Tag: Employee Free Choice Act

(Cross posted from 21st Century Democrats)

You can search this nation far and wide and still wind up with very few elected moderate Republicans. As I've discussed before, the Republican tent is shrinking: those who don't subscribe to a narrow set of backward ideas are pushed out. Some have reacted courageously, like the trio of Republican moderates who voted for the stimulus bill. Some however, take the convenient route. Case in point: New York congressman Peter King, who represents the moderate 3rd district, was an original co-sponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act in 2003. This was back when President Bush was certain to veto the bill if it passed, so King hopped on board, appeased the unions in his home district, and kept everyone content. Now that we have a President who supports the measure, King has jumped off the wagon. From his official statement:

“I do not, however, intend to support EFCA in this Congress. Our country is facing its most severe economic crisis in 75 years. It is a crisis different from previous recessions in that it includes restricted credit, massive job loss, a plunging stock market and increased foreclosures and bankruptcies. Virtually every component of our economy is suffering. While I am confident we will recover, I believe the road ahead will be long and difficult. Under these conditions, I have concluded that the Employee Free Choice Act would be too severe a shock to our economy at this time and would be counterproductive.“

 He concludes the statement with a telling sentence: “I will continue, of course, to monitor the situation but that is my current thinking.” From that statement, you might actually think that Congressman King is going to monitor the economic situation. However, what he's really going to be watching are his chances to defeat Kirsten Gillibrand in the 2010 Senate race (Gillibrand is a 21st Century Democrats endorsee and a strong Employee Free Choice supporter). As we've heard, NRSC Chairman John Cornyn is reaching back in time for his 2010 candidates, and he seems to have his sights set on former-Governor George Pataki. If Peter King wants Party money for his Senate bid, he needs to look like the “better Republican.” It'll be Pataki vs. King in a beauty contest of conservatism. He can't be doing things like – gasp – protecting the rights of working people. It would be so un-Republican of him. And while we're at it, let's talk about the idea that the passage of the Employee Free Choice Act would be a “shock” to our economy in these troubled times. Look, the economy is already shocked; working families are shocked by the $2,000 on average that disappeared from their income between 2001 and 2007. The bill does NOT get rid of the option for the NRLB secret ballot election, even though the current election system is rife with flaws. And despite popular belief, when management and labor bargain on equal terms, it helps the workers as well as the management. Just ask this group of 40 leading economists, including two Nobel laureates, who put a full page ad in the Washington Post last month supporting the bill.

Peter King isn't watching the economic situation. He's watching John Cornyn and George Pataki, and he's watching Senator Gillibrand's poll numbers to see if he has a shot at her seat.Meanwhile, Politico reports that numerous Freshman Democrats are voting for the bill despite their electoral vulnerability. There's something to be said for political courage: not everyone has it.

by Doug Foote

{Originially posted at my blog Senate Guru.}

Roll Call has a new article online focusing on Republican attempts to win in 2010 the Senate seat held by Democratic Senator Blanche Lincoln for the last ten years.  The content of the article is a clear statement on how Senate Republicans’ only weapon besides obstruction-by-filibuster is toothless bullying.

The article begins by telegraphing how Republicans will attack Senator Lincoln over the course of the 2010 cycle:

This cycle, the NRSC has stepped into the Arkansas race early, attempting to soften Lincoln’s poll numbers with attacks on her support for the stimulus legislation and for sending “mixed signals” when it comes to the Employee Free Choice Act, according to an NRSC press release. And when Lincoln announced late last month that Vice President Joseph Biden would join her at her 2010 campaign kickoff this weekend, the NRSC was quick to blast the two-term Senator for being out of touch with voters back home.

“Senator Lincoln’s support for runaway Washington spending and her refusal to take a position on ‘card check’ despite representing a right to work state, are among a few of the important issues we are bringing to the attention of her constituents,” NRSC spokesman Brian Walsh said on Monday.

Let’s take a look at the foolishness contained in this passage:

(Much more below the fold.)

