankings on various factors of the "business climate."  Contrary to the findings of national organizations that lack an agenda in Washington and say our state business climate is excellent, the 2005 edition of the local lobbyist-produced rankings has concluded that, yes, we suck.

But an omission in this year's edition shows just how the data is manipulated to suit the short-term lobbying goals of the business groups that write it, and call into question the credibility of the entire "analysis."

In years past, the "Redbook" included a state-by-state comparison of employer workers' compensation costs, citing the a comparison prepared every two years by the State of Oregon. The Redbook for 2005 -- a year in which workers' compensation "reform" will be at the very top of the business lobbyists' agenda in Olympia and dueling initiatives could both land on next fall's ballot -- that ranking has disappeared.

Why?  Because we don't suck!  

Washington, as it turns out, is a low-cost workers' compensation system state and despite recent premium increases, still ranks in the bottom third when compared to other states. That bit of news is counterproductive to the lobbying groups that hope to seize on the frustration of a recent spike in premiums to try to cut benefits. They are desperate to accomplish this in 2005, because the system has stabilized and big premium increases may not happen again any time soon.  (They are so desperate that one business group actually argues for a bigger premium increase that the 3.7% scheduled for 2005.)

So instead of listing the "employer cost" ranking, the 2005 Competitiveness Redbook lists only a state-by-state comparison of workers' compensation benefits, where Washington ranks 5th highest in the nation. The obvious goal is to hope the reader assumes that higher benefits equal higher premiums.

They don't. The biggest single reason is that Washington is the only state in the nation where workers pay a share of the workers' comp premiums. An average of more than 25% of the premium is covered by employees, and that unique provision has long been considered a trade-off for having better benefits and a stronger safety net for the families of workers injured on the job who can't return to work.

Now, the business community appears poised to renege on that trade-off.  They want to cut benefits and keep the employees' subsidy of their workers' compensation premiums. In 2005, they hope to seize upon what's left of the momentum from the 7E7 bid and all this false "competitiveness" rhetoric and convince legislators that the workers' comp grass is greener everywhere else but here.

Business lobbyists continue to point to premium spikes in 2003 and 2004 as evidence of the need for reform. But just as they refuse to report the good news on Washington's overall competitiveness in this area, they refuse to acknowledge that those two years were preceded by more than a decade of frozen or reduced rates, and two years (1999 and 2000) in which Governor Locke actually issued massive rebate checks costing the system $400 million. (The Washington State Labor Council opposed those rebates as imprudent, and as it turns out, if they had not been issued, only small inflationary increases would have been needed in 2003 and 2004, as opposed to the premium spikes that have generated momentum for changing the system.)

After the business community pulled out of negotiations last year on changing the workers' compensation system, the Building Industry Association of Washington decided to file an initiative to "reform" the system, primarily by cutting benefits. The Washington State Labor Council responded with an initiative of its own articulating ways the system can be made more fair and responsive to injured workers and their families.

Stay tuned.

Postscript:  A note of irony sounded in the 2005 Redbook is the focus it puts upon Washington's rank as the most expensive state in the nation for unemployment insurance. The irony is that business lobbying groups were allowed to rewrite our state's unemployment system as part of the bid for Boeing 7E7 assembly work, and chose a volatile new financing system that required a self-imposed 14% tax increase in 2004 over a labor-sponsored alternative plan that would have saved Boeing the same amount of money, but avoided that tax increase AND across-the-board benefit cuts.

The good news for employers -- and bad news for workers -- is that in 2005, those UI premiums are expected to begin dropping as the dramatic benefit cuts continue to be phased in. The Department of Employment Security is predicting a 16% cut in UI premiums in 2005, and more premium reductions in 2006.