Warner Todd Huston
Washington State's SEIU bought Republican
By Warner Todd Huston
On February 24, Moe Lane posted a short piece alerting one and all to the fact that one of the Republican candidates for Washington State's 3rd Congressional District is a favorite of the hard-core lefties in the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) — one of Obama's favorite Big Labors cohorts. Mr. Lane, though, was sure that Jaime Herrera "regrets that endorsement now." Unfortunately, I am not so sanguine because Herrera has been far more compliant with Big Labor's goals than is evident from what Lane might have thought was a mere wayward endorsement.
There is a reason, it appears, that the SEIU endorsed Herrera. As a Republican she seems to be far more one of them than one of us at least as far as Big Labor's needs go!
Moe Lane cited the Clark County Politics blog on the SEIU's endorsement, but if you don't want to believe the CCPblog — admittedly a right leaning site — here is a Progressive Voters Guide for Washington and here is the Voters Guide for Equal Rights Washington, both left-wing groups that show SEIU support for Herrera. On top of that here is SEIU Local 1199 NW's endorsement page which also announces its endorsement of Herrera.
But, let's address that possible "regret" that Mr. Lane so casually extends to Ms Harrera. Could Lane be right, could it be that Herrera was just by happenstance on the receiving end of an SEIU endorsement and now wishes it never happened? Was it all just an unfortunate incident? I have to say that after looking up some of her votes over the last few years, I must conclude that Herrera was given the thumbs up by the SEIU for a reason. Jaime Herrera was quite a friend to Big Labor.
Herrera's Pro-Union Votes
In both 2009 and 2010 Herrera voted "yes" to forcibly unionize child care workers in the state, a favorite SEIU cause not just in Washington but in many states. (For instance, I had a hand in fighting the SEIU's efforts to forcibly unionize in-home healthcare and child care workers in Illinois in 2009. Also see John Stossel's recent story on forced unionization of Michigan's in-home workers.)
In the 2007-08 session, Herrera voted yes on HB 2449 a bill that provided "collective bargaining for child care center directors and workers."
Then in the 2009-10 session she not only voted yes on HB 1329, she was also a co-sponsor. This bill also provided for the collective bargaining for child care center directors and workers.
It turns out that Herrera is co-sponsoring a bill that would force these child care workers to unionize even though those very same workers previously rejected the SEIU and had already told the union that they didn't want to be part of their organization.
Not only that, but this bill would also force unionization of church-based child care centers.
These several bills that would force child care workers to unionize aren't the only forced unionization bill that Herrera voted for. She also voted yes on HB 1389.
According to its summary, HB 1389, "Adds the operating and maintenance employees at a commercial nuclear power plant to the employees covered by interest arbitration under the Public Employees' Collective Bargaining Act." In other words the bill would place workers at a private power plant into a state employee's union.
As it happens, Herrera was one of the few Republicans in Washington State to vote in favor of these many Big Labor bills. Herrera said in a phone interview that her votes on these Big Labor bills were a "moral issue." I guess if by "moral" you mean getting political and financial support from unions, then that would be the case. Other's mileage might vary!
Just call it Herrera's attempt to emulate an Obamaesque style of "community organizing." It's organizing by hook or by crook and since none of these bills bothered to ask the actual workers being unionized, I'd say it is mostly crook.
Again according to Clark County Politics Blog Herrera promised she "would be a friend of organized labor." Well, even if she didn't say that exactly (as I only have this one source to say so) her votes most certainly lend credence to that sentiment.
The Washington Third
Currently Democrat Brian Baird holds Washington's 3rd Congressional seat. He is retiring at the end of this term. Democrats seem to be lining up behind Denny Heck as their nominee to replace Baird. Three other Democrats are also still in the running: State Senator Craig Pridemore; Cheryl Crist; and Maria Rodriguez-Salazar.
There are three Republicans vying for the GOP nomination. Along with Herrera, former serviceman David Hedrick of Camas is in the race and former deputy assistant secretary of the federal Department of Veterans Affairs David Castillo of Olympia is also running.
Me, I have no dog in that hunt, but with Herrera's constant sop to Big Labor, I'd suggest that Washington's Republicans look a bit more carefully at her record and then that they should consider looking to support either Castillo or Hedrick instead.
