The rhetoric coming from Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, would be ludicrious if it weren’t so poisonous.

Speaking in Columbus, Ohio, the national union leader took the usual populism to a new, ugly level.

Some of our politicians, and some of America’s biggest corporations have given up on America. Companies are sitting on $837 billion without creating jobs. Banks are clutching a trillion dollars in profits without lending to small businesses and consumers. Too many companies aren’t investing in the future, or in the country that made them great. All they want to do is scrape every ounce of flesh from our hides — for their profit.

Well I say that is economic treason!

The big health insurance companies – the same ones that racked up tens of billions in profits last year and paid their CEOs megabucks – they say they need premium increases of 20 percent or more for no reason at all – except guess what? Greed.

That’s economic treason! [...]

Right. And the punishment for treason is what, Trumka? Is that the next step?

One of Trumka’s political allies should tell him to knock it off. Stop questioning people’s patriotism. Stop debasing the public debate. Stop stirring up hate.

(Hat tip: Mytheos Holt, Battle ’10 blog.)

UPDATE (3 p.m.): The AFL-CIO Blog is now highlighting Trumka’s invective, “Trumka: Union Votes Can Beat False Populism and Economic Treason.” When repetition robs this particular accusation of its impact, how will Trumka ratchet up the rhetoric? What slur could possibly come next?

Thing is, you don’t start using rhetoric like this in speeches without first kicking it around the office, talking about it with colleagues. So, the use of this ugly attack comes not in the heat of the moment, but rather as a cynical exercise. Guess our blog headline should have read, “‘Treason! Treason!’ Trumka Shouted with Faked Rage.”

Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, “Making Patriotic Choices To Save The Economy“:

It’s time for all Americans to remember that patriotism is about more than fighting abroad. It’s also about fighting for ourselves, our neighbors and our communities here in the United States. It’s time for economic patriotism.

Trumka came out with his “economic patriotism” rhetoric in time for Labor Day and the fall elections. Judging by his column, it’s just another, more invidious slogan to accompany the rest of the usual slogans.

Samuel Johnson had smart observations on the topic in “The Patriot,” his 1774 essay directed to the electors of England.

A man sometimes starts up a patriot, only by disseminating discontent, and propagating reports of secret influence, of dangerous counsels, of violated rights, and encroaching usurpation.

This practice is no certain note of patriotism. To instigate the populace with rage beyond the provocation, is to suspend publick happiness, if not to destroy it. He is no lover of his country, that unnecessarily disturbs its peace. Few errours and few faults of government, can justify an appeal to the rabble; who ought not to judge of what they cannot understand, and whose opinions are not propagated by reason, but caught by contagion.

Just saying …

President Obama appears with Trumka next Monday at the annual Laborfest in Milwaukee. Will the President, too, embrace this rhetoric of “economic patriotism?”

Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, was on the CSPAN “Newsmakers” show this morning. Asked whether the Employee Free Choice Act will be considered in Congress this year, Trumka said: “I think you’ll see the Employee Free Choice Act come up again. I think you’ll see it probably before the end of the year.”

Before the elections or in a lameduck session? Trumka: “Either one.”

The reason the Employee Free Choice Act has not passed Congress is because 40 Senate Republicans have blocked it, he said.

Oh, pshaw, Trumka. The reason EFCA has not passed is because the American people are overwhelmingly opposed to what the bill would do, opponents have made an effective case that “card check” and forced unionization are antithetical to democratic principles and economic growth. The legislation is extraordinarily unpopular, which is why key Senate Democrats joined Republicans in preventing the bill’s consideration on the floor this Congress.

If it were popular, the President would have already signed the Employee Free Choice Act into law instead of planning to put its provisions into effect through Executive Orders, presidential nominations, and regulatory enactments. (See Shopfloor post, “If EFCA Won’t Pass the Senate, We’ll Turn to Federal Labor Boards.”

