Wednesday, June 28, 2006

List of AFL-CIO Endorsements

Below is a full list of endorsed candidates from the state AFL-CIO convention. I haven't seen a complete list in the media so I thought it would be worth posting here.

Governor
John Destefano

Secretary of State
Susan Bysiewicz

Treasurer
Denise Nappier

Comptroller
Nancy Wyman

Attorney General
Richard Blumenthal

U.S. Senate
Joe Lieberman


Congress: 1st District
John Larson

Congress: 2nd District
Joe Courtney

Congress: 3rd District
Rosa DeLauro

Congress: 4th District
Diane Farrell

Congress: 5th District
Chris Murphy

The CT AFL-CIO has a .pdf of the full list, including nominees for State Senate and State Representative here.

Sources

"2006 Connecticut AFL-CIO Endorsements." http://www.ctaflcio.org/. 6/28/06

"DeStefano Earns Historic Endorsement from Connecticut AFL-CIO!" Campaign Press Release. 6/27/06

"Major Labor Groups Endorse Senator Lieberman." Campaign Press Release 6/27/06

Spigel, Jan Ellen. "CONNECTICUT AFL-CIO ENDORSES DIANE FARRELL." Campaign Press Release 6/27/06

"Chris Receives Warm Welcome from Connecticut Workers". Campaign Blog. 6/28/06

51 comments:

bluecoat said...

they endorsed the winners of the convention, including JDS, big deal...

TSCowperthwait said...

I thought that it was weak that the AFL-CIO only endorsed Senator Lieberman through the August primary election. If you believe enough in a candidate's policies to endorse him, then endorse him.

The endorsement of Mayor DeStefano also doesn't surprise me. Over the last couple of months it has been apparent that he has greater union support than Mayor Malloy.

BRubenstein said...

GC...how about the blog hosting a social?...like a pizza party at some restaurant where we could all meet ( and hopefully not kill eachother) drink beer and watch the Lieberman/Lamont debate?

BRubenstein said...

TSC..the question is..will the unions get off their duff and work hard for him? That remains to be seen..but if they do..then JDS has a leg up in the primary.

Chris MC said...

[Olsen] said he had a conversation with the [UFCW]’s leaders in which he asked, “What message do you want to bring to the convention” – one that blocked the AFL-CIO from making an endorsement? They stayed home.

Labor Lifts DeStefano; Malloy Looks Long Term

disgruntled_republican said...

Where are the Republican candidates?

bluecoat said...

The UFCW backed Farrell if I am not mistaken and I know Farrell has asked her supporters to back Malloy because she feels it's in the best interest of her campaign; as I posted before that reasoning helped her flip several votes at the convention from JDS to DM on the second and third votes..

Chris MC said...

There was no third vote.

BRubenstein said...

I will go thru the numbers again for the Democratic Party...first some general facts and observations...

There are close to 700,000 registered Democrats.In 1994 the curry vs. larson primary the turnout was 26%..There is no precedent or history for a August Primary and this one will be a double primary right now ( governor and senator).There are 250,000 union members in CT ( in and out of the AFL)

Of the 250,000 members...you would "add in" the organized retirees that are organized and active in each union( about 100,00)
and their immediate families and relatives whom they influence..15% would seem a good conservative number..bringing the total union vote to about 390,000 votes..

Of those 390,000 votes about 55% are either U's or R's leaving about 175,000 union democratic votes,able to vote in the primary.

If there was a 26% vote in 1994 ( curry vs. larson..its safe to assume a higher % even given the august vote...so i assume a roughly 35% total vote or ..of the total 700,000 Dems able to vote..expect a turnout of about 250,000 total votes on primary day..the union vote of that 250,000 would be 35% of 175,000 union dems able to vote or about 61,000 votes.This equates to about a 25% labor turnout on the total vote of the primary..a traditional history and assumes labor will turnout in the same % as everyone else.

In 1994 the unions backed curry at a rate of 2/1 over larson...lets assume the same 2/1 for JDS...of the 61,000 votes he would be at 41,000 and DM would be at 20,000 and the total democratic population voting once again would be 250,000 votes..that mean you would subtract the 61,000 union dems voting from the 250,000 total vote leaving roughly 190,000 voting non-union democrats...

Of those remaining 190,000 voting non-union democrats DM would need to win them at a rate of 56% of those 190,000 votes.56% of 190,000 is roughly 106,000..leaving JDS with the balance of 84,000. 106,000 less 84,000 is 22,000..so DM would make up from the union 2/1 vote and win.

While 56% of non-union votes is very hard to do..its not impossible..

BRubenstein said...

chris is right...there was no 3rd vote..

bluecoat said...

OK, I am wrong....stop picking on me...and I knew you were in league with Chris there BR...:->>>

BRubenstein said...

bluecoat...LMAO...na...never in league with him..we dont usally support the same candidates...he is for DM and Lieberman and im for JDS and Lamont.

bluecoat said...

speaking of being wrong:http://www.journalinquirer.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16857276&BRD=985&PAG=461&dept_id=161556&rfi=6 and not tipping off its opinion on the death penalty the JI offers this headlinerKiller's lawyers attack prosecutors' 'God-like decisions' on death By Heather Nann Collins, Journal Inquirer 06/27/2006

BRubenstein said...

Addendum to the Numbers...

The 4th CD is the 2nd worst democratic voting CD in the state..check as i did the 2004 numbers in the blue book register.The 3rd and 1st CD's are the best performing ones...this will give JDS another "edge" going into the primary..I suspect he will goose up his base in the 1st and 3rd and other towns where they are high performing and try to capitalize on them.

bluecoat said...

the first link above offers commentary on Malloy's policing plan from Rell and JDS...I screwed up AGAIN

Mr. Reality said...

It's good to know that unions are not in the back pockets of Democrats!!!

AnonAndOnAndOn said...

Mr. Reality:

Or is it the other way around??

bluecoat said...

NO, the Democrats would be in the back pockets of the unions if anything....andSullivan Case Stalls At Capitol 3 Justices Were Set To Face Committee June 28, 2006 By LYNNE TUOHY, Courant Staff Writer and instead of syaing this job is too much for me and I'll never get it right so we can get rid of the admittedly useless court monitor, Commissioner Darlene Dunbar at DCF Wants Monitor Replaced Official Says Behavior Compromises Role June 28, 2006 By COLIN POITRAS And DAVE ALTIMARI, Courant Staff Writers

BRubenstein said...

disgruntled and Mr Reality..the unions have a huge investment in the Democratic Party...

For many years in the national DNC the unions have many at-large seats for them in the Executive Committee of the national party and a few are officers of the party.

In this state,of the 72 democratic state central members id bet 20 are active union members, with atleast 1 who is a officer of the party.

On the issues...the democratic party is closest to them..

If your Republican Party moved closer to them on the issues...then you might see some movement from labor to your party.Until then, expect them to be part of the Democratic Party

bluecoat said...

good link for the Court Monitor/DCF story I hope...and why not?E-mails that elections enforcement chief Jeffrey B. Garfield claimed were not on his state computer when requested by legislators last spring had been restored at least six days before the request, according to records of the state Department of Information Technology

disgruntled_republican said...

BR-

We, in my opinion, are much closer than you and they betray. Specifically I think of people like Rob Simmons who has work hard for his district and saved and added numerous union jobs and has always stood up for those that need help.

In my humble opinion the AFL-CIO is the largest special interest group around and I think it's unfortunate that the Democrat party as a whole feels beholden to them. And yes, they are beholden to them. Why else would it be necessary to create special positions for them?

bluecoat said...

DG: I think it's fair to say Simmons also saved profits for some companies while saving union jobs too...

BRubenstein said...

Disgruntled...the party is beholden to Labor..i admit it.

However they arent the largest special interest group...id venture to say that pro-choice women are the largest special interest group

disgruntled_republican said...

I would give you that but that group crosses political lines, especially in New England. As can be seen from the AFL-CIO endorsements, they certainly do not.

BRubenstein said...

Disgruntled...I dont think the labor movement feels that your Psrty is closer to them then mine..

Having said that..they have a declining % in a general election..and there is a anti-union backlash as well...

BRubenstein said...

WHat i meant is...they definitely mean alot in a democratic primary..in a general election they mean very little right now..otherwise WE would have been in the governor's mansion sometime between 1990 and now.ANd not just as a "guest" lmao

disgruntled_republican said...

What labor movement?

That's my entire freaking point! The so called labor movement is non-existant. It is a lack of movement Bruce.

Explain why GM, a company that sold more cars than any outo maker last year, had to lay off so many employees while Honda & Toyota, who also produce cars in the USA, didn't lay off a soal?

The answer is simple - UNIONS

GM, Ford, et al have union labor while Toyota and Honda do not. Does this mean Toyota & Honda don;t treat their employees well? No, on the contrary, they treat then quite well.

Now I am not saying unions don;t have their place because they do. What I am saying is that they shouldn't be strong enough to have the influence on a political party like they do. I am saying they shouldn;t be strong enough to affect the economy in the way that they do.

My uncle is a union worker. I am proud of him for what he has accomplished in life. I fully admit that unions helped him do that but this isn;t early 1900's Amereica anymore. The sooner everyone realizes that the better off we will all be.

bluecoat said...

DG: GM and Ford made promises to the organized labor unions that they never could keep...and now they are breaking them...it's not just about the unions it's about managemnt too...

Mr. Reality said...

BRubenstein, If you have read any of my comments in the past you would know that I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I love to point out however how partisan people on this board can be so closeminded. Thank you for backing up my point.

BRubenstein said...

Disgruntled...I agree that the social conditions in 2006 are not as bad as they were in 1900 and thus making it justifiably harder to organize a labor union. Having said that...its still necessary for many reasons and bluecoat mentioned one of them.I only wish the labor movement spent less time on politics and more time on organizing.If they did more organizing..there would be more of a movement...

BRubenstein said...

Mr Reality..how am i close-minded?

Mr. Reality said...

Because you automatically labeled me a Republican. It's not my Republican party. Just because I think its silly that unions actually go through this endorsement process (considering that 99% of their endorsements are for Democrats)it does not make me a Republican.

disgruntled_republican said...

bluecoat -

Promises were made on both sides...however I think, no no, I know that GM, Ford and Chrysler has zero chance of breaking the union without crippling the economy.

By no means do I think they (auto makers in this example) should try to break the union but I think the unions are short sighted in their thinking that they aren't part of the problem because they are.

That is why I say that the sooner they realize this the better off we will all be.

Then look at the teacher's union...what a joke! How can one keep an ineffective teacher and give him/her a raise when they are not effective? If I am ineffective I lose money and if I lose enough I lose my job. Simple as that.

Unions should only be local in that instance and only exist for the good of the organization, not themselves.

disgruntled_republican said...

Wow...I just read back through this thread and am I ever on a soapbox...whew!

BRubenstein said...

Mr Reality...when did i label you a Republican? I dont remember that

disgruntled_republican said...

Bruce,

I think he is referring to when you repsonded to both he and I at once and said "when your republican party..."

BRubenstein said...

yes..i checked that..Mr Reality..i was responding to my friend Disgruntled..who is a proud Republican and not you...

bluecoat said...

The giveaways to the unions by GM, the airlines et al was over the course of at least fifty years when they went for peace at all costs because they were raking in the dough.....and the giveawyas have broken the economy...so which is it and what is the next step?

disgruntled_republican said...

Despite what some people say, the economy is fine right now. The automakers' profits are not. Neither are the union's jobs. Seems both sides have something to lose.

I don't know what the next step is but open dialogue between the union and management is a start...

BRubenstein said...

Disgruntled...i agree about the open dislogue suggestion of yours...i just bought a new jag...the trannie was made in Japan as well as some other parts of the car...

bluecoat said...

Yes, the economy is fine right now if you are not an auto maker or an auto maker employee, retiree or supplier and a few other folks who have noticed that healthcosts are double the % of GDP today that they were half a century ago..

bluecoat said...

BR: you bought a Ford!!!

bluecoat said...

When the current head of GM, whose name escapes me right now, began the draconian moves of a few years ago he blamed management and he said there needed to be a dialogue about how to improve the quality of health services while lowering costs - GM is the largest health insurer in the country next to the federal govt.

disgruntled_republican said...

bluecoat-

Meanwhile, back in the real world, employees have been paying a higher portion of their premium. I certainly am but I don't complain about it as it is not my employer's fault.

I think it is very reasonable for employers to ask their employees to pay more...they still pay the largest portion anyway.

bluecoat said...

DG: you are talking about insurance and who pays for it - and employers can do wwhat they will as far as I am concerned; I am talking about the cost of the service; there is a difference...but the doctors, hospitals and for some reason the CBIA want to divert the conversation to co-pays...

bluecoat said...

I should add that Pitney-Bowes made a business decision to not require any co-pays of their employees but I am not sure about the contribution to the actual premium...while they work to lower the underlying costs of doctors, hospitals and drugs, etc....because that is where the money is....

disgruntled_republican said...

I realize that...I am not talking about that...I was talking about the problems unions create...a bit off topic from where I was...I need to go work anyway...

HuskyFan06 said...

Earth to Murphy’s campaign! I posted on your blog curious to see which senate resolution [The Kerry proposal that would bring troops home by July 2007 or the Reed-Levin proposal that would start pulling troops out his year without a specific deadline for withdrawal of all troops] would receive Chris’s support. It’s curious to have a blog and not answer. Any thoughts where Chris Murphy is on the issue? Also does anyone know if he is going to face the facts and endorse Lamont?

BRubenstein said...

HuskyFan06..i seem to remember that Murphy,Courtney and Farrell all endorsed Lieberman

disgruntled_republican said...

That they did and they have all stood by their endorsements of him.

blogsurfer said...

Hi, I see your blog is talking about Toyotas. Are you looking for anything related to Toyotas? Toyota cars, SUVs, or Toyota parts & accessories? And the best part, every item can be had at auction prices! Just wanted to pass this tidbit of info along. Thanks.