Yesterday, I attended two briefings in Denver held by labor leaders that gave very concrete outlines to labor's battle plan for the 2008 elections: where resources will be deployed and how much money will be spent. Both briefings were sparsely attended by the traditional media -- and, while they seem obsessed by polling snapshots, they are missing an important component to the election battle ahead that polls don't catch--but count for millions of mobilized voters. I think this will be the difference in the election. Here's why.
The first briefing was conducted by the Service Employees International Union in a meeting space in the Opera House in Denver's Performing Arts Center. Andy Stern, president of SEIU; Anna Burger, the secretary-treasurer of SEIU and the chair of the Change To Win federation; and Pauline Beck, an SEIU member, spoke.
Beck was the SEIU homecare worker from California with whom Barack Obama spent a day following around as Beck did her daily job. It was part of a program, called "Walk A Day In My Shoes", SEIU put in place to encourage -- maybe even force -- candidates who were seeking the union's endorsement to take part in. Beck talked about Obama's day with her (he apparently held up his end). You can see that video here.
SEIU is committing $85 million do the 2008 cycle. A slice of that money has already been spent, a ton will be spent in the next two months and, fair warning to the Democratic Party, a piece will be spent AFTER the election to hold elected officials accountable; $10 million will be reserved for "hard money" for candidates who potentially would be funded for primary challengers to elected officials who stray from their commitments to the union's agenda.
John Youngdahl, the union's political director, said that 1,463 SEIU members will take time off from their jobs in 25 states to work full-time for the campaign; two-thirds of the efforts will be messages targeted to the general public.
Right after the SEIU briefing, AFL-CIO Political Director Karen Ackerman gave a very detailed presentation on the federation's plans at the nearby Convention Center. Ackerman believes the election will very close and the AFL-CIO is launching the "broadest, biggest efforts in its history": 250,000 volunteers in 24 priority states will be deployed. Just this week, the AFL-CIO has sent a mailing to 1 million union households in just five states to make the case for Obama.
Ackerman focused a lot on Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan. Her view is that without Ohio, Obama's chances of winning are 24 percent (no one asked how that specific number was arrived at). Without Michigan and Ohio, Obama's chances are 0.07 percent...
Here are some pretty interesting numbers to keep in mind. In 2004, and in previous elections, Democrats tended to lose white men and white women, born-again evangelicals, weekly churchgoers, married people and rural voters -- EXCEPT IF THEY WERE UNION VOTERS. In 2004, John Kerry won the union vote in Michigan by 24 points but lost the non-union vote by 11 points; he won the union vote by 25 points in Pennsylvania but lost the non-union vote by 10 points; and he won the union vote by 16 points in Ohio but lost the non-union vote by 12 points. Contemplate that thought -- a few point in the union vote or a few points less in the non-union vote and John Kerry would have won Ohio -- and the election.
The AFL-CIO's expenditure this cycle will be $53.4 million; if you add to that the money individual unions will spend, the total will be somewhere between $200-$250 million (just to clarify, individual unions are part of the umbrella of the AFL-CIO Federation; they each pay a certain amount of money per member into the federation's overall political program, and, then, spend their own dollars on top of that).
Another interesting feature is the role Working America will play in the election. Working America was set up as a kind of affiliate to the AFL-CIO to solve this problem: with labor only representing 12 percent of the workforce, and less than 8 percent in the private sector, how could unions each voters who, polling showed, supported the labor movement on issues of wages, job security and general workplace fairness.
Working America sent canvassers out across the country, focusing on battleground states. They knocked on doors of non-union homes and, when successful, signed up people to the organization. Get this: Working America now has 2.5 million members...
So, what does this mean? Ackerman gave a pretty interesting example. Using a Google map, she showed a visual of zip code 55912 in Minnesota. Within that zip code, blue dots represented union households: 1,634. Then, she added the Working America red dots signifying non-union households: 1,819. So, in theory, a voter mobilization effort, motivated by economic issues, could turn out at more than double the number of voters -- at least in this particular area. And, presumably, this will be true in other districts.
I thought Ackerman made some interesting points about the question of whether Obama will be able to win the non-educated white working class voters. First is this: because of the economic crisis facing the country, she said that "these voters generally don't want to vote for McCain." Second, Obama is actually winning those voters who are union members by 20-30 points more than the non-union voters. From there she addressed race in a very complex and sophisticated way. Her basic message: yes, race is an issue for SOME union members but not something that is a broad problem. Race will be something to address and be up front about but the overwhelming number of union members are far more interested to know how a president will fix the economic crisis facing workers, and, if they are convinced a candidate has the answer or at least a semblance of the right direction, race will be a secondary issue.
So, the bottom line: just between the AFL-CIO, its individual unions and SEIU, you are looking at an expenditure of up to $300 million. And an army of people deployed in precincts around the country.
Last thought: so, we've heard this before. Why is this different? I do sense an even more heightened sense of urgency within labor. This is an overused cliche but the labor movement really believes this election is a matter of life and death. If it can't get a president that will not have a huge boot stomping on the neck of unions every single day, it may pass the point of no return in the next four years or eight years if a Republican president is re-elected in 2012.
For more Huffington Post coverage from the Democratic National Convention, visit our Politics @ the DNC page, our Democratic Convention Big News Page, and our HuffPost bloggers' Twitter feed, live from Denver.