The CAFTA 15--Meeks Staffer Wigs Out

    Well, if you wondered whether the CAFTA 15 are testy about their vote and maybe a tad worried that it's going to come back to bite them, check out this barrage which was sent by Mike McKay, senior policy advisor to Rep. Gregory Meeks (NY, District 06), one of the CAFTA 15. He sent it as an e-mail to an individual involved in the anti-CAFTA work and it was sent on to me.

    "You're so politically stupid, it is not funny! You send out a press release, and get 1 or 2 media outlets to cover it, and then put it on your blogs as if it some big deal believing your own hype! Please. We welcome your racists campaign. Keep it up. Instead of the 96% of the vote we got last cycle, you racists will help us get 100% for sure! By the way, I hope you saw the numerous newspapers articles and editorials praising Rep. Meeks for his courageous vote and standing up for his district and NYC. Congressman Meeks will continue to fight for the 51% of unemployed black males in NYC and working families regardless of the lies put forth by your racist campaign. I bet you couldn't find our district if you were standing in it. By the way, since your last email cited Crain's NY, I hope you saw their editorial today regarding Cafta, along with the many others.  So keep up your racist campaign. But just a warning to you, when we respond back, you better be prepared. Because we will fight back your racist campaign of misinformation. And it will be just as ugly and nasty as you and your fellow Nadar klansmen. Put that in your elitist pipe and choke on it!"

     So, the questions I have for Mike McKay and Rep. Meeks are:

1. You are claiming that people who oppose CAFTA are racists. Can you explain, then, why widespread demonstrations were held against CAFTA in all of the Central American countries that CAFTA is supposed to help?

2. Are you arguing that CAFTA will bring jobs that will employ the 51 percent of unemployed black males in New York? If so, can you show the data that backs up the claim from an independent source i.e., not the Chamber of Commerce or the Administration? 

3. You say that you will fight back as ugly and nasty, referring to "klansmen." Could you outline what your proposed tactics are?

4. Congressman Meeks, is this the standard of discussion you support from your senior aides? Do you disavow or support his remarks?

Updated Question: And as a helpful Congressional staffer pointed out to me in response to this posting, Rep. Meeks, is your senior policy advisor suggesting that members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus are also racists because of its opposition to CAFTA?

Comments

[Logan]

Can you specify who McKay sent this letter to?

[Mike]

Who's Nadar?

[Jambon]

I presume he probably meant "Nader" as in Ralph Nader.

This staffer strikes as one of those overly ambitious capitol hill types who's it in for the career, not the cause. Someone send him a copy of "What's the Matter With Kansas". He needs a little populist enlightenment...

[John Halle]

As much of a cretin as this guy is, there is something he understands which we, in general, do not, and that is that politics is fundamentally about power. Press releases, in fact, don't matter very much unless they are combined with the ability to speak to Meeks in the language he understands, and that is the language of political force.

While challenging Meeks's committee assignments might have some effect-and I'm a bit dubious as to whether the threat has any teeth-what really matters is the ability to put into question Meeks return to office, and here McKay is right. Meeks will almost certainly waltz back into office with his usual 90+ percentage margin.

So essentially, the challenge McKay is making to us is the same one which Clint Eastwood makes in "Dirty Harry":

"What are you going to do about it, punk?"

Unless we have an answer to this question, we're blowing smoke and they know it.

That being said, I agree that it is kind of fun to watch these guys wig out.

[Bill Pearson]

That must be some kind of a record...calling someone a racist 5 times in the space of one paragraph. I'll just be polite and say the author of this response is woefully inadequate and he must have more ability to communicate his point than this.

I do like your calling him out and soliciting a response JT. If Mr. Mike McCay can get past his childish outburst, maybe he can enlighten us all by answering those simple questions in easy to read non-threatening statements.

Alas, i doubt you will hear from him. I'm sure he is way too busy reading the press clippings from the business writers at the newspapers, the backslapping from the Chamber of Commerce and the right wing republicans courting him.

Whata putz.

[Janet]

I'm surprised that Congressman Meeks would allow such comments to be made public. Not only that, but I think this staffer is completely missing the point on how critical CAFTA is to future trade agreements and jobs here in the US. I'm embarrassed for Meeks, and the constituents in his district--this is NOT the way to respond to critics.

[Marc]

These comments are not even worth addressing...it clearly shows ignorance and misguided anger for the wrong reasons.