1) The NRSC attacks Senator Lincoln as being “out of touch” with Arkansas voters because Vice President Joe Biden is attending her campaign kick-off.  So, um, how popular is the Obama-Biden administration right now?  I believe the levels are historically high (as are the folks at the NRSC, apparently).  Here is a link to the rather comical release.  Among the ‘reasons’ that the NRSC gives for why ‘palling around’ with Vice President Biden proves Senator Lincoln is “out of touch” with Arkansans is that McCain-Palin won Arkansas’ electoral votes in 2008.  I wonder if the NRSC staff will apply that same standard when they opine about the re-election bids of Iowa’s Chuck Grassley and Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter, as well as the campaigns of those who win the Republican nominations for Senate in Florida, New Hampshire, and Ohio.  Note to Senator Lincoln: Republicans will call you “out of touch” no matter what you do.  If you dive to the right in order to deflect their attacks, it won’t work because they’ll keep attacking no matter what.

2) The NRSC attacks Senator Lincoln’s support for what they call “runaway Washington spending.”  The NRSC’s ridiculous attack press release linked above does not reference a single vote of Senator Lincoln’s, only criticizing Vice President Biden’s record as a U.S. Senator.  However, the NRSC has already dispensed a stock attack against Senator Lincoln for her support of the economic stimulus bill earlier this year.  Note to Senator Lincoln: Republicans will claim you support “runaway Washington spending” no matter how you vote.  Even if you oppose every bill that includes a dime of spending, Republicans will attack you.  If you dive to the right in order to deflect their attacks, it won’t work because they’ll keep attacking no matter what.

3) The NRSC attacks Senator Lincoln on what they call “card check,” refering to the Employee Free Choice Act.  If Senator Lincoln strengthens American workers by supporting the Employee Free Choice Act, Republicans will attack her, sure.  Although, if Senator Lincoln caves to Republican bullying and votes against it, all that will do is drive a wedge between her and organized labor, a key source of support for Democrats.  However, caving to Republicans on this issue won’t bring an end to Republican attacks.  Note to Senator Lincoln: To put it simply, Republicans will attack you no matter how you vote.  The more you cave to their attacks, the more credence you give their attacks.  Work to gain the approval of Arkansas’ families and workers, not the NRSC.

After offering the silly stock Republican attacks against Senator Lincoln, the article goes into who the Republicans might recruit to oppose Senator Lincoln:

When it comes to taking on the Lincoln machine, the Republicans mentioned most often right now include state Sen. Gilbert Baker, who represents a Little Rock-based district, and Little Rock Attorney Tim Griffin, a former special assistant in the Bush White House who briefly served as U.S. attorney in Arkansas. …

Outside of Griffin and Baker, Republicans are also looking to Rogers Mayor Steve Womack and Little Rock banker French Hill – who served as a special assistant under Bush for economic policy – as possible 2010 Senate candidates.

Let’s take a look at what this list of potential recruits says about Republican prospects against Senator Lincoln:

1) Nowhere in the article is Republican Rep. John Boozman mentioned.  Rep. Boozman is the only Republican member of Arkansas’ Congressional delegation.  Given that every – I repeat: every – Constitutional officer in Arkansas is a Democrat, Rep. Boozman is basically the top elected official in Arkansas.  That the NRSC didn’t even see fit to make sure his name was included means he is out.

2) Similarly, the absence of any mention of former Gov. Mike Huckabee reiterates Gov. Huckabee’s insistence that a 2010 Senate run isn’t in his future.

Two of the four mentioned possible recruits are guaranteed to turn AR-Sen, in no small part, into a referendum on George W. Bush more than on President Obama or Senator Lincoln.

3) Tim Griffin is a Karl Rove protege who Cheney-Bush-Rove tried to install as a U.S. Attorney amid their notorious Attorney Purge.  Griffin is also a former RNC staffer credited with engaging in the racist voter-suppression tactic of “vote caging.”  Speaking of Griffin being a Rove protege, even Twitter betrays Griffin’s Rove-philia:

4) The other Bushie mentioned as a possible candidate is French Hill, whose name sounds a little – what’s the word? – French!  As the article notes, French Hill was a “special assistant under Bush for economic policy.”  Hmmm, someone refresh my memory.  How does the public regard George W. Bush’s economic record?  Really, I beg the AR-GOP to put French Hill forward as their Senate candidate.

5) The first non-Bushie possible recruit mentioned is state sen. Gilbert Baker.  Though not a member of George W. Bush’s administration, he has not managed to avoid scandal.  First, Baker went to bat “as a character witness for a campaign worker and Republican officeholder who’d repeatedly brutalized a woman and was subsequently convicted of kidnapping. Some supporter of women.”  Here’s the situation:

Recently, Baker sent out a press release claiming the issue of women’s rights is one he takes “seriously”. However, in 2005 Gilbert Baker asked the 1st Division Faulkner County Circuit Court for “leniency and mercy” for a campaign worker of Baker’s who repeatedly beat his female victim, held a knife to her throat, smothered her until she threw up, and  using a cigarette lighter burned her multiple times.

Baker testified repeatedly as a character witness to help the defendant, also an elected Republican constable. The defendant was accused of rape, and convicted of kidnapping and assault against a Faulkner County woman. According to Circuit Court documents, Baker testified twice for the man, after knowing the horrible facts of the case and even admitted the defendant had “done wrong.”

Baker acknowledged that this heinously degenerate person had “done wrong” and he still offered his testimony as a character witness multiple times (because this degenerate was a campaign worker?).  Pretty grotesque.  Another scandal, far less grotesque but nonetheless inappropriate, was also aired for public consumption.  Baker’s son allegedly received preferential treatment at the University of Central Arkansas (UCA) and Baker used public property belonging to UCA for a campaign fundraiser while Baker delivered over half a million dollars to in public money to UCA.  The credibility of the allegations (particularly as a possible quid pro quo) were furthered when it was revealed that UCA President Lu Hardin used money from his discretionary fund to buy gifts for Baker.  Will the AR-GOP and the NRSC turn to this person, who appears to abuse his political power and defends his campaign workers when they abuse women?

6) The last possible recruit is Rogers Mayor Steve Womack.  Rogers is a city of about 50,000 residents, putting in the bottom half of Arkansas’ top ten most populous cities, and Womack was first elected Rogers’ Mayor in November ’98.  By not being a Bushie or a character witness for someone who brutalized a woman, Womack should automatically become the most desirable of the four recruits to the NRSC.  I don’t know much about Womack aside from an episode of anti-immigrant fervor.  Womack wanted to task local law enforcement officers with enforcing federal immigration policy.  When the Mexican consulate in Arkansas wanted to discuss the issue with Womack, Womack gave the consulate the cold shoulder:

It was a bad week for …

ROGERS MAYOR STEVE WOMACK. He treated rudely a request by the Mexican consul in Little Rock to talk about Womack’s plan to use police officers to crack down on immigrants, pleading more important business at a golf tournament. Womack intends to send cops full bore after people without proper working papers, not, you may be sure, the people who hired them.

Womack could simply veil his anti-immigrant policy under the guise of populism.  Womack is, perhaps, the most unknown of the named possible recruits – and that might be his greatest strength as a Republican candidate in 2010.

After running through the underwhelming list of possible Republican Senate recruits, the Roll Call article ends with Republicans warning Senator Lincoln that, if she doesn’t vote the way they want her to, she’ll be in big, big trouble:

“Right now, we’re all watching her card check vote,” said Karen Ray, whose last day as Arkansas Republican Party executive director was Monday. “If she votes yes on it, the repercussions here will just be enormous.” …

Griffin said he too would be watching Lincoln’s votes carefully.

“There will be a number of other pieces of legislation where she will have to decide between being an Arkansas conservative or being a Washington liberal,” he said.

I have two responses to this closing section of the article:

1) “The repercussions here will just be enormous.”  Senator Lincoln, watch out!  If you don’t vote the way the National Republican Senatorial Committee wants, they will attack you.  However, if you vote the exact way they want you to every single time, they will… they will… they’ll still attack you!  These “enormous repercussions” that Republicans rattle on about are absolutely meaningless.  I truly hope that Senator Lincoln recognizes this and has the spine to stand up to idiotic Republican attacks.

2) For the AR-GOP, the only two types of people that exist are “Arkansas conservatives” and “Washington liberals.”  That’s why the AR-GOP is so successful.  Need I remind you that Arkansas’ Congressional delegation includes only one Republican and every single statewide Constitutional officer is a Democrat.  Further, the 35-member Arkansas state Senate consists of 27 Democrats and only 8 Republicans; and, the 100-member Arkansas state House of Representatives consists of 71 Democrats and only 28 Republicans (and 1 Green).  Aside from the Presidential election, these are partisan electoral leanings you’d more likely see in Rhode Island than in the South.  Yet Karl Rove protege Tim Griffin wants to turn the race into a political caricature about “Arkansas conservatives” vs. “Washington liberals.”  And Republicans expect Senator Lincoln to quake at their threats.  Once again, that’s why the AR-GOP is so successful.

I’ll close with a reiteration of sentiments given above.  Note to Senator Lincoln: Republicans will attack you as “out of touch” or as a supporter of “runaway Washington spending” no matter how you vote.  Even if you vote the way Republicans want you to every single time, Republicans will attack you.  The more you cave to their attacks, the more credence you give their attacks.  If you dive to the right in order to deflect their attacks, it won’t work because they’ll keep attacking no matter what.  The best way to keep your job for another six years is to do your job.  Look out for the best interests of Arkansas’ families and workers, and don’t give a second thought to the toothless, empty bullying of Republicans.

At Ryan for Kentucky, we believe that the playing field has been tilted against working families for far too long. My whole life, it seems that war has been waged on union workers and workers attempting to form new unions. I have witnessed this personally in a union fight. Although initially, 80% of the workers at our warehouse signed on to become union, the long process allowed the company to come in and “behind the scenes” peel off these votes. How? By turning worker against worker. Promising promotion of certain workers, and higher wages and more benefits if the union failed.

In the end, After workers being bribed and intimidated on the day of the union vote, it failed by one vote. Then, a month after the union vote, ou company announced it was shutting down our warehouse and moving elsewhere.

Yes, the playing field has long been tilted against workers in this country organizing new unions. The Bush years have only seen it grow worse. Our Representative, Exxon Ed Whitfield has been a constant enemy of workers having the right to organize for better lives.

He voted against the Employee Free Choice Act which would put an end to the problems I just described. Yes, to millionaires like Ed Whitfield, employees should not have the right to negotiate with corporations and companies that pull in billions of dollars a year for better wages and benefits.

But it goes much deeper than that. Exxon Ed Whitfield never met a free trade agreement he didn’t love. Forget the fact that American high-paying middle-class jobs that have been the backbone of this country since WWII are being shipped overseas by greedy corporations. Forget the fact that Free Trade has cost the American worker dearly, Exxon Eddie doesn’t even believe in helping those whose livelihoods were lost by the corporate sponsored government policies of greed, and profit:

Voted NO on assisting workers who lose jobs due to globalization.

H.R.3920: Trade and Globalization Act of 2007: Amends the Trade Act of 1974 to allow the filing for trade adjustment assistance (TAA) by adversely affected workers. Revises group eligibility requirements for TAA to cover: (1) a shift of production or services to abroad; or (2) imports of articles or services from abroad.

Proponents support voting YES because:

Rep. RANGEL: In recent years, trade policy has been a dividing force. This legislation develops a new trade policy that more adequately addresses the growing perception that trade is not working for American workers. The Trade and Globalization Assistance Act would expand training and benefits for workers while also helping to encourage investment in communities that have lost jobs to increased trade–particularly in our manufacturing sector. The bill is a comprehensive policy expanding opportunities for American workers, industries, and communities to prepare for and overcome the challenges created by expanded trade.

Reference: Trade and Globalization Assistance Act; Bill HR3920 ; vote number 2007-1025 on Oct 31, 2007

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

Lets look back at all the bad deals Exxon Ed Whitfield has voted for to destroy the American middle-class, and preserve corporate profits at all costs. His old buddy Tom Delay, whom he Tried to bail out and voted with 91% of the time  co-sponsored this one:

Voted YES on implementing free trade agreement with Chile.

United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act: Vote to pass a bill that would put into effect a trade agreement between the US and Chile. The agreement would reduce tariffs and trade barriers between the US and Chile. The trade pact would decrease duties and tariffs on agricultural and textile products. It would also open markets for services. The trade pact would establish intellectual property safeguards and would call for enforcement of environmental and labor standards.

Reference: Bill sponsored by DeLay, R-TX; Bill HR 2738 ; vote number 2003-436 on Jul 24, 2003

And it just goes on and on:

Voted YES on implementing US-Singapore free trade agreement.

Vote to pass a bill that would put into effect a trade agreement between the United States and Singapore. The trade agreement would reduce tariffs and trade barriers between the United States and Singapore. The agreement would remove tariffs on goods and duties on textiles, and open markets for services The agreement would also establish intellectual property, environmental and labor standards.

Reference: US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement; Bill HR 2739 ; vote number 2003-432 on Jul 24, 2003

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

Voted YES on implementing US-Australia Free Trade Agreement.

United States-Australia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act: implementing free trade with protections for the domestic textile and apparel industries.

Reference: Bill sponsored by Rep Tom DeLay [R, TX-22]; Bill H.R.4759 ; vote number 2004-375 on Jul 14, 2005

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

Voted YES on implementing CAFTA, Central America Free Trade.

To implement the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement. A vote of YES would:

Progressively eliminate customs duties on all originating goods traded among the participating nations

Preserve U.S. duties on imports of sugar goods over a certain quota

Remove duties on textile and apparel goods traded among participating nations

Prohibit export subsidies for agricultural goods traded among participating nations

Provide for cooperation among participating nations on customs laws and import licensing procedures

Encourage each participating nation to adopt and enforce laws ensuring high levels of sanitation and environmental protection

Recommend that each participating nation uphold the International Labor Organization Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work

Urge each participating nation to obey various international agreements regarding intellectual property rights

Reference: CAFTA Implementation Bill; Bill HR 3045 ; vote number 2005-443 on Jul 28, 2005

Whitfield’s was thedeciding vote on that one.

Then we ended with this:

Voted YES on promoting free trade with Peru.

Approves the Agreement entered into with the government of Peru. Provides for the Agreement’s entry into force upon certain conditions being met on or after January 1, 2008.

Prescribes requirements for:

enforcement of textile and apparel rules of origin;

certain textile and apparel safeguard measures; and

enforcement of export laws governing trade of timber products from Peru.

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

We need a leader in Washington who doesn’t scorn and ridicule American workers daily. We need a leader in Washington who believes that America should indeed have a middle-class:

It is not hard to figure out that outsourcing American jobs to third world countries is destroying our middle class.  We must stop rewarding companies who send our jobs oversees with tax cuts and begin rewarding companies who invest in our nations future.  

As a member of a staunch union family, and a former union member myself, I understand first hand the need for a living wage as well as benefits and training programs.  I will work tirelessly to fight for the rights of the working person.  For far too long, the citizens of Kentucky have been victimized by the million dollar boy’s club.  It is time for change!

http://www.ryanforkentucky.com…

New leadership brings promise to Kentucky, and American workers!!:

Old leadership brings about the same old complaints:

Please, help us win this race and bring a young, energetic, and most of all compassionate leader who isn’t afraid to fight for workers and Democratic values to Washington:

 

In Kentucky’s First Congressional District we managed to field a great Democratic woman who believes in fighting for the working american, for equal opportunity for everyone, and for the American dream. She believes that every American who works hard should be rewarded with fair wages and benefits. Now, in the coming campaign I am sure Ed Whitfield will run as a “moderate”, who cares about everyone. This record doesn’t bear itself out, and there are monumental differences between the priorities of Exxon Ed Whitfield and Heather Ryan, who wants to work for the betterment of ALL the people of our district.  

One has only to look at the rankings put forth by the Shriver Center to see glaring differences in the committments of these two candidates toward supporting the working, average Kentuckian and American and towards supporting the goal we should all have of creating One America for all. Take the Employee Free Choice Act. This legislation would have empowered millions of Americans to fight against rampant corporate greed and have the power to negotiate for fair wages and benefits. Organized labor is the most effective deterent to poverty. Don’t just take my word for it, look at this overview of H.R. 800:

– Requires the National Labor Relations Board to review petitions filed by employees for the purpose of creating a labor organization for collective bargaining, and to determine whether or not a majority of employees have signed the petition (Sec 2 (a) (6))

–

Requires the National Labor Relations Board to not hold an election, but to certify the bargaining representative if a majority of employees have signed the petition (Sec 2 (a) (6))

–

Requires the parties to begin bargaining within 10 days of the receipt of the petition, or within a longer time frame acknowledged by both parties (Sec 3 (h) (1))

–

States that if the parties are unable to agree in the bargaining after 90 days, either party may contact the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, which will mediate and attempt to facilitate an agreement (Sec 3 (h) (2))

–

States that if an agreement has not been reached within 30 days of the request for mediation, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service may refer the matter to an arbitration board which in turn will render a decision binding to both parties for two years, unless both parties agree to amend the terms within that two years (Sec 3 (h) (3))

–

Provides civil penalties for employers who engage labor practices in violation of the National Labor Relations Act to affect the formation of a union, including back pay and liquidated damages for employees, and a penalty to be determined by the National Labor Relations Board not to exceed $20,000 per infraction (Sec 4 (b) (1)) (Sec 4 (b) (2))

http://www.govtrack.us/congres…

Of course, because of his close ties with the Chamber of Commerce, and his membership in the McConnell Machine of corrupt Kentucky Republicans, Ed Whitfield voted against this valuable legislation to give the citizens of his district a chance at a better future, while his own numerous stock holdings are making him even richer.

Well, Heather Ryan believes in the working Kentuckian and wants to give them more opportunities for a better future for themselves and their children, she supports the aims of organized labor, including the Employee Free Choice Act. Her is her recent email answer to my question about what can be done to strengthen the labor movement once more:

Our country has seen an all out assault on Organized Labor in the last several decades. We believe Organized Labor is essential in achieving fair wages and benefits for workers. We believe we need to rebuild our Union movement by passing the Employee Free Choice Act and give workers real choices in forming a union. We believe penalties for breaking labor laws should be tougher, and enforced faster. We also support banning the permanent replacement of striking workers. We should also defend and restore a workers right to overtime. We also need to end the practice of mislabeling workers as an independent contractorsÂ? to avoid paying benefits and taxes. We should expand minimum wage protections to tipped workers and home healthcare workers. We should give public employees every opportunity to compete with private contractors and evaluate a companies record on tax, labor and environmental standards before awarding them any federal or state contracts. Finally, we should recognize that any work that involves essential government functions should not be privatized.

Now, we all know how we are always hearing how Republicans will lower your taxes and Democrats will raise them. We have all fallen prey at one time or another to the term, “tax and spend” liberal. Well, from what I have seen, Exxon Eddie is the one who believes in raising taxes, as long as it isn’t on himself, or his fellow millinaires. Why else would he vote against HR 3996? Just look at what this bill attempted to accomplish:

This bill amending the Tax Code includes a provision that greatly benefits low-income families by expanding the Child Tax Credit

(CTC).

1 The CTC is a par tially refundable tax credit aimed at

offsetting some of the expenses of raising a child.

2 Under current law, families must have earnings above $12,050 to qualify for the refundable CTC; this bill lowers the threshold to $8,500.

3 This change in the CTC would benefit the families of thir teen million

low-income children, including three million whose families would

become newly eligible for the CTC and ten million whose families

would see their credit increase.

4 The House vote was on passage.The Senate cloture vote was the

decisive vote on whether the Senate would approve an expansion

of the CTC.

So Exxon Eddie rails against raising taxes. Unless of course it is on the backs of working Americans, not his fellow Exxon and Chevron stockholders.

Contrast that with the position Heather Ryan has taken on taxes, also recieved by me via email:

We need to rewrite our tax code. Our tax code should be more simple and fair. We need to ensure that the tax code rewards American workers and not just the wealthy. To do this we should triple the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) for single adults and cut the marriage penalty. We should also at least double the Child and Dependent Care Credit making it up to $2500 per child. Also, we need to restore a fair investment income tax rate so that the wealthy don’t pay less taxes on investments than workers pay on income. Additionally, we need to repeal the Bush tax credits for the rich which gives tax breaks to those who make over $200,000 a year. Finally, we need to close loopholes that allow the wealthy to pay just 15% of taxes on their huge incomes while American working families often pay twice as much.

It is pretty easy to see who has the interests of the majority of Kentuckians and indeed Americans at heart. Heather Ryan actually fights for tax policies that loosen the tax burdens on millions of working Americans, while Ed Whitfield stubbornly clings to the failed “trickle-down” policies that failed once, and are now failing again as our economy crashes.

We need to win this seat not only for the people of Kentucky, but for Americans everywhere who are seeing the policies of our government, which are set up to benefit the very wealthy and multi-national corporations destroy their lives and the futures of their children.

Heather Ryan will be a constant voice for One America and will fight with tenacity for a Democratic vision for our country that means hard work translates to success. She believes in unions and the work that they do, and she would fight to restore a fair tax system where work, not only wealth is rewarded.

We need your help in this race. Our national party seldom supports the great Democrats here in Kentucky and we expect nothing different this time. We have 62% registered Democrats in this district and getting our message out to them means victory. Please help expand our Congressional majorities and bring another Democratic vote to Kentucky’s delegation.

I have started “Americans for Ryan” to raise $1500 by May 20. I am already just under one-third of the way there. Please help us fight for our state, and elect a “Fighting Democrat” to the Congress who will not forget what she was elected to fight for here:

http://www.actblue.com/page/am…

Visit her site and sign up for email updates:

http://www.ryanforkentucky.com/

Also, don’t miss this awesome diary and interview with Heather here:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/…

Please help us in our quest to take back this seat with a Democrat, and to make history in electing the first woman to this seat!!