Political Hotsheet
By

Stephanie Condon /

CBS News/ September 1, 2009, 5:04 PM

Labor Draws a Line in the Sand On Public Option

5215995Labor leaders drew a line in the sand today, saying a health care reform bill must include three specific elements -- including a government-sponsored health insurance plan, or "public option" -- in order to win their support.

The AFL-CIO outlined its demands for both health care and labor law reforms at a meeting today at which it released a new survey of young workers. The data backs up its progressive agenda and attempts to give it a sense of urgency.

The "Young Workers: A Lost Decade" poll, conducted in July of this year, found that 31 percent of workers under 35 report being uninsured, up from 24 percent 10 years ago. Counter to arguments that young people do not want to pay for insurance, 79 percent of the uninsured said they do not have coverage because they cannot afford it or their employer does not offer it.

"Every day people are drowning from the cost of health care," AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said.

Richard Trumka, who will replace Sweeney as president in a couple of weeks, said there are "three absolute musts" for health care: the public option, an employer mandate, and no taxes on employer-provided health care.

"That means we won't support the bill if it doesn't have the public option in it," Trumka said.

He alluded to his earlier assertion that lawmakers will pay a political price if they do not support the public option.

"We're going to tell our members the truth, who stood with them," he said.

The survey released today painted a picture of the economic hardship young workers are facing, which the labor leaders said was largely the result of rising health care costs.

The poll found 34 percent of young workers live with their parents for financial reasons, while just 31 percent say they make enough money to cover their bills and put some money aside— a 22 percent drop from 1999, when labor's last "young workers" survey was conducted.

Twenty-four percent of young workers say they cannot pay their monthly bills, and 70 percent would not have enough money saved to cover two months of living expenses, were they to be laid off.

In 2008, union members only accounted for 12.4 percent of employed wage and salary workers, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Still, they remain a force to be reckoned with in Washington.

CBSNews.com Special Report: Health Care

President Obama, who benefitted from labor support in the 2008 election, will be addressing the AFL-CIO convention in Pittsburgh in two weeks, as well as the AFL-CIO picnic in Cincinnati over Labor Day weekend.

While town hall protesters angry with Mr. Obama's health care agenda received most of the limelight over the month of August, labor unions had a strong presence at the events as well -- more than 18,000 union members attended more than 400 town halls in August, the AFL-CIO said.

This Labor Day weekend, more than 100,000 union members will show their support for health care reform and labor reform -- specifically, the Employee Free Choice Act --in events across the country.

"Workers are invigorated and ready for round two of the fight," AFL-CIO Executive Vice President Arlene Holt Baker said today.

Though 18-to-35-year-olds only make up about 25 percent of union membership, they typically have more progressive priorities, Trumka said.

Today's survey showed that young workers favor expanding public investment over reducing the budget deficit by a 22-point margin. Also, more than half of young workers said employees are more successful getting problems resolved as a group rather than as individuals, and employees who have a union are better off than employees in similar jobs who do not.

Trumka said the AFL-CIO will reach out to young workers in an unprecendented way at its convention this month.
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
19 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
anthonylima says:
Well politicians work with US UNION members because most of our contract negotiations eventually become some form of law or the benefits end up filtering down for the benefit for those not in a collective bargaining agreement. So our benefits end up benefiting society as a whole.Unions are trying to eradicate the mobster images of the 60's and 70's in the public opinion, we are highly trained performance value based professionals, and we those skills to work everyday helping bring jobs in under budget or ahead of schedule and sometimes both. And by making sure that SOCIETY AS A WHOLE aren't getting taxed on health-care will make sure there is "No Taxation Without Representation" making us good stewards for our fellow man.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
mikeoliphant says:
If you watch cable news at all, you've seen the ads for ?health care reform?, now being called ?health insurance reform?. ?It is an interesting subtle switch in language?. Mike Oliphant runs a small Utah health insurance website http://www.benefitsmanager.net/SelectHealth.html and http://www.dentalinsuranceutah.net whom deals with people day to day struggling to find affordable coverage. ?I think it?s important to not understate the huge difference in meaning between ?health insurance reform? and ?health care reform?. Let?s not lose focus on the need to reform a broken health care system which includes not only health insurance carriers but also billing practices of medical providers. Why isn?t TORT reform part of the national discussion? Studies show that alone could lower costs by 15% for both the medical professionals and health insurance carriers (Humana). Perhaps the federal government should take notice of what Utah has accomplished with first step of health insurance reform and promises for reform in the medical provider arena. Several interesting changes took place with the passage of H.B. 188. House Speaker Clark has championed the need for change while recognizing the experience of the private health insurance sector. To see more about this visit http://www.prweb.com/releases/utah_health_insurance/health_care_reform/prweb2614544.htm
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
pasmalltown says:
by trapbreaking September 1, 2009 4:05 PM EDT -

"Government workers were nearly five times more likely to belong
to a union than were private sector employees."
____________________________________

"In this decade, those proportions have essentially reversed, with 36% of public workers being represented by unions while private sector union density has plummeted to around 7%."

O.K. 36% divided by 7% equals 5.14 - IN THIS DECADE. One other fact you omitted is:

"In the Midwest, manufacturing job losses reduced union membership."

So, is not part of your claim due to lost jobs? It's reckless to assume that the "82%" you cite is due to a private sector desire to NOT join a union simply because only 12% are current union members.
Some of the "82%" lost their jobs and could not join a union......

Furthermore, comparing public and private sector unions is like mixing apples and oranges - Federal unions are limited by government regulation:
"The NLRA excludes several groups of employers from its scope, including the following:

?The Federal Government
?Any wholly owned government corporation or federal reserve bank"

Additionally:

"The right to strike in the private sector is guaranteed under the NLRA. However, only about half of the states extend this right to employees in the public sector. Where public employees are not permitted to strike, state statutes often impose monetary or similar penalties on those who strike illegally."

And on June 28, 2006 the NLRA deferred a decision between Firstline Transportation Security, Inc. and International Union, Security, Police and Fire Professions of America (SPFPA - a private sector union) back to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). regarding limiting this union's collective bargining and strike rights. It seems your over simplification of poll data has obscured some important underlying facts behind labor union membership, both private and public.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
jab232 says:
Enough talk. It is time for congress to vote. The only way to hold representatives accountable is for them to stand up and vote.

Congress, get off your duff and vote.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
pasmalltown says:
by robham777 September 1, 2009 9:10 PM EDT
by _JackSteen_ September 1, 2009 6:32 PM EDT You simpleton Baptist
Republitard sisterf?#$@*!&s really HAVE been drinking the KoolAid, haven't y'all !?

You and your likes are exactly the reason union members get a bad rap and become less popular in this country. I am glad you can build a wall and pour a foundation, because you sure don't have a whole lot else going for you.

_________________________________

Going to base your opinion on "JackSteen" and his "likes"? I'm not a real big fan of unions, but they do still have a place in a "free-market" economy. Union bashing is a trick that big business uses to de-bunk the idea that the "people that actually perform the work", as opposed to those that "merely push paper", in this nation are valuable and deserve a reasonable health care plan....
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Aldymac says:
I think its funny that these so-called 'union' people think they are so great, I got all my construction experience as nonunion. I was forced to join the union if I wanted to keep my job, then found out that for all the schooling the union boys had, they came to me for answers on a lot of the problems they encountered in some difficult situations. The unions had their time and place, that time and place is now gone, so should the unions be. I could never figure the mind set that the union bosses had so much power over the workers to threaten thier workers with job loss if they didn't vote for the party that was union friendly.
It has been proven that people in the beginning of life and at the other end of life are the ones who use healthcare the most, the government run system runs just like the government, at a snails pace. Those of us who have had to use it can tell you that by the time you get the care you need the problem you had in the first place was far worse than it was when you first went down with the problem.
Being in an advanced stage you have less chance for better recovery, or you have lost so much tissue your recovery is limited. I have been there, I know what I am talking about.
The plan "O" liked in Colo. works this way, if you are on a pension, you lose your pension to be put on the plan, you wind up paying for the plan but you don't have anything to live on, does that sound like a great plan or what? If "O" can get everybody on his plan then take away social security to pay for the plan, doesn't that solve the problem as to how to pay for his healthcare plan?
How many more tricks are there up his sleeve? or should it be called "options"?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
robham777 says:
by _JackSteen_ September 1, 2009 6:32 PM EDT You simpleton Baptist
Republitard sisterf?#$@*!&s really HAVE been drinking the KoolAid, haven't y'all !?

You and your likes are exactly the reason union members get a bad rap and become less popular in this country. I am glad you can build a wall and pour a foundation, because you sure don't have a whole lot else going for you.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
jsd330 says:
These leaders haven't put in a days work in so long they don't know what it is like. And like congrssmen and senator, enjoy premium health insurance plans and make 10 times what the people they supposedly represent do.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
jsd330 says:
It's a trade off, the unions support the public option the Dems pass the check off.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
valleywiz says:
Public Option and other options. The more the merrier.
reply
See all 19 Comments