June 18, 2009 6:20 PM

Major Labor Union To Skip Endorsement

(AP)  None of the Democratic presidential primary contenders will get the endorsement they've been fervently seeking from the Service Employees International Union, an especially painful blow to John Edwards.

The union said Monday it won't choose a national candidate for the primary elections, underscoring divisions that had been apparent among SEIU supporters of Edwards and the Democrats he trails in national polls: Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.

"Any one of these candidates would help create a new American dream for workers and their families," SEIU Secretary Treasurer Anna Burger said.

Instead of making a national endorsement, the union will allow its locals to make decisions state by state.

"Given the importance of this election, we are encouraging members and leaders to act on their passion for the candidates and get involved on a statewide basis," SEIU President Andy Stern said.

SEIU backing was one of the most important labor endorsements available. The organization has donated more than $25 million, mostly to Democratic candidates, since 1989.

Edwards had hoped a national SEIU endorsement would energize his campaign in the crucial early primary states. The former North Carolina senator and 2004 vice presidential nominee has spent considerable time the past couple of years walking picket lines, speaking out for workers' rights and seeking labor support.

Clinton and Obama also have been working SEIU hard, with the union endorsement being one of the endorsement plums still left.

But now instead of spending its money in a primary campaign, the international union will devote its funds to national issues until the Democrats have picked a candidate.

"We will continue to work on issues like health care, the war in Iraq and other issues while our locals decide whether they want to endorse a candidate in the Democratic primary," SEIU spokeswoman Stephanie Mueller said.

The 1.8-million member union winnowed the Democratic field to Clinton, Obama and Edwards after the three were the clear favorites at an SEIU forum in Washington in September. The union delayed an endorsement because of the deep divisions among its members, and delayed the decision again after hearing from the candidates anew in Chicago at the Change to Win labor federation conference.

© 2009 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment
by hwy71so October 9, 2007 5:24 PM EDT
Duncan Hunter... ;)
Reply to this comment
by averjane October 9, 2007 2:36 PM EDT
but they shouldn''''''''t even pick anyone that advocates abortion.
***********************
I must have missed something. I wasn''''t aware that any candidate from either party, "advocated abortion."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by kansas1946

You must have missed something because everyone knows that the Democratic party speak out the loudest in support of abortion. There are conservative Democrats but they are all being lumped together with the Liberal Democrats because their voice is the strongest on this issue and the gay agenda issue. So when you think of Democrats you think of Liberals. On the other hand, Republicans get lumped together as being extreme right wing but some are beginning to agree with Democratic politicians on certain issues. Everything is not as black and white as it used to be. Right is wrong and wrong is right. They keep your head spinning so you really don''t know who to vote for anymore. If you can keep in mind what the true vien running through each party is, you just might be able to see through the haze of confusion. Sometimes you have to choose the lesser of two evils.
Reply to this comment
by dante805 October 9, 2007 11:39 AM EDT
Why would anyone back Edwards, an abject failure. A two time loser. Hitlary and Dumbo ears are no better for real working Union families. The big union fat cat bosses are the only ones that get a say. ABC- anyone but Clinton, but not obama.
Reply to this comment
by antoniof123 October 9, 2007 11:26 AM EDT
Once again another group tries to give us their opinion and I for one can read so I will make up my own mind. Give your opinion to the 3rd grade inbreds that vote they need help. LOL.
Reply to this comment
by tylenol6 October 9, 2007 12:44 AM EDT
VOTE RON PAUL FOR NEXT PRESIDENT. Hitlery, Obama and
Edwards are NEW WORLD ORDER ELITES. Do your research
people. Hitlery will definately continue selling out
America. Don''t be stupid.....
Reply to this comment
by socrates392 October 9, 2007 12:05 AM EDT
I must have missed something. I wasn''''t aware that any candidate from either party, "advocated abortion."

Posted by kansas1946 at 08:28 PM : Oct 08, 2007

You mean the Dems aren''t really begging young girls to murder their babies? But I thought that was there official position?! See, it says so right here in the Neo Con smear manual LOL! ;-)
Reply to this comment
by kansas1946 October 8, 2007 11:28 PM EDT
but they shouldn''''t even pick anyone that advocates abortion.
***********************
I must have missed something. I wasn''t aware that any candidate from either party, "advocated abortion."
Reply to this comment
by cfin5 October 8, 2007 11:19 PM EDT
I''m all for Unions to protect our workers, but they shouldn''t even pick anyone that advocates abortion. Those kids that have been murdered since 1973 would have amounted to 47 million "American Union-Made/Services Product Purchasing Customers". Not to mention tax payers to keep Social Security solvent. I know the Unions are slipping badly. Better start thinking and put someone in the Big Chair that is a real American, a real John F. Kennedy if you will. Get the businesses back here where they belong so there will even be a place for a Union to excist!......Ron Paul, the best Constitutional walking candidate in ''08! GO USA!!!
Reply to this comment
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook