Symbolic Labor Bill Should Have No Trouble Getting Democratic Support

Jim West/ZUMA

Facts matter: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. Support our nonprofit reporting. Subscribe to our print magazine.

Eric Levitz says that every Democrat should back “Bernie Sanders’s new labor bill”:

On Wednesday, Bernie Sanders introduced the Workplace Democracy Act, a bill that aims to increase America’s unionization rate….Thirteen of Sanders’s Democratic colleagues have signed onto this legislation — including virtually every suspected 2020 hopeful in the upper chamber (Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, and Kamala Harris are all represented). And yet, a wide array of (self-identified) progressive senators — including ones from states with strong labor presences — have not signed onto the bill.

Somebody should stop me if I’m missing something big, but this bill is basically card check plus a few other things. In other words, it’s the Employee Free Choice Act, which garnered 47 cosponsors in 2008 (92 percent of all Democrats in the Senate), but then slumped to 41 cosponsors (71 percent of all Democrats) when it actually had a chance of passing in 2009. Since the bill has no chance of going anywhere with a Republican in the White House, we’re politically in the same situation as we were in 2008. This means that Bernie’s bill should have no trouble getting cosponsorship from nearly every Democrat.

If the bill had a real chance of passing, that would be a whole different story. Probably a bunch of Democrats would drop out, citing some detail or other as unacceptable. But as long as it’s just symbolic, it should be able to do at least as well as those dozens of Republican votes to repeal Obamacare back when it had no chance of passing either.

POSTSCRIPT: I seem to be feeling a little grumpy and cynical this morning, no? Perhaps I need some cookies.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate