Thanks for the facts, but they don’t address my concerns. I wasn’t trying to imply that the AFT was going against the wishes of its members. I was questioning its characterization of the endorsement process as being member driven. I’m sorry you can’t provide information about the leadership’s internal debate over the pros and cons of endorsing the different candidates or the discussions the AFT leaders had with these candidates. It would have been interesting to learn.

But I wish I hadn’t made that offhand remark. If I was going to spark discussion, I would have wanted it to be about the wisdom of endorsing someone from the anti-union wing of the Democratic party.

The process is that endorsements are made at the level of the union that corresponds to the office. Thus, in a mayoral election, the UFT makes the endorsement; in a gubernatorial election, our state union, NYSUT, makes the endorsement; and in a national election, the national union, the AFT, makes the endorsement.

There are two national decision making bodies — the Convention which meets every second year [it last met in Boston in July 2006 before anyone know who was running], and the Executive Council, which is made up of the AFT officers — there are many vice presidents from state federations and large locals around the country. Given the issue of timeliness, the Executive Council had to be the body to make an endorsement, if it were to be made, since the nomination would be over by the time the next convention meets, in July 2008.

The Executive Council had discussions on what to do, of the pluses and minuses of an endorsement now. That is a discussion of principle AND strategy. The Council took into consideration not only the polls it had conducted and what its members reported back on the sentiments of their members, but the fact that the NYSUT convention had voted overwhelmingly in its April convention this year [with NY being a very large portion of AFT membership] to urge the AFT to endorse Hillary Clinton.

Leo

what was the decision-making process? The AFT leadership can look at polls, but are we committed to making endorsements based on membership polls?

Jonathan

Glad to hear we endorsed the Democratic candidate who is most anti-union, most beholden to corporate interests, and most closely tied to those responsible for driving the Democratic party into the ground during the 1990’s. Not to mention that her political baggage gives her almost no chance of bringing substantive change to Washington, even if she were so inclined.

Every now and then I think about making COPE contributions and then something like this comes along to jolt me back into sanity (Last time it was the phone calls urging me to vote for one of Clarence Norman’s pals that did it).

Are we really to believe the AFT made this endorsement by soliciting opinions from members?