Specter deals heavy blow to card-check

"Labor Laws"

03/25/2009

By Kevin Bogardus and Aaron Blake
The HILL
Posted: 03/24/09 08:26 PM [ET]


Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) announced Tuesday he will oppose the card-check bill, giving an apparent death blow to the most important bill for organized labor this Congress.

Specter’s dramatic announcement from the Senate floor also has implications for 2010, when he is expected to face difficult challenges from the right and left. He likely won himself some support from business groups with his declaration, but made himself a target for labor.

Specter noted that Democrat Al Franken’s likely win in the Minnesota Senate race would give him the 60th vote required to make card-check law.

“It is an anguishing position, but we play the cards we are dealt,” Specter said Tuesday.
Specter said in a lengthy interview with The Hill last week that he didn’t relish being the pivotal vote on card-check or the nearly $800 billion economic stimulus bill.

“If you want to be a senator, you’re prepared to take on responsibility, but it’s a little heavy to be responsible for $800 billion with just two other senators,” he said. “And I’m not looking forward to being the decisive vote on [card-check].”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) dismissed the suggestion that Specter’s vote is the death knell for card-check, formally known as the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA).

“Oh, I don’t think so,” Reid said. “He’s not the only Republican who has indicated a willingness to consider something being done.”

When asked what other Republicans might support the bill, Reid said, “We have other suspects.”

But Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) said Specter’s decision is “surely” a serious hit to the bill.
“It greatly diminishes the chances that it will be considered anytime soon,” Kyl said.

No other Republican senators have signaled their support for the bill.

Reid cited an alternative bill offered by Starbucks, Costco and Whole Foods as evidence that the issue was far from over. He said it showed that companies realize labor reform is necessary.

Yet that compromise was roundly shunned by labor and business groups as well as leading Democrats Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) and Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa).

Specter’s opposition means Democrats can count on a maximum of 59 votes to move the bill forward, one short of the 60 required to clear Senate rules.
Winning 59 votes would require Franken to win his contested election with Republican Norm Coleman. Democrats also would have to count on holding the rest of their votes, and several centrists have raised doubts about the bill.

During his interview with The Hill, Specter left open the possibility of running as an Independent in 2010 as a last resort. His campaign has pushed back against the idea that he would leave the GOP, but his polling remains much stronger with Democrats than Republicans.

The Independent route would appear to be less attractive now that he has enflamed unions, which he has intermittently supported during his time in the Senate.

After his speech, praise immediately began to pour in for Specter from the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business trade associations lobbying heavily against the bill.

“Manufacturers stand behind Sen. Specter’s decision to vote against EFCA and appreciate his decision to put working men and women, the economy and the nation first,” said former Michigan Gov. John Engler (R), NAM’s president and CEO.

Labor leaders vowed to plow forward.

Specter’s “statement today opposing an up-or-down vote and real discussion is inconsistent with his own record of support for working people,” said Mary Beth Maxwell, executive director of American Rights at Work, a worker advocacy group. “We will continue to work with Democrats and Republicans to pass this vital legislation and make the economy work for everyone again.”

In exchange for Specter’s vote on the bill, the AFL-CIO had offered to register union members in 2010 as Republicans to help Specter beat primary challenger Pat Toomey. Specter has said repeatedly that he does not make such deals, which he reiterated in his floor statement Tuesday.

State business leaders noted that Specter’s decision is not a cure-all for his woes with the GOP base.

They say many influential conservative groups are so turned off by Specter’s support for the stimulus bill that even a game-changing decision on a major bill like EFCA is little consolation.

In a 2004 primary, Specter defeated Toomey, a former GOP House member, by less than 2 percent.

Toomey’s chances look even sweeter this time around, with just 26 percent of Republicans in a recent poll saying they would vote to send Specter back to the Senate. Two-thirds said they wanted someone else.

Specter was the only Republican to vote in favor of a cloture motion in 2007 to proceed to debate on the bill, but that was essentially a free vote, since the bill did not have the votes to clear the Senate and would not have been signed by President Bush.

Specter’s support this year would almost certainly have sent the bill to President Obama, who has said he would sign it.

The senator said the decision to vote for cloture on the bill last Congress was not because he approved of the bill itself.

“I was not supporting the bill on the merits, but only to take up the issue of labor law reform,” Specter said.

The Pennsylvania Republican said he found significant problems with two provisions in the bill. One, the card-check provision, would prevent employers from demanding a secret-ballot election to form a union if a majority of workers sign authorization cards stating their intention to organize. The other would have the government appoint an arbitrator to mediate stalled contract negotiations between unions and management.

Specter said the card-check provision would eliminate the secret ballot, which he called “the cornerstone of how contests are decided in a democratic society.” The arbitration measure could saddle an employer with “a deal he or she cannot live with.”

But Specter left himself some room to maneuver. He said he would be willing to reconsider the bill once the recession ends and if other legislation could not boost labor’s collective bargaining rights.

Toomey noted that statement in his own response to Specter’s decision. He said Specter has reserved the right to change his position if his own “political fortunes” improve.

“When Sen. Specter does a flip-flop, it’s worth checking the fine print,” Toomey said. “On the Senate floor today, he said: ‘I would be willing to reconsider Employees’ Free Choice legislation when the economy returns to normalcy.’ In other words, if he thinks his political fortunes have improved, he will deny workers a secret ballot after all.”

Specter also attached possible amendments to the National Labor Relations Act to his floor statement for other senators to consider in order to improve labor law.

One amendment was very similar to an EFCA measure that would increase penalties for employers who violate labor law. Another would provide for a union election within 10 days once a joint petition is filed by a union and its employer. And yet another Specter measure would give union officials equal access to workers during an organizing drive.