So Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell has declared H.97 – the bill passed last session by the House that would provide limited collective bargaining rights to home-based child care workers (and a bill I did some work on) – dead. He does not intent to let it come out of committee. Barring some last minute intervention from the Governor, it’s likely to stay dead (and Shumlin has already picked his controversies for this election year… this bill is not on the list).
It should never have come to this, and has because of self-destructive behavior on both sides.
On the union’s side, it’s no secret in the Statehouse that AFT has continued to wield a strategic sledgehammer, even those times when finesse has been called for. Vermont legislators are more prickly than most on that regard.
On Campbell’s end, it seems to be simply about pique. He’s not able to see beyond some of that strategic clumsiness to judge the issue on its merits, simply because bill proponents have dared to cross him. And when you dare to cross Campbell, apparently, political reality becomes an afterthought.
Putting aside the ethics of the bill and the right to collective bargaining – a right Democrats are supposed to stand for – consider the more politically crass implications. Campbell is assumed to be eyeing higher office – possibly the governorship after Shumlin moves on. He’ll inevitably face a primary, and this move won’t play well in that arena.
But more than that – consider the general election. In its earliest form, this bill could have unionized 8,000 low-income Vermonters, mostly women. That’s 8000 union members who would get mailings endorsing candidates – and most of those would be Democrats.
This is why I have little doubt that Republican insiders are laughing their butts off at Campbell’s decision to let his personal pride overcome his common sense.
It has been the case over the years that Vt. Legislators get annoyed with political activist groups and sometimes take it out on the issue–which is, taking it out on the people. Politics sometimes gets personal. But, our elected officials know this when they run for office. And boy, 8000 votes is something that should put your personal annoyance on the back burner.
to see a Vt.Democrat hand one to the Republicans.
With all the beatings the unions are taking nationally from Republicans in Indiana,Arizona,Wisconsin,Utah and so on they don’t need any “friendly fire”.
I largely agree, although I’m a bit skeptical to see it framed that “the union” has acted in a self-destructive manner. By this, are we talking about providers (primarily low-income women) contacting their elected “leaders” to demand fair treatment and a mere seat at the table with the decisions that effect their livelihoods? Seems to me that democracy should be more about issues and process than petty “I don’t like your style” personality questions. That’s how anti-union folks always frame the issues…
a lot of overworked and underpaid Vermonters, mostly women, who want to improve not only their own circumstances but also the standard of care their charges receive, are left powerless once again.
I heard the campaign promises and thought we were heading into a more enlightened era when we would do better than this in Vermont. I thought, even if the rest of the country makes war on education, at least here we’ve got our priorities straight.
I was wrong.