Not a news diary, here, so if you’re looking for journalistic edge, please remember this is a blog (as in “web log”), not a news site like Vermont Digger (which people are always accusing of being a blog, which it ain’t).
But a thought on the VSEA vs. Shumlin activity, which – as of this weekend – is escalating dangerously close to the VSEA vs. The Democratic State Committee (see previous diary).
Now I’m going to do something that annoys people, I’m gonna talk crass political strategizing, and leave the ethics/ideology out of it. Again, this is my online web diary and that’s just the way I am.
So let’s put aside the value and morality of unions and the labor movement and ask: was the decision to block a resolution urging the Shumlin administration to back off it’s media war with the State Employees’ union (and allow the grievance process to run its course) a good idea strategically? The answer is a resounding ‘no,’ but represents an all-too-typical mistake on the part of powerful Democratic politicians.
When we talk about the genesis of a conflict, we talk about communication being “charged.” We say “sparks will fly.” This is a good analogy, and I’m going to take it further. All sparks, whether from a frayed power cord or a bolt of lightning, have one thing in common – they seek the ground. That spark is seeking the shortest path to ground, and the safest thing to do when a big spark is seeking the ground is to get out of its way. Better still – if it’s a lightning bolt we’re talking about, better to provide a lightning rod to get it to ground as quickly and efficiently as possible. If you try to block the spark, it either blasts through the blockage, or it makes its way around the blockage in unpredictably dangerous ways.
The Shumlin administration brought the VSEA grievance on itself. It may have been a foolish or naive grievance to pursue on the union’s part, but the point is it was predictable. The administration approached the union before the story broke about how to avoid a double-time pay scenario and a solution was mutually agreed to. Then the administration dropped the ball, and a grievance was filed. Cause-effect. It didn’t have to be a big deal. It only is because, once again, Democratic politicians and advisors to politicians pointlessly fixate on how they think people and institutions should respond to situations, as opposed to understanding the simple mechanics of how they actually will respond.
And then the administration went public, with Shumlin personally putting out the video of his comments, even getting a li’l choked up (ugh), about those mean, mean public employees trying to stick it to Vermonters. Put simply, they picked a public fight (and in a particularly inartful way).
Well, sparks flew. Sparks that could’ve been avoided (more on that in a sec). That spark is heading to ground – and likely would have reached the ground through the State Committee and dissipated – if not for the misguided effort of the administration, through Chair Perkinson, to block it. Now? Well, now it’s going to continue to seek ground, but in dangerously unpredictable and destructive ways.
And why? For the same reason the public fight was started to begin with: Foolish pride and arrogance. It is a consistent failing of many in the political classes to do two things: a) to assume they are smarter than everyone else, and b) to feel they are entitled to act impulsively without consequence (and that impulse is usually born in angry reactions to people and institutions responding in obvious and natural ways, rather than in ways that make the politician’s life easier). Put these two things together and you get a sort of you-talkin’-to-me? politics, which is invariably self-destructive.
The Shumlin administration’s battle with VSEA is not smart, well-considered, or well thought-through. It was born in an act of impulsive chest-thumping. The decision to block a vote in the State Committee is more of the same, and threatens to turn the unnecessary battle into an unnecessary war.
The 2012 election is Shumlin’s to lose. If he keeps playing you-talkin-to-me? politics, he will.
I think you’ve explained the what and who and where and when of the issue. The question is WHY? Foolish pride and arrogance? Well, maybe somewhat. But it’s kind of hard to understand WHY this is becoming bigger and bigger. They had an opportunity to kiss and make up at the Labor Hall. Simple. But instead, another slap in the face at VSEA, which now seems to be a broader slap at Labor in Vermont itself. I see a 2012 campaign in which Brian Dubie (or some such critter) says: “Labor unions in Vermont are out of control!” And Shumlin responding: “I just want to say, I have addressed this issue already. And I will continue to address it forcefully in the future.” And union workers saying: “What the……..?”
I think there’s a deeper WHY here. And it’s about POWER. The POWER of Wall St. and the RICH. If this continues, they have 2 parties now. The Working People have 0.
Thank you.
anyone remembers the Gov’s folksy …“we get more done with maple syrup up in Vermont than with vinegar” line used( I think) when he testified in congress about state budget reductions.
Shumlin was seated next to Republican Gov.Scott Walker.
At the risk of getting between the dog and the fire hydrant, I suggest that it’s not too late and it’s definitely in both the Governor’s and VSEA’s interest to put this issue behind them quickly. The longer it sits around, the more people are sucked in and the more destructive it seems to become. Can’t someone prevail on both parties to acknowledge that a lack of critical information and inadequate time were factors in the initial failure to deal with the issue thoughtfully. Also, that the high uncertainty and stress created by the catastrophic nature of Irene escalated the situation beyond either side’s intentions. With the stakes high and the consequences expanding, what harm is done by a mutual effort to dial things back, agree on ground rules for how the dispute will be characterized and resolved, and make some commitments to at least try to minimize unpleasant surprises in the future. Aren’t there enough outside challenges to the Democratic Party and the labor movement to cause each side to recognize their shared interests? Somebody step up – please before everyone is electrocuted!
“The labor movement was the principal force that transformed misery and despair into hope and progress. Out of its bold struggles, economic and social reform gave birth to unemployment insurance, old-age pensions, government relief for the destitute and, above all, new wage levels that meant not mere survival but a tolerable life. The captains of industry did not lead this transformation; they resisted it until they were overcome. When in the thirties the wave of union organization crested over the nation, it carried to secure shores not only itself but the whole society.”
Martin Luther King Jr.
Speech to the state convention of the Illinois AFL-CIO, Oct. 7, 1965
In a previos post, I was commenting on how Leahy and Welch aren’t actually Democrats, but moderate Republicans. This is the modern Democratic Party: claim to be Democrats but side with the GOP when it really counts.
I was taken to task by other commenters for ‘demanding party purity’ and ‘purges’ of non-believers.
And here we see the exact same thing that’s happening on the federal level here on the local level: a ‘democratic’ executive who’s more closely allied with the moderate Republicans and assumes his base will vote for him no matter how much he openly betrays them, house and senate ‘democrats’ that also side with the near right over their own base and are confident in their re-election no matter how anti-Democratic values they are, and the leaders of the Democratic Party that openly HATE the actual Democratic voters and subvert the democratic process to prevent the voters from having any voice.
After the last election here with all that lovey-dovey hugfest and news stories saying that the Progs can happily shut down now that the Dems are going to represent the actual voters. Boy, was that short-lived!
After Chair Perkinson’s behavior the other day, I’ll be damned if I’ll have anything to do with the Vermont Democratic Party! His open hatred of the democratic process and his anger at the Democratic Voters is enough for me…