I recently received two similar mailings from the Service Employees International Union Local 1199. One was stating their support of a candidate for State Representative in the 6th Suffolk District, Darrin Howell. I had no problem with it as it seems that both he and Karen Payne, who is also a candidate for the seat have very similar and progressive views regarding a womans’ right to choose and civil rights for gay and lesbian couples in Massachusetts. They would both serve my State Representative district very well.
On the other hand, the other piece of literature touted State Representative Michael Rush of West Roxbury as their preferred candidate for State Senator in the Suffolk & Norfolk State Senate District. Could they have picked more of a right wing conservative for their endorsement? Maybe if John Silber was a candidate for the seat. Mike Rush wants to bring the right of gay and lesbian couples up for a vote in the State Senate if he gains election. He is vehemently anti-choice regarding abortion as well.
How can SEIU who is forwarding Mac D’Allessandro for Congress against Stephen Lynch back a State Representative for State Senate that is more conservative than Lynch?
I will be voting for Michael Walsh for State Senator in the Suffolk & Norfolk District as he has more Democratic values than the current
(Democratic) State Representative from West Roxbury.
Respectfully Submitted,
Sincerely,
Wayne J. Wilson, Jr.
Roslindale
Darrin have nothing on karen payne. she has the mosrt experiance in community leadership.. darrin have no experiance in community building.
Mike Rush has far more then SEIU support in the peimary. My Union, Painters DC #35, is strongly backing Rush as are many others.
<
p>Tremendous record on workers issues earned Rush our endorsement.
history here.
I have not posted anything on this site since April, and I am no longer a candidate for office. Nor would I want to be. As someone who has given thousands of hours to help elect Democrats to office, I would think that I have the right to voice my opinion without the past being thrown up in my face at every turn.
<
p>Sincerely,
Wayne Wilson
Roslindale
generally requires one to state one’s personal interest when applicable.
<
p>At a minimum, I expected a disclaimer, given your previous bitter diary on the same topic.
I was not a fan of Wayne’s run for office, but he is exactly right about Rush. There is really no question that Rush is backward on social issues and has voted against equal marriage rights for same-sex couples. There is no way I will ever vote for him and I am also disappointed that the SEIU would choose to endorse him.
is its author. So for anyone, who like me, remembers the previous diary, a disclaimer would have strengthened the current one.
<
p>Without doing my own research, how then am I to distinguish reasonable assessments from sour grapes? It’s nice to know it’s the former not the latter.
Yes Mr. Laughlin:
<
p>We have known one another for years. I cannot reconcile Mr. Rush’s conservative stands on social issues with his union issue voting record. He has not been a leader in the House at all, and has recently shown support for allowing doctors to take gifts from pharmaceutical companies. I hope that all of the gay and lesbian members of these unions know that Mr. Rush would like to recind their right to marry also.
<
p>Sincerely,
Wayne Wilson
Roslindale
Hi Wayne:
<
p>For the record, my union has endorsed Mike Rush. On jobs, wage enforcement, minimun wage increases, public sector collective bargaining and many other key issues for workers, Mike Rush has been a solid and dependable supporter.
<
p>Also for the record my Union took a public position in support of equal marriage. My union believed then and now that we must represent ALL our members and that equal marriage ensured legal access to health insurance, pension and other benefits a Union member has under his/her collective bargaining agreement.
<
p>I am personally disappointed on Mike for his position on equal marriage and my Union lobbied him on this issue. However, we look at a candidate’s entire record, not one vote. Mike Rush earned our endorsement and we will continue to educate him on the right of all workers under equal marriage in Massachusetts.
<
p>Wayne, while I respect your position, unions must act on more then one issue while individuals have the right to hold one issue as the deal-breaker.
<
p>On a personal note, I am sorry that you decided to leave politics. I have worked with you on the grassroots over the years. We didn’t always agree but I have respect for those who carry the fight. I’ve lost my share of political battles but the “take my ball and go home” approach just leaves other to fight for my issues. Think about returning – it’s the only real way your voice can be heard and taken seriously.
…be primarily concerned with labor issues rather than GLBT rights or reproductive freedom? Seems to be a non sequiter in the argument here.
or rights of gay people to not be harassed in the workplace? Etc.
Christopher:
<
p>The point that I am trying to convey is that Mike Rush is running as a Democrat. Not as a Republican (like he would really prefer to given his adoration of G.H.W. Bush during high school) He does not believe in most of the Platform of the Massachusetts Democratic Party.
<
p>Secondly, S.E.I.U. sent out a GENERAL mailing to the Democrats of this district touting him. If they had only sent the mailing to union members, then it is up for those union members to decide if the counsel of the union is wise. But when they contacted me, as a pro – union Democrat who does not belong to a union it rubbed me the wrong way.
<
p>Lastly, I do not claim to be perfect. I was very perturbed when I had to withdraw from this race, and I was kind of disgusted with the whole process. Time has helped me to discover what is important to me, and this race is very important. It will determine the character of the voters of this district, to see if they will accept or reject a Republican in Democrats’ clothing.
<
p>Sincerely,
Wayne Wilson
Roslindale
I would absolitely expect a union to endorse someone who fights for them on their issues even if he is socially conservative. Unions aren’t necessarily a liberal bastion. In fact just this week I read an article suggesting the Democratic troubles in the past generation stem from unions feeling left out of the socially liberal coalition that seems to them to be more interested in the hot botton wedge issues. I assume the unions sent the piece to every Democrat because they are hoping that even non-union households prioritize their issues over others.
to assign much credibility to the author of a comment who assails a candidate because he “adored” someone in high school.
Party is the only criteria. They are a wholly owned subsidiary of the state Democratic party.
<
p>And before you protest – has the SEIU EVER endorsed a Republican?
Including just recently, $100,000 to the Republican Governor’s Association, who paid for ads attacking Deval Patrick.
<
p>The Massachusetts local is part of 1199SEIU, which quite publicly backed Republicans for Governor and Senate President. If they don’t support Republicans in Massachusetts, that tells you more about the Republican party than it does SEIU.