Trumka also continued pounding the table for more federal stimulus spending, dismissing concerns about the federal deficit, saying we have a jobs crisis in this country, not a deficit crisis. (UPDATE, 10:58 a.m.: Here’s the exact quote: “We have a job crisis right now, we don’t have a debt crisis right now. The only thing that can possibly make this recession, and this recovery from not stalling and going back into recession is if government continues to do some stimulus spending. And unfortunately, the states aren’t in a position to do that, so it’s going to take aid from the federal government.”)

CSPAN Radio will re-run the interview, about 30 minutes worth, at 6 p.m. Eastern.

UPDATE (11:20 a.m.): An interviewer asks, well, if the Employee Free Choice is so popular, and Democrats control the House and Senate, why haven’t the Democrats brought it to the floor for a vote? Trumka:

The President supports it, the vice president supports it, a vast majority of the House support it, a vast majority of the Senate report [sic] it, and like a hundred and some other bills in this country, 40 Republicans said we’re saying no to everything, and so they’ve stopped it.

It has come to the House and the Senate, remember? It passed by a large majority in the House. It’s been in the Senate where 40 Republicans have said no, just like they’ve said no to extensions of unemployment benefits, to help for state and local government, they’ve said no to everything. It doesn’t surprise us they’ve said no.

UPDATE (11:50 a.m.): Let’s be more accurate about the recent legislative history of the Employee Free Choice Act. In the 110th Congress, 2007-2008, H.R. 800 was introduced on Feb. 5, 2007. It passed the House on March 1, 2007. In the U.S. Senate, the bill failed to achieve cloture on June 26, 2007, with a vote of 51-48, short of the 60 votes needed. The only Republican to vote for cloture was Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylania, who subsequently became a Democrat (and who lost his party primary this spring). Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD) was absent.

In the current 111th Congress, H.R. 1409 was introduced in the House on April 29, 2009, referred to committee, with no subsequent action. In the Senate, S. 560 was introduced on March 10, 2009 and referred to committee, with no subsequent action. From July (Sen. Franken’s swearing in) to December 2010 (Sen. Scott Brown’s arrival) the Democrats enjoyed a 60-vote majority in the Senate — enough to invoke cloture — but leadership chose not to pursue a vote because several members of the caucus would have voted no.

The portion of the interview concerning the Employee Free Choice Act is here as an .mp3 file. The host is Bill Scanlan and the interlocutors are David Catanese of Politico.com and Victoria McGrane of Dow-Jones.

Edited and updated for clarity, style.

As the AFL-CIO prepares for a visit from President Barack Obama on Wednesday the labor group has announced plans for an aggressive push for political engagement from its member unions. The AP’s Sam Hananel reports that the group has “…lingering irritation that Democrats could not muster enough support to pass legislation that would make it easier for unions to organize workers.” The legislation in question is the Employee Free Choice Act, which would effectively do away with secret-ballot elections in favor of a card check system of union recognition.

Despite the unhappiness, AFL-CIO deputy political director Mike Podhorzer said that the AFL-CIO had “…high hopes that Congress would do more to create jobs.” Interesting comment from organized labor if, as leaders claim, their highest priority is the Employee Free Choice Act. As we have noted numerous times that the legislation has been estimated to destroy 600,000 jobs in the first year after enactment. In a way, Congress has protected the jobs of 600,000 Americans by not passing this legislation.

It leads me to wonder – are labor leaders truly committed to jobs creation or are they more interested in artificially growing their membership by forcing workers into unions? If they are focused on jobs creation, then they should cease their support for jobs-killing legislation.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi used her address to the “progressive” activists and bloggers at Netroots Nation in Las Vegas on Friday to promote House Democrats’ manufacturing agenda, “Make it in America.” Judging from the absence of coverage, neither the audience nor reporters seemed all that interested in that segment of her remarks.