David Castillo for Congress www.castilloforcongress.com
David W. Hedrick for Congress www.davidwhedrick.com
© Warner Todd Huston
February 26, 2010
On February 24, Moe Lane posted a short piece alerting one and all to the fact that one of the Republican candidates for Washington State's 3rd Congressional District is a favorite of the hard-core lefties in the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) — one of Obama's favorite Big Labors cohorts. Mr. Lane, though, was sure that Jaime Herrera "regrets that endorsement now." Unfortunately, I am not so sanguine because Herrera has been far more compliant with Big Labor's goals than is evident from what Lane might have thought was a mere wayward endorsement.
There is a reason, it appears, that the SEIU endorsed Herrera. As a Republican she seems to be far more one of them than one of us at least as far as Big Labor's needs go!
Moe Lane cited the Clark County Politics blog on the SEIU's endorsement, but if you don't want to believe the CCPblog — admittedly a right leaning site — here is a Progressive Voters Guide for Washington and here is the Voters Guide for Equal Rights Washington, both left-wing groups that show SEIU support for Herrera. On top of that here is SEIU Local 1199 NW's endorsement page which also announces its endorsement of Herrera.
But, let's address that possible "regret" that Mr. Lane so casually extends to Ms Harrera. Could Lane be right, could it be that Herrera was just by happenstance on the receiving end of an SEIU endorsement and now wishes it never happened? Was it all just an unfortunate incident? I have to say that after looking up some of her votes over the last few years, I must conclude that Herrera was given the thumbs up by the SEIU for a reason. Jaime Herrera was quite a friend to Big Labor.
Herrera's Pro-Union Votes
In both 2009 and 2010 Herrera voted "yes" to forcibly unionize child care workers in the state, a favorite SEIU cause not just in Washington but in many states. (For instance, I had a hand in fighting the SEIU's efforts to forcibly unionize in-home healthcare and child care workers in Illinois in 2009. Also see John Stossel's recent story on forced unionization of Michigan's in-home workers.)
In the 2007-08 session, Herrera voted yes on HB 2449 a bill that provided "collective bargaining for child care center directors and workers."
Then in the 2009-10 session she not only voted yes on HB 1329, she was also a co-sponsor. This bill also provided for the collective bargaining for child care center directors and workers.
It turns out that Herrera is co-sponsoring a bill that would force these child care workers to unionize even though those very same workers previously rejected the SEIU and had already told the union that they didn't want to be part of their organization.
Not only that, but this bill would also force unionization of church-based child care centers.
These several bills that would force child care workers to unionize aren't the only forced unionization bill that Herrera voted for. She also voted yes on HB 1389.
According to its summary, HB 1389, "Adds the operating and maintenance employees at a commercial nuclear power plant to the employees covered by interest arbitration under the Public Employees' Collective Bargaining Act." In other words the bill would place workers at a private power plant into a state employee's union.
As it happens, Herrera was one of the few Republicans in Washington State to vote in favor of these many Big Labor bills. Herrera said in a phone interview that her votes on these Big Labor bills were a "moral issue." I guess if by "moral" you mean getting political and financial support from unions, then that would be the case. Other's mileage might vary!
Just call it Herrera's attempt to emulate an Obamaesque style of "community organizing." It's organizing by hook or by crook and since none of these bills bothered to ask the actual workers being unionized, I'd say it is mostly crook.
Again according to Clark County Politics Blog Herrera promised she "would be a friend of organized labor." Well, even if she didn't say that exactly (as I only have this one source to say so) her votes most certainly lend credence to that sentiment.
The Washington Third
Currently Democrat Brian Baird holds Washington's 3rd Congressional seat. He is retiring at the end of this term. Democrats seem to be lining up behind Denny Heck as their nominee to replace Baird. Three other Democrats are also still in the running: State Senator Craig Pridemore; Cheryl Crist; and Maria Rodriguez-Salazar.
There are three Republicans vying for the GOP nomination. Along with Herrera, former serviceman David Hedrick of Camas is in the race and former deputy assistant secretary of the federal Department of Veterans Affairs David Castillo of Olympia is also running.
Me, I have no dog in that hunt, but with Herrera's constant sop to Big Labor, I'd suggest that Washington's Republicans look a bit more carefully at her record and then that they should consider looking to support either Castillo or Hedrick instead.
David Castillo for Congress www.castilloforcongress.com
David W. Hedrick for Congress www.davidwhedrick.com
© Warner Todd Huston
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
