U.S.-POLITICS: Unions, Black Leaders Back Clinton, but Warily

By Farhan Haq Reprint | | Print |

NEW YORK, Apr 1 1996 (IPS) - As he makes his bid for re-election this year, President Bill Clinton has wooed big business, vowed that “the era of big government is over”, and backed tough crime measures critics claim treat African Americans unfairly.

He has also obtained the firm support of major union leaders and important black politicians like the Rev. Jesse Jackson — an unusually early show of support for a Democratic president.

But these supporters show mixed feelings for Clinton, who is a long-time head of the conservative Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) and the president who passed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

In the case of Jackson, even as has branded many of Clinton’s 1996 policy statements as ‘Republican Lite’, he is seeking to mobilise black and working-class voters supportive of his National Rainbow Coalition to provide key votes for Democrats in districts they lost narrowly to the Republican party in Congressional elections two years ago. Just a swing of some 200,000 black voters, Jackson argues, would have prevented a Republican takeover of both houses of Congress in 1994.

His priorities are shared by most labour groups, including the large American Federaion of Labour-Congress of Industrial Unions (AFL-CIO). New AFL-CIO President John Sweeney threw his support behind Clinton last week, an unusually early endorsement from labour for the November elections.

Asked whether unions were interested in prodding both major political parties to improve U.S. labour conditions, including ending sweatshops in the United States, Ron Blackwell of the Union of Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees (UNITE) merely responded, “First we have to regain control of Congress.”

Some labour leaders are aware of the distance between that “we” and the Democratic Party.

Rich Trumka, the new AFL-CIO vice-president and a former leader of the radical United Mine Workers of America, concedes that Democratic support for NAFTA and other free-trade issues has differed from what unions have desired.

But he adds that Clinton and the Democrats are the best choice labour leaders have. Trumka says labour would be firmly in the Democrat’s camp, since Clinton is at least trying to raise the minimum wage from 4.25 dollars an hour to 5.15 dollars an hour.

Ultimately, labour and minority leaders say, the Democrats will face little pressure from the left this year, since few progressives want to harm a party considered the lesser of two evils.

“The reality is that (Speaker of the House of Representatives) Newt Gingrich has organised the Democratic Party for Bill Clinton,” says Robert Borosage, director of the Campaign for New Priorities, a Washington lobby.

“For years, the Democrats had the bastions in the House and Senate, so they could at least slow down any attempts to dismantle (post-New Deal) social programmes,” he says.

But now, with Gingrich leading a right-wing House and Presidential contender Robert Dole leading a Republican-majority Senate, Borosage adds, “All progressives, almost without exception, are united in the notion they’ve got to unite behind the retaking of the House of Representatives.”

Similarly, argues Ron Walters, a Howard University professor who advised Jackson’s presidential campaigns, liberal or working- class groups have tried not to upset Clinton’s campaign, lest the Republicans win control of all the top government positions.

“Given what’s available out there, you can’t get the feeling (1992 independent candidate) Ross Perot would be better, or that Dole would be better,” Walters says.

One exception to the pro-Clinton consensus on the left has been consumer advocate Ralph Nader, who is threatening to run for the presidency as the candidate for the environmentalist Green Party in California, a crucial state for the Democrats.

Current polls show Nader could take between five and seven percent of the California vote. Democrats complain that is only enough to spoil a Clinton campaign by taking crucial support away from the incumbent in a vote-rich state the Democrats cannot afford to lose.

But Walters dismisses the impact of a Nader candidacy. If Ross Perot were to run again as an independent, as seems likely, he argues, Perot could claim roughly a fifth of all voters, diminishing Nader’s significance in the race.

“As push comes to shove, Nader will be prodded to abandon his quixotic bid with the Greens,” Borosage predicts.

But without any pressure on the Democrats from the left, many analysts have wondered what would prevent Clinton and his party from moving sharply to the right to undercut the Republicans.

Many of Clinton’s recent proposals — including mandatory school uniforms, tougher crime laws, and arguments for the television industry to develop technology to screen out violence and sex from shows — have stolen the thunder from the right wing. But, except for Labour Secretary Robert Reich’s failed pleas to raise the minimum wage, no similar efforts have been made to consolidate support on the left.

Union leaders are confident that will change as the election year kicks into high gear. Borosage also predicts that, as November comes near, Clinton will sound out more of the populist themes that briefly enlivened the campaign of right-wing commentator Pat Buchanan.

But Walters worries that Clinton may also steal another page from the Republicans’ book by using ‘race-baiting’ tactics to appeal to the white majority, taking tough stances against blacks on crime and other issues. He notes Clinton’s recent support for harsh mandatory sentences for cocaine-linked crimes over other drug-related crimes — a disparity critics say that penalises African Americans more than any other group.

“I think (Clinton) did some race baiting himself in 1992,” Walters says, noting Clinton’s harsh treatment of Jackson and rap singer ‘Sister Souljah’ during that campaign. “He’s not above doing it again in 1996.”