The Washington Post story, “Pelosi calls for liberal activists to help keep Democrats in majority,” managed a paragraph:

Pelosi spoke about “Making It in America,” the Democrats’ manufacturing agenda that she said would roll out in coming weeks to help restore and create industrial jobs. “Jobs, jobs, jobs is very important, but we have to get it done,” Pelosi said. “People have to see the difference between what the Republicans want to do about this — nothing — and what we are advocating.”

The McClatchy story did not mention the manufacturing angle.

This isn’t a complaint about sparse coverage. Netroots Nation is populated by political activists and left-wing bloggers. To the convention attendees, as a whole, the more interesting topics are elections, campaigns and the perfidy of Fox News. The convention in Las Vegas was more about seeing the candidates and grousing about the Obama Administration’s passivity than economic policy.

Likewise, even though organized labor was a major funder of the event, there just didn’t seem to be all that much interest paid to the union agenda. The only extensive coverage of the remarks of AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka came from the AFL-CIO blog, a post, “Trumka at Netroots Nation: New Industrial Policy for a Globalized World“:

Speaking as part of a panel on Building a Progressive Economic Vision, Trumka outlined the need for the the nation to invest in infrastructure, implement fair trade policies, change our tax policies, enact comprehensive immigration reform and reform our broken labor laws. The full panel included consumer advocate Elizabeth Warren, progressive Florida Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson, Center for Community Change Executive Director Deepak Bhargava, Green for All’s Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins and National People’s Action Executive Director George Goehl. (Watch it here.)

By “change our tax policies,” he means:

For those who say we can’t afford to make these investments, Trumka explained how we can do it with a financial speculation tax that encourages capital to invest in concrete things and discourages unproductive speculation or paper pushing for a quick buck, all the while raising more than $100 billion. Trumka made it clear that lawmakers must not reduce the federal deficit at the expense of creating jobs.

From what we know of the other speakers, Trumka probably represented the most economically conservative point of view on that panel, amazingly enough. Only $100 billion in new taxes to support manufacturing? Open borders for more immigration? Protectionism to wall off America from global competition? Think bigger, Trumka! Be more progressive!

We’ve figured it has been awhile since we’ve done a rundown of labor issues in the news so here it goes:

• Recess appointed NLRB Board Member Craig Becker is under investigation
  The Washington Examiner’s Mark Hemingway reports that the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Darrell Issa, R-Calif., has asked the NLRB’s Inspector General to examine the potential conflict of interest in Becker’s decision to take part in Board decisions involving his previous employers – the AFL-CIO and the SEIU.
• Labor Department report shows that fewer employees are seeking to form a labor union
  The Bureau of Labor Statistics released data that shows that the number of union elections has decreased 60 percent from 1997-2009. This trend follows closely with the decline in overall union membership. Perhaps employees aren’t finding it necessary to have a third party represent them with their employers?
• The Washington Post highlights the flaws of labor leaders plans for higher taxes
  In a follow up piece from a recent lunch with the head of the AFL-CIO, Richard Trumka, the Washington Post’s Ruth Marcus highlights the flawed logic behind labor leaders’ plans to increase taxes on higher-end earners in order to maintain current levels of spending. Her verdict? It won’t work.
• NLRB is finally fully staffed in time to celebrate its 75^th birthday
  Brian Hayes has been sworn in to become the fifth member of the NLRB, bringing the Board to its full complement of five members. Also this week, the Board recognizes the 75th anniversary of our nation’s primary labor statute the National Labor Relations Act. Let’s hope the current Board members maintain the principles of balance that the original drafters sought.
• Labor Board lays out plans to re-hear almost 100 cases
  In response to the Supreme Court ruling that the NLRB had no authority to determine cases without the necessary quorum of members the board laid out plans to re-hear approximately 100 cases that were made in the past few years. The Board’s staffing problems have started when Senate Democrats first sought to block President Bush’s efforts to ensure the Board was properly staffed.
• Former labor official, now White House political director forgot to disclose almost $40k in unused vacation time that was cashed out
  As labor groups continue to press Congress to pass paid leave mandates, it appears such benefits don’t come cheap.

The Hill reports that the newly elected head of the SEIU labor union, Mary Kay Henry, has reaffirmed that the jobs-killing Employee Free Choice Act remains the “main plank of [the SEIU’s] legislative platform,” but she recognizes that it’s”unlikely this year as Democrats no longer have the 60 votes needed to overcome a Senate filibuster.” This comes just a few days after the AFL-CIO’s Richard Trumka doubled-down on his labor union’s commitment to see the bill passed in some form by seeking ways to “tack” it on to other, more politically viable pieces of legislation.

Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), who has been leading the effort in the Senate to pass the legislation, paints a different picture. The AFL-CIO’s path forward appears the most realistic approach, the Senator indicates, but he still bluntly asserts that he has “no higher priority” other than to pass the pending bill.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka was on the ABCNews.com show, Political Topline, on Thursday. He was asked about the Employee Free Choice Act. Here’s the exchange:

Interviewer:* Can we say Employee Free Choice Act, not going to happen this year? Maybe next year. Just off the table right now?

Trumka: No, I wouldn’t say that at all. We’re looking at ways to bring that up as we speak right now, to look at things to attach it to. We’re still fighting, and here’s why.

Talking points follow. Then…

Trumka: We’re pushing it very, very heartily. The president supports it. The vice president supports it. The vast majority of the Senate and the House support it, and the American public supports labor law reform in the country now.

Interviewer: With all that support, you’d think we would have seen a vote by now.

Sound clip of the segment. More at ABC’s The Note.

* We don’t immediately recognize the news anchors and don’t quickly spot their identifications.

Ben Smith of Politico follows up on AFL-CIO dropping its Employee Free Choice Act banner from the side of its luxurious downtown D.C. headquarters, asking AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka about the legislation’s prospects. .

AFL-CIO President said the Employee Free Choice Act, which had apparently been left for dead by congressional Democrats, remains a top priority of the federation.

The AFL removed a giant EFCA banner from its Washington headquarters today, prompting speculation of a quiet concession of defeat.

“It was just starting to rip,” he said. “We’ll put up another one. We’re still working hard.”

“We’ll find something to tack it on,” he said (of the legislation, not the banner).

Yep, that’s the fear.

As for Trumka’s vow to rehoist the pro-EFCA message, we seriously doubt the next banner touts the undemocratic Employee Free Choice Act. Seems like the AFL-CIO has decided that it’s more politically promising to attack Wall Street than it is to make the case for forcing employees to join unions against their will.

The AFL-CIO and other unions are demanding a recess appointment of SEIU attorney Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board, decrying the current two-member board for its inability to act.

In an op-ed in The Hill Thursday, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka sputtered:

It’s an outrage that a decision-making body so important to the basic rights of working people is crippled by vacancies. Because the appointment of board members has been deeply politicized and repeatedly blocked, the NLRB has had just two members for more than two years.

Man, oh, man, are these guys shameless.

Just two years, the AFL-CIO was celebrating its ability to prevent a full quorum on the NLRB, cheering the politicization of the appointment process.

From James Parks, AFL-CIO blog, March 27, 2008, “Workers’ Political Strength Helps Stall NLRB Assault on Rights“:

In recent months, our allies on Capitol Hill joined our campaign for a fair NLRB that does its job to protect workers’ freedom to join a union. Last November, workers across the country protested the ongoing assault on worker rights by the Bush-appointed NLRB, saying until a pro-worker labor board is appointed, the agency should be “closed for renovations.”

Now, it seems, workers have successfully stalled, if not derailed, the NLRB’s assault on workers’ rights until a new president can appoint new board members.

Yay! We shut it down! Yay!

Just shameless…

UPDATE 12:15 p.m.: The ChamberPost also delves into the writings of Becker’s union supporters and identifies the clear agenda behind their call for a recess appointment: He’ll use the NLRB to help preserve the political power and perks of Big Labor: “When it Comes to Craig Becker, Heed the Words of his Supporters.”