Keith Ellison

Mr. ELLISON

Mr. ELLISON. I thank you, Congresswoman Edwards, for doing this again. So many myths you're busting tonight, so much good information, including the panels that are right next to you. But I just want to say that, you know, as you're busting myths associated with the Employee Free Choice Act, and I thank you for that, let me just talk about a few other things that unions have done for me and you. Worker compensation. That's because workers fought for it. Social Security, that's a pretty good thing, right? Minimum wage, I'd say that's a thumbs up. The weekend. You want to thank somebody for the weekend, you can thank the union movement. The 8-hour day, prohibitions against child labor so we don't have 9-year-olds slaving away for 14 hours a day 7 days a week. Worker safety, used to be, Congresswoman Edwards, that if you lost your thumb at that punch press, they couldn't use you anymore, you just had to leave. Now we've got worker safety and requirements, OSHA. Setting a wage scale. As you pointed out, as a worker who was on the lower end of the wage scale, you could thank the union movement for setting a minimum wage and for setting a wage scale that other employers had to meet, or they would lose workers because they would come to the higher wage area. The union movement, as I pointed out a moment ago, contributed to the civil rights movement, for women, for people of color. And even today, so many struggles for union representation are caught up in struggles for empowerment, for people who are legal immigrants to our society, communities of color, women, people who are fighting for a chance in our society. The union movement has done a lot for us all. I yield back.

Mr. ELLISON. And I would add to society at large. Let me say that 79 percent of workers surveyed reported that workers are very, or at least somewhat, likely to be fired for trying to organize a union, an important fact I think we need to point out. And in about 25 percent of all organizing drives, at least one worker is unlawfully fired for union activity. So again, this kind of protection, this stress-free way to either have a union recognized or not I think is a very, very good idea. I believe the gentlelady was kind of going down myths that are out there. Let's bust a few more myths. I think that it is important to point out that this does not hurt small business. Small businesses would not be harmed by the Employee Free Choice Act. In fact, small business stand to gain from the Employee Free Choice Act. It is interesting to me that in a time when we talk about ``too big to fail'' and these huge, enormous businesses, some of them opposing the Employee Free Choice Act, it is the small business, again, that is often at the back end of the line on this stuff. But along that alone, let's just say that small business owners are supporting the bill and are beginning to speak out all over the country. In fact, a Wisconsin company, Wisconsin Vision, owned by Darren Horndasch, says that having a union makes his employees more career oriented, more invested in his business and gives him a competitive edge. Jim O'Malley, owner of a print shop in Pittsburgh, says that he values the union apprenticeship program for his employees. Again, sharing training expenses with the union is a benefit to this small business employer. Ruth Shep, a business owner in West Fargo, North Dakota, says ``good jobs support families, they support the community.'' And she wants to see workers be able to form a union and to have a choice in our economy. Larry Thompson, owner of an Ohio firm, Thompson Electric, recently wrote an op-ed in which he wrote, ``our union workers receive the most cutting-edge job training available, and it pays off through lower injury rates, increased productivity and strengthening the ability to serve the people of Ohio.'' So I would agree with you. It is cheaper in the short term, this quarter, to try to shave a buck here a buck there. But if you want a successful business, you have to build over the long term. That means having a good, solid, well trained, reliable and productive workforce. And you can't do that on the cheap. And that is why we need the Employee Free Choice Act. And I yield back to the gentlelady.

Mr. ELLISON. I'm curious to get the gentlelady's views on this point. Now, on that myth you just talked about right there, is it common, in your view, allowing for the fact that there are a lot of good employers who cooperate with their unions, but is it common in your view for some of these folks who are opposing the Employee Free Choice Act, some of these big CEOs who are opposing the Employee Free Choice Act, to spend a lot of time worrying about whether a worker has a private ballot or not? Is there any irony here that you have been able to detect? I yield back.

Mr. ELLISON. Well, I'm going to commend you, Congresswoman, for going down to North Carolina and standing with those workers. It is not easy. I have been on many a picket line myself. I have been on many a union drive because I believe in it. I think it strengthens the working class. You're right. There are subtle points of intimidation to prevent the union. But there are lots of places in this country where there is not- so-subtle intimidation to prevent the union. There are people fired for trying to organize a union. And even if you prove that it is an unfair labor practice that you were fired for organizing a union, generally even if you win, at the NLRB what happens? Well, a minor fine maybe, a posting up on the wall that says we were wrong for doing this. In fact, it is really not a real deterrent to some of the unfair labor practices that we have seen. I think that having a union in place would definitely strengthen a worker's right to raise issues that are of concern to them at the workplace as you point out. I hope the gentlelady doesn't mind me taking a little turn to make a few comments that I would like to make. And I also want to thank you for holding it down. It was your idea that we do the Employee Free Choice Act today, it was your organization that brought this session about, and this is critically important that we do this subject because we do need to help the public understand that a strong workforce that is organized and unionized gives voice not just only to unionized people but to the entire middle class. And so I do want to thank you for organizing this today. All I want to do is just take a little short detour for a moment and say that the Employee Free Choice Act, we also talk about card check, majority card check. As you pointed out, if you get 30 percent of the employees to sign a card, you can get an election for a union now. That is the present law. And nothing about that will be stripped away by the Employee Free Choice Act. But it is also important to say that even if you get, even if you get majority sign up and you get the union recognized or you get 30 percent which then provokes a union election and you get the union recognized that way, that is not the end of the Employee Free Choice Act. The Employee Free Choice Act recognizes the fact that even after union recognition comes, a lot of employers fight and fight the contract, and you can have a union but no contract. And I would love to hear if you have any stories about that because it is important to talk about how workers have dealt with these things. But the Employee Free Choice Act requires a period in which there is mediation on the contract, and then if that doesn't work, there is binding arbitration on the first contract so that there will be a first contract. And after there is one contract, then history tells us there will be another one. But there will be a first contract under the Employee Free Choice Act. So it is not just card check, but it is getting that first contract at the bargaining table. So I will yield back to the gentlelady at this time because I just want to make sure that we frame what the bill says and what it doesn't say. And again I invite the gentlelady if she cares to talk about this effort to get the first contract which is so often a difficulty. Of course, I don't want to narrow what the gentlelady might comment on.

Mr. ELLISON. I have heard this term, ``captive audience,'' as I have discussed the Employee Free Choice Act, and heard stories about how, when the union drive was going on, that the employer can make it a condition of a worker's employment that they show up at a meeting where they give anti-union messages. Is this really true? Is this really true? I yield back. Does this happen in America?

Mr. ELLISON. Would the gentlelady yield?

Mr. ELLISON. If the gentlelady will yield just on that point.

Mr. ELLISON. Will the gentlelady yield?

Mr. ELLISON. As I might point out, Congresswoman and Mr. Speaker, the fact is that having a union creates labor peace. We don't have costly strikes, lockouts. We have labor peace. We make an agreement, and everybody sort of--we have a refined orderly way to resolve conflict. And as you pointed out, sometimes these conflicts over a bargaining table are tough struggles. Nobody is expecting to just give anything away, but there is an orderly way to resolve issues. Turnover, which is a definite killer for productivity, is reduced when you have a union in place. Unions tend to promote reliability. You have a place to go, you can to go your shop steward if there is something you think isn't right. And it provides a way for real stability on the job. Also, I think it is important to say that a lot of unions have training programs of their own, which it shares the burden with the employer. So unions have been good for many employers and have been good for America. Union workers earn 30 percent more than nonunion workers. And when it comes to African American unionized people, they earn 56 percent more than nonunion African Americans. Women benefit from being in the union. Upwards of 40, 50 percent of women who are unionized make that much more than women who are not. Pensions, medical benefits. It is good to have a union job. Everybody knows that. And unions have not contributed to economic demise of any community or our country. In fact, unions have brought labor peace, unions have benefited our country in a great way. And I just might add, before I turn it back to the gentlelady from Maryland, Congresswoman, I will never forget the image of Walter Reuther, the great UAW leader and Martin Luther King walking down Woodward Avenue in Detroit. I will never forget that when Martin Luther King went to his reward on April 4, 1968, he was at a union. He was standing up for garbage strikers, sanitation workers who were on strike because they were paid poorly and in unsafe working conditions and were dealing with these issues. And it is important to remember that the union won that strike. So unions have contributed to the life of America. Unions have done a service for our great country. And so I think it is important that we point that out as we talk about the Employee Free Choice Act. And I yield back.

Mr. ELLISON. If the gentlelady would yield, I want to ask you a more fundamental question. Are unions good for America? I yield back.

Mr. ELLISON. I have a question for you about the Employee Free Choice Act. Is this a proven idea? You know, this idea of a card check, of getting a majority of the workers to sign up and then have the union recognized, has this been tried anywhere before? I yield back.

Mr. ELLISON

Mr. ELLISON. Will the gentleman from Colorado yield for a moment?

Mr. ELLISON. Let me join with you in that hope and in that wish. I think I can speak for the members of the Progressive Caucus, Mr. Speaker, when I say that we will be working hard to make that dream a reality. I also want to point out that there have been a great many Americans, I'm sure Minnesotans and I'm sure Coloradans as well, who have been calling for, working for, pushing for America to assert its soft power in the world and to help make peace in this world and be a source of peace in this world. You can bet there is a committed group of Americans who are in the United States Congress who are people who call themselves the Progressive Caucus, and you can find out what we are doing on this Web site, it's cpc.grijalva.house.gov. We are going to be here giving this progressive message every week, and we are the Progressive Caucus. As I wrap it up, and I just want to thank you for joining me tonight, we are going to be here week in, week out, through rain, shine, winter, summer, talking about a progressive message, a progressive message for America, for the world. Congressman Polis, let me thank you again for joining me tonight. I yield back.

Mr. ELLISON. Congressman, great point. The fact is that our veterans are Americans, of course, some of the finest Americans. They come back to their country; they expect a country that's working. So they can come back and maybe get a green job that will help them build our country on the civilian side. They can help weatherize our neighborhoods. They can help build senior housing, low-income housing. They can do so many things our country needs and help build us a renewable future. So I think you're absolutely right to introduce the broader economic context that we're in. One thing we don't want to see is to have these veterans who have given so much for so many come back to a country where we're not building, where we're not preparing for the future. So you're right. I'm glad you mentioned the American Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act. I'm glad you mentioned our efforts to build a health care system that everyone can benefit from. I'm glad you mentioned these important things because, of course, veterans are folks who come into a broader context, and it's not only veterans' benefits that benefit veterans. It's a working, functioning America in which everybody has a slice of the pie. So, Congressman, as we are wrapping up today, I just want to thank you again for being here with us this afternoon. The Progressive message has to always come week in, week out. Whether or not Members are on a Thursday night jumping on a plane trying to get back home or not, the Progressive message has to be part of what we do every week. And I just want to yield to you to sort of offer some final thoughts as we begin to wrap up our comments tonight.

Mr. ELLISON. Yes, sir.

Mr. ELLISON. Well, Congressman, I just want to congratulate you and all the delegation of Colorado on this wonderful news. I believe that Mr. Shinseki is one of the best Veterans Affairs Secretaries our country has ever seen, and I expect that we will be able to work closely with him to not only help the constituents of your great State but probably many others around our country. I also just want to mention that I'm proud to have the Minneapolis VA hospital in my district, and Minneapolis VA is one of the facilities in our country that I feel very proud to be able to represent. The Minneapolis VA Medical Center has been awarded the 2008 Robert W. Carey Trophy Award for performance and excellence. If I sound like I'm a little proud of them, you're right, I am. The annual Carey Trophy Award, the most prestigious national quality award that the VA bestows, recognizes a VA organization that implements management approaches resulting in high levels of performance and service to our veterans. So I am just real happy to mention that. And I am proud, along with you, as we see veterans in Colorado, Minnesota, all over the country being able to benefit from a responsive Congress, a grateful Congress, for the great service that these brave men and women have given to our country.

Mr. ELLISON. Well, Congressman, I just want to point out to you and to everyone watching, Mr. Speaker, that when one child is forced from their home or one adult, for that matter--a home is like a bowl. Can you imagine making a cake without a bowl? Where are you going to put the eggs? Where are you going to put the milk? Where are you going to put all the ingredients for that cake so that you can make that cake and put it in the oven? Try to imagine raising a family. You don't know where you're going to be. You don't know where your school is going to be. No familiar places. You're a stranger everywhere. This kind of displacement has an impact on a child's ability to learn, a child's ability to embrace the environment that they're in. The child begins to sense that maybe their parents can't really protect them, that maybe they're vulnerable and perhaps that anything could happen to them at any time. This does not bode well for the future. We're talking about a region of the world that has known way too much conflict, and this conflict is one that we surely need to end. And this idea of displacement, I think, is another thing that we need to talk about in terms of the impact on the development of this society as we talk in this Progressive message this hour and the anniversary of the war in Iraq. Congressman, let's turn for a moment, then, to veterans' care, if you will. We must begin to take seriously the promise to care for our veterans. Our veterans, prominent men and women, you have them in Colorado and I've got them in Minnesota. Actually, they are from all over this country. And the fact is with tens of thousands of injured troops returning home, we must work diligently to ensure that they do not fall through the cracks and that every soldier receives care and benefits that they have earned and deserve. During the 110th Congress, when I was a freshman Member, I was proud to have voted for the largest increase in funding for Veterans Affairs in history, upon passage of H.R. 2642, the Fiscal Year 2008 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies appropriations bill. We made a real commitment to military hospital construction, improving the quality of care for veterans, improving the lives of veterans, making sure that we shorten the period of time and that their veterans' benefits got to them in a quick way. We not only talked patriotism, we did patriotism as we passed this largest Veterans Affairs funding bill in the history of our country. In the fall of 2007, I worked closely with the Minnesota congressional delegation to ensure that members of the Minnesota National Guard Unit, the 1/34th Brigade Combat Team receive their full active component GI Bill entitlements. That particular unit, that particular brigade combat team, returned to Minnesota after a 22-month mobilization and deployment to Iraq, the longest tour of any ground combat unit during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Unfortunately, members of the unit were informed after they returned home, Congressman and Mr. Speaker, that they were not eligible for their full GI benefits because their orders to return home cut them a few days short of the eligibility for these benefits. After my office was informed of this decision, I and Mr. Tim Walz, my congressman and the highest-ranking enlisted Member ever to come to Congress, wrote a letter to the Department of Defense to appeal the decision. The Army responded positively, and most of the soldiers of this very brave, courageous, and successful combat unit were granted waivers to access those educational benefits. And I just wanted to share that with you, Mr. Speaker and Congressman, because I think it's important that the world know that Members of Congress are fighting for their constituents who have served our country bravely. And I just want to ask you, Congressman Polis, if you have any thoughts you want to share with us about our veterans at this time and about our Nation's commitment to this group of Americans. Whether or not we agree on the war, we all agree that the warrior needs to be supported. Any comments as I yield to you?

Mr. ELLISON. Congressman, I have just got to tell you that 1 more minute is too much. Our President has said that 16 months is our out date, and I think it's incumbent upon all of us to make sure that it is that or less because, quite frankly, I don't look forward to coming up here another year from now saying that we're still present in Iraq in the way that we are now. We need to out of there. We need to wind our way out. Iraq needs to go back to the people of Iraq. Iraqis need to get ahold of their country and govern their own affairs. Sometimes we talk about the Iraq War and even here I've used the word ``war,'' but really at this point we are not talking about a war. We are talking about an occupation. And when I say that, I don't mean that in any sort of a derisive way. It's the legal word that is appropriate for this situation. In a war you can win or lose, but in an occupation you can only stay longer than you should or you can leave sooner than you should, but eventually you've got to go; right? So with this America involvement in Iraq, it is time to say to the Iraqi people, ``This is your country. We will not abandon you. We will not leave you because, of course, we're deeply implicated in your country at this time, but the reality is the military engagement needs to come to a close.'' Let me ask you this, Congressman Polis: When you think about this statistic, Iraqi civilians forced from their homes and the number of about 4.7 million, how does that strike you when you consider Iraqi boys and girls who used to live one place but now can't because of this military conflict? How does that impact their development? How does that impact their ability to grow up to be strong citizens of the world in, say, 5, 10, 15 years?

Mr. ELLISON. Each one with a family, each one with a story, each one with a future, each one with a patriotic passion for their Nation, each one who wanted to come home. And each one didn't have to ever go to Iraq because the premise for our involvement was, as you and I just mentioned, those reasons were discovered to not be accurate, the weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein in connection with al Qaeda. U.S. troops wounded in Iraq, 31,102. And again, these are traumatic brain injuries, these are lost limbs, these are severe injuries--some will heal, some are injuries for a lifetime, as you know, Congressman. And I will yield if you want to comment on any of these. Iraqi civilians killed in the war, about 150,000; that's according to the World Health Organization. Please look it up yourself if you have any questions about that number. And you would have to imagine, in a country of about 29 million people, that there is no Iraqi family that has not seen death and destruction, and this has to be extremely traumatizing. Iraqi civilians forced from their homes, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, about 4.7 million persons who have been homeless as a result of this conflict. That's a big deal. U.S. troops deployed in Iraq, right now we have got about 138,000 people there and, again, a conflict that, according to the reasons offered to us by the Bush administration, not one should have been there based on the reasons they offered to us. Impact of war on the U.S. economy, $1.3 trillion. That's the Congressional Joint Economic Committee Report. I hope folks who might be seeing this, Mr. Speaker, will be willing to look at the Congressional Joint Economic Committee Report, which will cite the impact of this war on our economy as $1.3 trillion. That's a lot of money. That's a whole lot of money. Cost of the Iraq War to the average American family, according again to the Congressional Joint Economic Committee Report, that's about $16,500 per American family. We have paid dearly, too dearly for our involvement in this conflict. And in my view, Mr. Speaker, the cost of even one life is too dear, even $1 is too dear, but we have made much, much more than that.

Mr. ELLISON. And there have been other costs, those that are less easy to quantify, such as the cost to America's image, which you spoke of very well, Congressman Polis. And though it is difficult to assign numbers, we know the view of our great Nation has suffered--although I'm happy to report we're on the mend now--and the cost is just really very difficult to calculate. Let me just remind folks that this is the Progressive message. We are talking about the anniversary of the Iraq war, we are talking about what's going on. We are the Progressive Caucus, and we're talking about a vision of peace and a vision of a progressive message in our country. I want to get to this panel in our slides, Congressman. And I want to say, after 6 years of the Iraq war, here is sort of the cost that I just alluded to. Here is what we've had to pay. Here are some of the hits--flush with cites on the bottom of each one because we're not just up here talking, we back up what we say at the Progressive message. U.S. troops killed in Iraq, 4,259 as of today.

Mr. ELLISON. Well, Congressman, I think that is a question that we all need to ponder. But Halliburton, after receiving no-bid reconstruction contracts from the Bush White House, wasted hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. A 2005 report by Senator Byron Dorgan and Congressman Henry Waxman cited internal Pentagon audits that question ``more than a billion dollars in the company's bills for work in Iraq.'' It just boggles the mind. If the American taxpayer, in their generosity, says let's get water going in Baghdad, let's get electricity going in Baghdad, at least if we spent the money, the people there ought to get it; wouldn't you say so, Congressman?

Mr. ELLISON. Well, Congressman, as you yield back, we were told weapons of mass destruction, links with Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. And some people said, well, at least Saddam Hussein is gone--and of course we're glad he is gone, but it almost seems like, when the argument was made, that folks acted like it was a cost-free endeavor, that he was just gone and we didn't have to pay dearly as a Nation for it. But one of the questions that I want to also direct to you, Congressman, is, $8 billion in reconstruction funding disappeared under the Bush administration's watch. According to Iraq's Public Integrity Commission, roughly $8 billion in the country's reconstruction funds were ``wasted or stolen'' between 2007 and the beginning of the invasion. How does that strike you? When you think about waste, fraud, and abuse, you might have heard that story about that billion dollars in bills sitting on a wooden pallet. How does that strike you? How does that strike your constituents?

Mr. ELLISON. Well, yielding back, Congressman, you and I also know that you are right when you say one of the purported reasons was weapons of mass destruction, which you and I learned was not true. We also know that we were told--we went through sort of this link that was sort of made between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. What have we learned? The bipartisan--bipartisan, that's Republicans and Democrats--9/11 Commission found that there was ``no operational relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.'' Claims that 9/11 hijacker Muhammad Atta met with Iraqi agents in Prague turned out to be false. Do remember that one, Congressman?

Mr. ELLISON. Weapons of mass destruction. And all we have been found with, Congressman, is weapons of mass distraction, as we have been given misinformation, disinformation due to a combination of political pressure, cherry-picking effects, and poor intelligence. All these assertions ended up being wrong, wrong, wrong and dramatically undermined American credibility around the world. Congressman, you also would probably have to agree with me that this war has had a corrosive effect on our standing in the world. Whether you're talking about Abu Ghraib, whether you're talking about Bagram, whether you're talking about--whatever you're talking about, our country, which is known as a beacon of civil and human rights, as the rule of law prevails in America, we have seen this conflict sort of eat at what we stand for. I wonder, are these things that you've encountered as you were out there on the campaign trail and as you have been a Member of this body for the last several weeks?

Mr. ELLISON

Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.