August 31, 2001

Labor Day Message
Bring Shovels and Hammers
by Katrina vanden Heuvel

Gazing out over our national political landscape this Labor Day 2001, it's not hard for progressives to see that we're in the fight of our lives. We face a White House in thrall to business-assaulting labor at every turn—a worldwide economic slowdown, increasing layoffs and plant closings, growing economic inequality. George W. Bush has made it clear that mandate or no mandate, he will pursue an extremist far-right agenda—a further redirection of resources to the rich, the privatization of Social Security, the rollback of environmental progress, the mugging of labor and the use of government to benefit corporate interests.

But, in these perilous times, the good news is that despite the powerful forces arrayed against the labor movement, and the continuing decline in its ranks, labor remains the spine of progressive politics in America. In the past six years, since John Sweeney's "new voices" campaign toppled the stagnant old guard, the AFL-CIO has inspired a more open and innovative spirit throughout much of the labor movement and stimulated serious discussion about grassroots organizing. As The Nation's special Labor Day issue reports, unions have been organizing more boldly and effectively in recent years, making inroads into new constituencies, like immigrants, and opening up the once-scorned service sector. Labor has made its greatest progress in recent years, both in politics and organizing , when it has engaged its members as active organizers and campaigners.

Election 2000 aside, more adept political organizing has boosted the union-household share of the electorate from 19 percent in 1992 to 26 percent in 2000. Labor has forged promising new alliances with students, religious communities, anti-WTO activists and environmentalists. Sure, there have been tactical stumbles—and most unions have yet to shake old bureaucratic habits-—but the stepped-up investment in organizing by the AFL-CIO and its aggressive affiliates has begun to show the way forward.

Yet, politically, the AFL-CIO could do more to build a serious electoral presence at the Congressional level—and at the increasingly important state and local legislative level. It has trained only a small number of people to run for office, and there is no national organization that brings labor to the table with other mass-membership organizations to share lists and develop common programs for elections. Labor is in the process of retooling its political operations in an effort to create a more powerful grassroots presence. And as noted above, it has significantly increased the percentage of voters from union households in recent elections. But while the increase in raw numbers and percentages of union voters is to be celebrated, those figures do not represent a new majority.

It is critical that a retooled and renewed labor strategy recognize that the road to 51 percent (and its future) will have to run through neighborhoods and regions where union membership is low—but where the need for labor-led progressive politics is high. If labor were to become the anchor of a broad progressive coalition, be assured it would gain allies. The fledgling labor-community alliances—for example, the living-wage campaigns that have swept the country—show there is broad support for labor's basic values. There are millions of workers, not just union members, who now recognize that winning labor rights is one of the great civil rights struggles of our time.

The challenge now is for labor to wield its resources and power more strategically and to articulate a broad vision of social justice, democracy, economic fairness and workers' rights on the job and in society that inspires members, allies and the public. Such a vision can impart unity and strength to the progressive movement, though attempts to forge a common strategy between union and environmental groups were seriously undermined when the Teamsters and the building trades union backed Bush's plan to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Their embrace of this policy put labor at odds with a majority of Americans, offended key allies and showed some retrograde thinking about the future of the American economy. (And, I have to confess, it was discouraging to watch your union—traditionally one of the more idealistic ones—endorsing the weaker fuel efficiency standards in the White House's energy plan.) Surely, John Sweeney and many labor leaders who worked hard to build the "blue-green" coalition understand that the future effects of the legislation will be as destructive to union families as to everyone else on the planet? (Now, not all the blame for this debacle lies with labor. Democratic leaders who were defeated by the defection of their own members ought to ask themselves—Why have they failed to promote their own energy policy as a jobs program? Ever since the first oil crisis almost three decades ago, many studies have proved that conservation generates much more employment than exploitation.)

These recent ruptures notwithstanding, it is encouraging that progressives and labor are forming a united front to block George W. Bush's demand for fast-track trade promotion authority. Big business will spend $20 million lobbying for fast track, which would grease the way for the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas through Congress. (The crucial fight will take place in the House, where the Administration will dangle all sorts of phony "side agreements" before Democrats and moderate Republicans.) In working to raise consciousness about the free trade debate and the human costs of these trade agreements, labor is building valuable alliances with other progressives and nonunion workers who care about basic human rights, fair labor standards and environmental protection. Labor—working with the larger progressive community—has blocked fast track twice before. The "blue-green coalition" can do it again.

In the long term, Labor's political success will be driven by an energized rank and file and animated by a morally compelling mission that resonates with workers at home and abroad. Labor will thrive to the extent that it acts not as a "special interest" but as a new civil rights movement—rallying union and nonunion workers alike around their rights to dignity and democracy in the workplace, to economic justice and a living wage, and to the voice and power that union representation can bring. It will be a long fight, but someday organizing must have the same moral and legal weight as the right not to be discriminated against on the basis of gender or race or sexual orientation.

On this Labor Day 2001, the broader progressive community and the labor movement need to chart new terms of engagement if we are to oppose the right-wing agenda of the Bush Administration and take on America's powerful conservative forces. Labor cannot build a progressive politics on its own; and the rest of us can't sit on the sidelines. A vibrant, self-confident progressive movement should bring shovels and hammers and join in the job. The good news is that there are many organizations and unaffiliated individuals who share labor's core values, who are ready to join labor in a common electoral program and in building a progressive infrastructure. In these precarious times, our future is at stake. Nothing less.

Katrina vanden Heuvel is editor of The Nation.

Home | News | Contact Us