SEIU Ad Aimed At Obama, Schwarzenegger, To Begin Airing Wednesday
Ads to run in Los Angeles and other California media markets starting Wednesday tie President Barack Obama to the recent decision by the state government to slash the wages of home health workers.
According to a source at the Service Employees International Union, the ad features Pauline Beck, an SEIU nurse who participated in a campaign event with Obama two years ago, and spoke at the Democratic National Convention, but who will now be affected by the cuts. Though the source had not seen a script of the ad (and therefore could not confirm whether, or to what extent, it implicates the administration for abandoning attempts to prevent the cuts) it's certainly meant to get Obama's attention as much as that of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and politicians in Sacramento.
Obama arrives in California for a fundraiser in L.A. on Wednesday--the same day the six-figure ad buy goes live. Earlier today, SEIU President Andy Stern announced the ads over Twitter. The organization is upset with Obama for withdrawing its threat to withhold health care-related stimulus funds from California if the state it goes through with its plans to cut home care workers' wages to $8 an hour.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
I thought it strange that he did that in the first place. Shouldn't threaten to withhold funds for a necessity like health care to appease a single group.
Those wages are very low for what they do,however.
May 25, 2009 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was just commenting to someone the other day that one of rhe first waves of what I call "deployment" on the way to this country becoming a plutocracy was the destruction of well-paid blue collar jobs back in the seventies and eighties in the steel and meat packing fields, and that this current wave of auto-related layoffs will preceed the lowest level of the healthcare field's "deployment". From there it will move up the chain, eating its way through lower-level white-collar jobs, professional jobs such as teaching, nursing, and techie jobs, until we're the new United States of Mexico.
And if those auto workers think that what's happening in Michigan isn't going to affect them, they have another think coming.
May 25, 2009 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did anybody mention to you that there is a world financial crisis that threatened to create a second Great Depression? Did you miss that memo?
May 25, 2009 11:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did anyone mention to you that the world financial crisis is based upon falling demand and it's affect on asset valuations?
Perhaps you missed the memo. We've had 30 years of 'supply-side' bias policies. The median wage hasn't gone up since 1974, while the GNP has gone up some 150%. That means, trillions of dollars flowing to the supply-side rich, year-in and year-out for decades. Demand and purchasing power, during that time was augmented by added family members entering the work force, or after 2001, borrowing cheap money from China. The affects of that borrowing came to an end in the summer of 2007, and a year later created the financial crisis of which you speak.
Here's the long of the short of it: The economy suffers from insufficient demand relative to supply. The only way to solve the demand problem is to give the masses more purchasing power. Overall that means giving workers more wages, not less. That means giving workers more bargaining power not less.
And so on.
There, now you've gotten the memo. Go forth and spread the word.
May 26, 2009 12:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
While I agree with you that the median real wage has not gone up since 1994 and that GNP has increased about 150% there is another huge factor for that increase according to Bureau of labor statistics running from Jan 1974 to Jan 2009 US non farm employment numbers have risen 78,104,000 in 1974 to 134,333,000 January this year, an increase of some 72% (don't trust my math).
May 26, 2009 3:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, yeah, I think that was part of the point.
The only way families have been able to increase their consumption life style is by sending more family members out to work.
I was a child in 1973. My mother either didn't work, or she did some kind of job because she was bored, the pocket change was an added benefit. Now most families have at least two 'jobs' being performed and one comes to mind where one spouse has 3 jobs - day, night and a third on weekends, and the other has one as a union mechanic for the local water works, and side jobs on weekends - that's nearly five jobs in one family, not counting the kids getting work some day. This was all necessitated because one lost their long term job and had to take a similar one at drastically lower prices. That's how it happens. Her field suddenly had too many workers (insurance processor - certified) and so the bargaining power dropped and when that happened the wages followed. So now her husband picks up the kids why she goes off to her second job as a sales clerk at a department store. She misses the time spent with her kids, but she gets some of it working at a community center on the weekends where they come for gymnastic classes and what not. People are working harder, and getting less. Despite holding more jobs, the median family income keeps dropping and demand sinks with it.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22756
May 26, 2009 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is basically a Republican. A sane one, but no better than any other plutocrat.
People with his outlook have been leaving the Republican Party and moving into ours ever since they lost out to Reagan, Fallwell and the wingnuts in 1980.
He is, without a doubt, the worst Democratic president in history.
May 25, 2009 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
HAHAHAHA care to back that up? Like at all? He's been in office 4 months. Maybe you should read up on your history a bit if you don't think Dems have done much, much worse.
May 25, 2009 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
there is no question obama falls way short, if you expected any change that would benefit the average person.
of course you can just keep your head in the sand and say stupid stuff like "its only been 4 months"..etc...
what a disgrace the stupidity and ignorance that hold hostage the minority of people with integrity.
May 25, 2009 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Get on the Cheney bandwagon if you're looking for a change. Or see what Nader is up to these days. People like you were with him in 2000 and maybe you can do it again! Stand by your principles, and if it's Gingrich in 2012, you still had a great moral victory for yourself.
