The Other Demographic Demise Democrats Should Worry About (Extended Musings)

“I like right-to-work better.” Donald Trump, February 2016

The #SchumerShutdown fight whimpered out when Democrats realize they had no chance of winning public support for their open-borders bigotry. Democrats have won sizeable influence in states where they have rushed in with mass migration (Virginia) and illegal immigration (California, Colorado). But this massive setback is hurting their future election chances. This loss to shape the country’s demographics has covered up another fight that Democrats are losing in great number. A leaked internal memo showed that Democrats depend on a fresh supply of third-world immigrants, legal and illegal, in order to maintain any kind of voter hegemony.

There’s another demographic which Democrats are losing: labor unions. Stalwart allies for the progressive liberal cause, labor unions buoyed Democrats’ political careers. Minority leader Chuck Schumer owes his US Senate Seat to the labor unions who helped him crush incumbent Republican Al D’Amato in 1998, for example.

Why are Democrats losing labor union support now?

The first reason rests on the pro-American, pro-economic growth agenda of the President. Union members reported their disdain with Hillary Clinton’s opposition to mining and manufacturing while pursuing progressive social goals, like flooding the labor market with cheap labor and prioritizing the fate of trees ahead of teamsters. Barack Obama had not curried favor with organized labor, enough that union presidents hosted their own convention instead of attending the 2012 Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina. Public safety unions have tended to support Republican candidates, since they stress law and order. The Border Patrol union as well as police unions across the country stood behind Trump, who supported then.

Democrats are also losing labor support, however, because Big Labor as a whole is in decline, especially in their political influence. Organized labor is facing greater roadblocks to their political process because labor unions face declining membership or declining political influence. In Southern states, labor union membership has gained somewhat, but mostly because of the manufacturing explosion. This trend should prove, however, that right-to-work legislation does not mean the utter demise of labor unions in any state.

Collective bargaining reforms have chipped away at their political power so assiduously, that their formidable pre-eminence in statewide elections has fallen dramatically. The progressive “journal” The Nation released an article detailing how Republican efforts, with considerable investment from conservative pro-liberty groups have taken down the aggressive abuse of the labor movement, which donates 90% of its union funding to Democratic candidates.

For the last 2 years, I've pointed out how the right-to-work movement was a big part of the reason why president Trump did so well in the Rust Belt states. The Nation article points out that Democratic voter turnout declined by an average of 3.5% following right-to-work legislation’s passage. Despite the most vocal efforts, Democrats are ignoring this downward trend at their peril.

Mass migration has become a non-started for keeping Democratic numbers propped up. As labor unions walk away from Democratic candidates, because they actually want a thriving economy which benefits American workers and not just international corporate executives, Democrats have moved toward the bi-coastal elites and their technocratic minions. Silicon Valley and Hollywood are the major cash cows for Democratic candidates. Hillary Clinton learned, however, that money cannot by an election.

The biggest reason why Scott Walker was my first choice for president was that he withstood the Big Labor Onslaught, winning three Statewide elections in four years. The collective bargaining reforms were crucial to diminishing the Progressive Movement in Wisconsin, the home of progressive politics. Even though Walker was not successful in the presidential primaries, his reforms both of collective bargaining and the right to work law he passed in 2015, helped ensure that a Republican would win the dairy State for the first time in over 30 years.

Those same reforms also moved Michigan into the GOP column. Granted, many analysts have argued that Hillary Clinton didn't get the turnout she wanted in those States, and the voter percentage decreased in Michigan and Wisconsin. One factor many of these analysts have left out is that the Big labor movement wasn't there to get them out to vote.

Right-to-work legislation has passed in 28 states. The provision is currently on-hold in Missouri since labor unions mobilized to place a statewide initiative repealing the law on the ballot. Missouri Governor Eric Greitens, who campaigned to victory on right-to-work, is facing his own PR nightmare following exposure of an extramarital affair two years ago, coupled with allegations of revenge porn blackmail. Will the negative veneer and the supposed Blue Wave backlash to Trump and Congressional Republicans hurt the labor reform in the Show Me State?

I doubt it. Labor unions cannot rely on the multimillions from labor unions in Rust Belt states. Workers are enjoying the benefits of labor reforms freeing up workers to join or not to join. Not only that, but the pro-worker policies have forced unions to serve their members, rather than serving themselves in the pursuit of raw yet elitist political power.

Election 2016 was not only a victory for Trump, but other statehouses gained GOP trifectas for the first time in decades. Within two months, Iowa’s GOP-controlled state legislature enacted sweeping collective bargaining reforms, similar to Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s Act 10 reforms. Iowa is already a right-to-work state, but the taxpayer burden of public sector unions requires more stringent legislative remedies.

Collective bargaining reforms have rolled out in other states, too, without the official right-to-work policy. In Maine, retiring governor Paul LePage worked out a new contract where the largest state employee union agreed to a pay rise, and in exchange the contract includes a comprehensive right-to-work provision. This measure will ensure that the Pine Tree State maintains its more purple brand of politics going forward.

This year, local and county governments have taken the lead on right-to-work reforms, despite vocal, menacing labor opposition. Sussex County, Delaware flirted with the reform, but organizational and legal pressure forced the county commissioners to back away from them proposal. This setback didn’t discourage the town of Seaford from going forward with their own ordinance. Despite mixed reactions to the policy change, at least one city will have a competitive investment advantage. Sandoval County, New Mexico also enacted a right-to-work provision. Past legal challenges to local right-to-work ordinances have met mixed outcomes, but have been upheld more than not. The economic and political consequences will come forth in the next year or two. Other blue states are entering the RTW column, too.

Ohio Governor John Kasich topped Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s reforms, but organized labor repealed those efforts by initiative in 2011. Republican supermajorities in Columbus have rewed their push for right-to-work, but the voters may decide the issue in 2020.

Big Labor is meeting further challenges at the federal level, too. President Trump has successfully appointed a pro-worker RTW majority to the National Labor Relations Board. Renewed interest in a national right-to-work law has encouraged Congressmen to submit legislation, and libertarian-leaning Republican Rand Paul has offered the same. Much of these piecemeal reforms and successes may become moot following a ruling in Janus v. AFSCME. The court could strike down the right of compelled agency fees from public workers, which would enact de facto right-to-work as a national policy.

Labor unions which cannot compel membership as a condition of employment will lose an easy revenue stream which has benefitted Democratic politicians for decades. This maneuver could turn purple states red and make blue states more competitive for Republicans who have struggled to compete because of Big Labor’s fundraising prowess. Despite two major Democratic opportunities for long-term pro-labor reforms, unions have seen Democrats taking them for granted. Now they may not have unions at all.

Democrats are losing the demographic battle over immigration. The demise of Big Labor could ensure, in the words of Grover Norquist that “the modern Democratic Party will cease to be a competitive power in American politics.”