Prop. 75 Worries Union Leaders

With thousands of Californians already voting by mail, leaders of organized labor are increasingly anxious about the strength of their push to mobilize union members against Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s November ballot measures.

Their chief worries are that many won’t vote and that many of those who do will support Proposition 75, a measure fiercely opposed by labor leaders yet alluring to many in the rank and file.

The measure, backed by Schwarzenegger, would bar government employee unions from spending members’ dues on political campaigns without prior consent. Labor leaders fear it would sharply diminish their ability to make campaign donations, tilting the balance of political power in California toward business interests.

“We’re not winning on this thing, and we’ve got to step it up,” Steven Neal, a Los Angeles County Federation of Labor official, told scores of union leaders at a campaign breakfast last week in downtown Los Angeles. He likened the battle against Proposition 75 to a “sinking ship” in need of rescue.

The gathering, called by the labor federation, was designed to arouse a sense of urgency among union political operatives in fighting Schwarzenegger’s agenda in the Nov. 8 election.

But the event also showcased the nervousness among union leaders, who fear that the Republican governor could pull off a victory with Proposition 75. Polls have found most voters support the measure, one of four Schwarzenegger is campaigning to get passed.

Passage of Proposition 75 would be a major setback to the nation’s fractured labor movement. Unions representing more than 5 million workers have bolted the AFL-CIO this year, a rupture that has distracted the national leadership from labor’s high-stakes clash with Schwarzenegger.

Within California, the split has not kept unions aligned with both national factions from working closely against Schwarzenegger. But Art Pulaski, leader of the California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO, told union leaders at the breakfast not to expect the vast resources that national unions sent in 1998 to defeat then-Gov. Pete Wilson’s campaign for a similar measure.

“The AFL-CIO and your national unions sent out carloads and planeloads of people here to help us do that campaign,” he said. “That’s not happening this year. They’re busy with other things. They’re relying on us.”

The 1998 measure would have applied to all California unions; Proposition 75 covers only those for government workers. But more than half of the state’s 2.4 million union members are public employees.

In an interview, Pulaski acknowledged that unions had been relatively late in starting to rally members against Proposition 75 and, most important, slow to start direct campaigning in workplaces.

After the breakfast, the county labor federation distributed thousands of fliers as well as wall charts for leaders of union locals to use in making workplace presentations opposing Schwarzenegger’s ballot measures. Labor strategists say workplace campaigning is the most effective tool for solidifying the union vote.

The limited reach of such efforts was apparent last week at the Kaiser Permanente medical complex in Los Feliz.

Deidre Brown, 43, a medical records clerk wheeling a metal cart of files through the corridors, said she had heard nothing about Proposition 75 from leaders of her union, Service Employees International Union, United Healthcare Workers-West. She said she trusted her union to spend her dues wisely but understood the appeal of getting members’ consent for political spending.

“It makes sense to ask permission,” she said.

“It sounds like a good idea,” added Malcolm Drake, 59, another medical records clerk who said he had heard nothing about Proposition 75 from the union.

Both said they were undecided on Proposition 75. But their openness to voting for it illustrates the danger union leaders face: Their own members could defy them and nudge Proposition 75 into law.

Union leaders say members have been almost evenly split on the measure. Strategists say labor risks losing the campaign if support for Proposition 75 among union members fails to drop to 30% or lower.

In their first radio ad promoting the measure, the Yes on 75 campaign featured union members, mimicking labor’s tactic against Schwarzenegger. “I’ve been a sheriff’s deputy for 10 years,” a man says in the ad. “I want the right to choose not to have my dues spent on a political campaign I disagree with.” (Current law does allow union members to block the use of their dues for political campaigns; the measure would require unions to ask approval in advance.)

Lew Uhler, the conservative anti-tax advocate who led the drive to put Proposition 75 on the ballot, said the campaign would use “precisely the same approach” in upcoming TV ads. “A powerful way to present the message,” he said, is to have “abused public employee union members” tell their stories.

He also expressed delight at the conundrum labor leaders face in boosting union turnout without drawing advocates of Proposition 75 to the polls.

“The union leadership has got to be schizophrenic,” he said. “They don’t know whether they’re going to turn out someone who’s going to vote with them or vote against them.”

Larry Grisolano, chief strategist of the No on 75 campaign, said labor’s biggest challenge is to show union members -- and voters at large -- that the measure appears at first glance “to be something that it’s not.” Opponents are arguing in advertising that the measure is meant as payback for union workers who vocally opposed Schwarzenegger on various issues.

“A lot of people are under the mistaken impression when they first look at it that it’s designed to help workers,” he said. “The truth is it’s designed to take away their political voice.”

The campaign, he said, will try to show voters that it targets public employees but leaves oil companies, tobacco giants and millionaire supporters of Schwarzenegger “completely untouched.”

Ken Jacobs, deputy chairman of UC Berkeley’s Center for Labor Research and Education, said the Yes on 75 campaign starts with an edge that could erode as voters learn more about the measure.

“They win if people think this is a question of union democracy,” he said. “I think they lose if people think this is about whether teachers, nurses or firefighters should be able to participate in politics or whether their voices should be silenced in the political arena.”

At the breakfast last week, a labor leader called to the crowd, “Where are the numbers on this thing? What are the polls?”

“Pretty bad!” shouted Vicky Cavarlez, administrative vice president at SEIU United Healthcare Workers-West. “I mean look, folks, we’ve really got to step it up a notch here.”

California labor groups were assigned to contact more than 600,000 voters beyond their union base but had reached just 14,000, she said, adding, “We’ve got five weeks to go, folks.”

In part, the slow start stems from campaign fatigue: Labor put its machinery to work in the 2003 recall, the 2004 national elections, then the Los Angeles mayoral contest this year.

Also, the death in May of Miguel Contreras, leader of the Los Angeles County Labor Federation, jolted the state’s most potent political operation. For nearly a decade, his personal guidance had been key to enhancing labor’s clout.

Contreras’ widow, Maria Elena Durazo, who heads a hotel workers union, Unite Here Local 11, told leaders at the breakfast to start acting like “warriors” against Proposition 75.

“Brothers and sisters,” she said, “we need, as my husband said, ‘the warrior level.’ ”