May 25, 2009 11:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right-oh! He's a Republican in all but name!
Or as the Republicans like to call him, he's a Socialist! Who would "make Lenin blush" as they put it. And also he's a fascist as Republicans say. Tune in to Limbaugh every weekday to hear more!
May 25, 2009 11:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, only in office for four months and already worse than James Buchanan.
May 25, 2009 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, I hope that's sarcasm. Because if it is your not good at it at all.
May 25, 2009 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course it's sarcasm. I was responding to the post previous to mine. Work on your reading comprehension.
May 25, 2009 8:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought that was sarcasm. Sometimes I can tell when people are are being funny or serious. Thanks for pointing it out.
May 25, 2009 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Blaming Obama for this is just dumb. This is California's problem NOT Obama's problem. Obama shouldn't get involved at all.
California is 21 billion dollars in the hole and thus EVERYBODY is going to take a haircut including the SEIU workers. They shouldn't be treated any more special than anybody else just because they campaigned for Obama.
IMO, attacking Obama for a problem that is California is just stupid and dumb politics.
May 25, 2009 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is California's problem NOT Obama's problem. Obama shouldn't get involved at all.
Yes or no question:
Is California part of the United States of America?
Another Yes/No:
Does California have the largest economy of the several states of the United States of America?
May 26, 2009 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that the SEIU workers are being EXTREMELY selfish. If Obama withholds $8 billion for health care funds from the stimulus package simply to try to get the SEIU workers some of their salaries back, than he is catering to an interest group and is NOT looking out for California as a whole.
Simply selfish.
May 25, 2009 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, it's like they were folks who matter like bankers.
May 25, 2009 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please explain how you went from "$8 billion for health care funds" to helping bankers. I'd be interested in smoking some of whatever led you to that logic...
May 25, 2009 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe it was the SELFISH word that did it. Sent me right into a free assocation thing and bankers just flew right into to my mind.
May 25, 2009 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
"He is, without a doubt, the worst Democratic president in history."
I laughed and laughed.
May 25, 2009 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
These people are really getting rolling, though, aren't they? There's no diff. btwn him and Bush, he's really a Republican, he's the worst Democrat.
It's amazing to me.
May 25, 2009 11:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
So let me make sure I understand this correctly. Obama threatens to withhold 8 BILLION in stimulus from California because of the H/C worker pay cut possibility. Schwarzenegger loses the ballot initiative which could have solved the budget crisis without the H/C worker pay cut. Schwarzenegger implores Obama that California needs the money. Obama relents and drops his threat. SEIU gets mad at OBAMA for relenting.
There is no easy answer here, and SEIU is really going to pay if they keep pushing this on Obama. I can see the WH getting very frustrated by this situation.
May 25, 2009 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whoa! What's Obama going to do if he gets really mad? Cut their wages to $7 an hour.
May 25, 2009 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a stupid comment. Do you want Obama to let California fail? Let's see now, 8 billion for the entire state to keep running or individuals in the home healthcare worker business dropping their pay 2 dollars. There was absolutely no easy answer here.
May 25, 2009 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
California already failed.
May 25, 2009 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
So you'd withhold 8 billion dollars then to the state. Clearly you didn't think this through.
May 25, 2009 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I might do something really radical like come on out to CA and hold a nice rally and give a stem winding speech and go all Bobby Kennedy and announce a new labor initiative and full backing for EFCA and raise the minimum wage again and figure out a bunch of new legislation designed to instill the fear of God into people who would cut wages to $8 for those who care for our most vulnerable in their last days on earth. But that wouldn't be cool or pragmatic or centrist.
California is just the big fat canary in the mine. This whole country is failing.
May 25, 2009 7:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who's to say he won't do that? But that's not the issue. The point is either 8 billion dollars or healthcare workers pay drop 2 dollars an hour. You can talk about other stuff, which is fine, but it doesn't answer the immediate problem. Which is, again, 8 billion right now or 2 dollars an hour.
May 25, 2009 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have a hard time believing there are many who need the $8 billion more than the health care workers need the $2 an hour.
But regardless of the merits of their argument they have the right to make it and I say make it. Obviously, no one has listened to them or gives a damn about them. I hope they make all the noise they can make. If they don't make it no one else will. Everyone just wants them to crawl back into whatever excuse for housing you can get on $8 in hour in CA and shut up.
Maybe another John Steinbeck will come along and turn it into a book.
May 25, 2009 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not saying they shouldn't fight like the dickens to prevent it from happening. They can and should argue and they can and should prevent it from happening. But if they decide to go blaming Obama for this, that's stupid. Go blame Schwarzenegger or others for this issue.
May 25, 2009 8:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
California failed when they gave massive tax breaks to a select group 30 years ago, and the consequences of that are now coming to a head. They could instantly solve their problems by raising taxes to a level sufficient to pay for the services people demand.
The Republicans have all but completed the Mississippification of what was once the Golden State.
May 25, 2009 10:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I had to type Mississippification! What a great word. That is exactly what Republicans are in favor of. Backward redneck illiterate values that got them where they are today, the heart and soul of American right wing theocracy. Mississippification for all the Nation!
May 26, 2009 3:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
As Paul Krugman pointed out in his column today, the consequences of Proposition 13 have had presented an enduring problem:
I'm not sure what SEIU thinks Obama can reasonably do given that structural impediment to a reasonable solution to the crisis. The threat of withholding stimulus funds isn't going to sway the "Republican rump."
May 25, 2009 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am with Maritza. They should be happy with $8/hour. That is $320/week, $1280/month, almost $15,000 per year! And they are complaining, the selfish nerve!
May 25, 2009 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, it's not like they're doing something that takes any effort. I mean changing the diapers of your mother with dementia? Hey, we'd all do that for $8 an hour and find ourselves a way cool apartment in San Francisco while we're at it.
Let them eat cake or tacos or something.
May 25, 2009 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The problem is that the market price isn't commensurate with the intrinsic value of the work.
May 25, 2009 8:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, please! Cake or tacos, indeed!
If those workers were anybody, they'd be enjoying some delectable foie gras with a nice glass of merlot.
May 25, 2009 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or they could get absolutely NOTHING if California doesn't get the $8 billion from the stimulus package.
Which would you prefer: a job making $15,000 per year or no job since California can't pay you.
Again this is a California problem. It is up to the Californian legislature to handle.
Obama shouldn't get involved.
May 25, 2009 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, no, it's not like he's FDR or something.
I have a hunch the folks worrying about losing jobs aren't the ones making $15K.
May 25, 2009 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama cannot help but become involved. That's the whole issue -- either he withholds money from CA for the SEIU or he doesn't.
Fact is though that CA will be bankrupt by July
Fact is that if CA completely shut down the state government - buy not so much as a paper clip and lay everyone off including the Governor and legislature - it still wouldn't save enough to close its deficit
May 25, 2009 8:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Put it this way - If you were Obama, which would you rather have - a six figure ad buy from SEIU or a six inch banner headline -
???May 25, 2009 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama isn't saying "California drop dead" (he would if he didn't give them the 8 billion dollars). Obama is saying I can't do anything about it since this is a California problem.
May 25, 2009 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've read up a little on military strategy, and one of the things that the authors placed importance on was knowledge of the battlefield. You can pretend like any way you fight, things will go your way if you push hard enough, but some positions are difficult to defend, and difficult to mount successful attacks from.
The folks in SEIU are taking a position that doesn't much help them. They're arguing against their most fervent advocate because he won't push an argument that's not going to get much traction against the California budget crisis. Rather than think strategically, and advocate politically for a more broadly beneficial political environment, they're trying to force perfection out of a terrible situation. Better to wait until times are better to insist on getting what they want.
May 25, 2009 9:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. This is not long term thinking at all. This is purely short term outrage. It is justifiable, they should be angry, but focusing it on the one individual who will help them long term is pretty stupid.
May 25, 2009 9:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stupid and traitorous. Obama has the hardest job in the world at the most difficult time. And here marches in SEIU to try to make it a little worse for him.
May 25, 2009 11:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then again, it seems stabing Obama in the back is the best way to get him to like and protect you. I wish he would start chaneling a little LBJ.
But these workers are getting screwed big time and are so desperate and enraged that strategy is the farthest thing from their minds. Their message is "Do something or we take you down with us." It is the tip of a ground swell that Presidnt Obama better start paying attention to. He better start dancing with them who brung him or he is going to crash and burn.
May 26, 2009 4:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
... They're arguing against their most fervent advocate because he won't push an argument that's not going to get much traction against the California budget crisis. ...
I don't blame Obama for deciding not to withhold funds from California, but the SEIU has good reason to be angry with him. So far, he has not been much of an advocate for their workers, or for any progressive cause.
May 25, 2009 11:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
The SEIU makes a big mistake by trying to tie this to Obama. The blame should be laid at the feet of Schwarzenegger, pure and simple. This was the guy who helped recall a Govenor, because he did not manage the budget in the manner Republicans thought was appropriate.
May 26, 2009 8:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
--== Matchcougar.C'om ==-- Best Cougar dating site in the world!
For Cougars, dating a younger man can be exciting and feel younger. And also you may find yourself more compatible with young men.
For younger men, dating an older woman has numerous advantages. You can sometimes learn valuable advice from her on how to conduct himself in a difficult situation. She is your best listener and supporter.
Join us and contact tens of thousands of cougars and cougar admirers!..
May 26, 2009 9:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
California is in trouble because they were stupid enough to first allow a recall of a Democratic governor for no legitimate reason and then to elect someone who had no legislative, governing, administrative or political experience and who was elected by people who would vote for a monkey who happened to be a Republican or who actually thought they were electing a character from one of his movies. Then Arnold kept robbing Peter to pay Paul by removing money from one source like education or transit to pay for something else. Which someone in Junior Achievement could have told him does not work. Is this woman just a replay of Joe the Plumber? We know how well that turned out.
May 26, 2009 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink