SEARCH
Senate Dem. Nelson Joins Republican Filibuster Against Obama’s NLRB Choice |
|
With the nation’s capitol under two-plus feet of snow, Nebraska’s Sen. Ben Nelson (D) appears to have come down with a case of snow madness—a delirium that sometimes manifests itself in bizarre and illogical actions and speech.
Nelson announced yesterday that he would back a Republican-led filibuster against President Obama’s nominee to the National Labor Relations Board, Craig Becker. The vote is scheduled for later today. Call your senators today and tell them to stop obstructing President Obama’s nominees, starting with Craig Becker.
Nelson says he believes Becker, the Obama administration’s choice for the NLRB, “would pursue a personal agenda there, rather than that of the administration.”
As Michael Whitney on FireDogLake writes:
How does that make any sense, when it’s the Obama administration that nominated him twice?
Got to be snow madness. Or maybe not, writes Whitney.
Nelson’s statement cites Becker’s past pretty much verbatim from a Chamber or NAM [National Association of Manufacturers] press release….The problem is Ben Nelson wants the Chamber of Commerce, NAM, and other corporate groups to pad his pockets for his 2012 race.
In the past, Nelson has criticized the Democratic filibuster of President Bush appointees and joined with Republican senators on several occasions to defeat Democratic filibusters on judges—and twice broke the Democratic filibuster on the nomination of John Bolton for United Nations ambassador and John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales for the U.S. Attorney General spot. Now it seems, he’s joining the Party of No and its obstructionist tactics to freeze any action in the Senate.
Nelson’s not the only senator who parrots the corporate line about Becker. Republicans almost in lockstep have painted an end-of-the-world-as-we know-it picture of labor law if Becker is confirmed. Who knew one person on the NLRB could be so powerful and override Congress and the courts to carry out some sort of workers’ revolution? Here’s what Becker said at his confirmation hearing.
I fully understand that, if confirmed, I will occupy a position far different from the positions I have occupied as a scholar, teacher, and advocate…if confirmed I will have a duty to implement the intent of Congress as expressed in the law, to consider impartially all views appropriately expressed to the Board.
Quite a radical view, eh?
Becker was nominated in July and has answered hundreds of questions from senators on both sides of the aisle, both in person and in written form. He is a highly respected and experienced labor law practitioner and scholar with an impressive 27-year record of advocating for and representing workers, especially low-wage workers.
Let’s not forget Republican Senate leaders blocked a vote on Becker for nearly a year and then last week rushed to seat newly elected Scott Brown (R-Mass.) to give them the 41 votes need to keep a filibuster alive if all voted in a bloc.
Now, with Nelson’s defection, at least two Republican votes are needed to break the filibuster. Anything’s possible. Last year at the committee level, senators Mike Enzi (Wyo.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), voted for Becker. We’ll see this afternoon if the Senate Republican’s single-minded Party of No campaign keeps rolling—with a little help from Ben Nelson.
7 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Senator SELL-OUT Bob Nelson
If Sen. Bob Nelson Dem Backs #GOP Filibuster of Craig Beckers #NLRB nom I WILL Quit The Dem Party & Vote Republican in 2010 !
At Least When I Get Screwed It Will Be In My Face and Not From Behind!
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/02/08/18637333.php
Craig Becker has written: “At first blush it might seem fair to give workers the choice to remain unrepresented. But, in providing workers this option, US labor law grants employers a powerful incentive to campaign for a vote of no representation.”
Therefore, concludes Mr. Becker, workers shouldn’t be allowed, either collectively or as individuals, to opt against unionization. Workers’ only choice should be over which union is their “exclusive” bargaining agent.
Does the AFL-CIO hierarchy agree with this radical position? Certainly, up to now, union spokesmen have suggested that, if a majority of employees at a workplace refuse to sign a union “authorization” card, they should be allowed not to have a union. If the AFL-CIO brass really agrees with Becker that unionization should be “mandated,” then that would be good for everybody to know. On the other hand, if AFL-CIO officials agree with me that Becker’s position is off the wall, why does he work for you and why are you defending him?
Stan Greer
National Right to Work Committee
National Instititute for Labor Relations Research
Stan:
In a 1993 Minnesota Law Review article, Craig Becker didn’t suggest that such an argument should be accepted, but that it can be made. In fact, Becker emphasized that only Congress could mandate employee representation.
When he wrote the Minnesota Law article, he wrote it as a scholar, one who seeks to broaden legal analysis and discussion.
Becker has stated to the Senate HELP Committee that he holds no personal views that would prevent him, as an NLRB member, from approaching the issue with an open mind, knowing he would be responsible for administering the law fairly and impartially.
Too bad the same can’t be said for all of Bush’s Republican NLRB appointees.
I,for the life of me cannot believe that these Democrats have squandered every opportunity to do the work of the people that worked tirelessly to put them in power;and this is what we get.I will never,ever vote for a Rethug,but I will not continue on this slippery slope of blind support for Democrats.
In my wildest dreams I could never have believed that some form of labor law reform would not get passed with such huge Democratic majorities and a Democratic President. This is unacceptable. The truth is that you’ve never had 60 votes for cloture at any time for reform in this congress. You always have, at least 4 or 5, dems of convenience who are afraid to vote with labor because they want those big corporate contributions. The only reason that they are Democrats is for seniority and committee chairmanships. Don’t let them get away!!!!!!! Make the HOUSE and SENATE vote on labor law reform even if it cannot pass.
I say let them filibuster — and MAKE them filibuster.
With unemployment at record levels, and work remaining on health care reform and pension reform, I would love to see these senators explain to the public why they are in lock-down over an NLRB appointment!
Most people don’t even know what the NLRB is.
Let them filibuster!
It is time for the AFL-CIO to stop blindly supporting the Dems party like we do and start voteing out all that work against us. We all need to start getting active in the Labor Party and strengthen it so that we can start working for the worker agenda. If the Tea Bagger Party can actually get up on its feet, so can a Labor Party! Hell, no organization can rally and mobalize people like the Union can.