[dude]

this guy is nuts. but we do need to be more politically calculating. the anti-meeks/towns forces have already made a political blunder. that is calling on nancy pelosi to oust meeks/towns from their committee assignments.

now that labor publicly wants pelosi to oust the congressmen from their posts she will never do it. she will be seen as a tool of labor.

however, pelosi must be angry at them to begin with, since cafta was an issue of great importance to the dem caucus. with behind the scenes pressure we could have gotten meeks and towns kicked off their committees. most likely fairly easily. however, now it probably wont happen, as it would reflect poorly on pelosi's strength and command.

as we go forth with the important task of beating these worthless politicans in '06, we must not let our reactive anger and immediate outrage get in the way of the objective calculations that must be made.

[gregory hamblet]

As a african american I,ve been called many things, racist is not one of them. Meeks is dead wrong on this one & this McKay is an idiot!!

[Kevin F Droste]

According to the letter sent by Meeks' staffer, he won his last election with 94% of the vote, yet my information shows he ran uncontested. One would think if someone runs uncontested, that person really should win 100% of the vote. (LOL) Also, is Congressman Meeks proud of that 51% unemployment number for NYC black males? What was the number when he took office, and is this an improvement? This is his SIXTH term, and he still can't get unemployment below 50%? This would mean to me that he hasn't done his job at all in his six terms, and that he may be right that CAFTA isn't gonna hurt his district, because there aren't many people left from whom to take jobs. Just my viewpoint. KFD

[LaborVet]

Brother Tasini, I saw your reference to a congresswoman french kissing. You wouldn't have used that kind of image to attack a male member of Congress. It's sexist. She's wrong not because she's a woman but because she's wrong. Leave her gender out of it.

As far as black members of Congress selling out to business (the other current example is members of the Congressional Black Caucus selling out to Wal-Mart), they don't feel heat from black constituents back home because after all unemployment IS a huge problem and unions and the Dems and so-called progressives are not seen as offering some alternative. So people grab onto the only thing being pitched as a jobs strategy, even if it's actually a strategy that destroys good jobs.

It's a mistake to sit around hooting at this guy or at the CBC for Wal-Martgate. It's like sitting around hooting at how dumb Bush is. Look in the mirror, instead, and be part of figuring out how the fair trade movement and its various components can become relevant in the lives of those 51% black unemployed the staffer talks about.

[NewYorkAfricanAmerican]

LaborVet hit the nail on the head. Let me take it a bit further. In New York City, the so-called labor community is racist in that they out and out refuse to hire African American males (this excludes municipals). In fact, everyone knows, they in-source from Ireland and Poland and get green cards for people instead of allowing African Americans to participate. The unemployment rate (which is actually 48.3 percent) is a reflection of this policy. Not to mention, many of the people who do belong in these unions live in the suburbs. People in the labor community need to check their own houses. As for Walmart, again, African Americans get hired at Wal-Mart. If it becomes unionized, that will probably slow down as well. For all of the supermarkets in the urban areas, the one where poor blacks live have no union. The outburst is uncalled for, but the issues are real. And, if you ask today if African Americans get a fair shake from the majority of unions, the answer is no. Additionally, the labor community does need to look itself in the mirror. 38% voted for bush, 11% of African Americans voted for Bush. Who is truer to the cause? The largest bloc of consumers at WalMart are union members. Stop the double standard, give equal opportunity at home if you expect fairness.

[serious]

I'm not being a smart ass but is unemployment 51% in New York? No. But its 51% among black men? Why? Becaue there are literally no jobs for them? No. I just did an internet search and found dozens of entry level service sector jobs in New York that are open right now (assuming this 51% are not college grads). Are they applying for these jobs and not geting them? That's a discrimination problem, not an international trade issue.

[FL house Staff]

I'm not even on the federal level.. and let me be clear: I would be fired- hands down - if I did something like this. Fired.. 100% no questions asked...

I can say, however, I am torn about whether or not to screw this guy (simply for defending CAFTA) or say 'well, I understand... sometimes people annoy you and you have to respond a little rudely (never on the record, though)!'

Shit.. I was working during the entire Schiavo fiasco was happening.. I was called much worse than 'racist' and never reacted like that.

[Carl Nyberg]

If this guy still has a job, his boss shouldn't after the next election.

[Real Moral majority]

First, let's be clear about McKays background. He was on the board of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and some board at his alma mater business school back in NY. That should tell you his stripes right there. next logical question is, what on earth is he doing serving as Sr. Policy advisor to Rep. Meeks?

Nuts and bolts ladies and gents- I'm not sure how familiar any on this board are with the intracacies and data surrounding the CAFTA, but every model run using non-biased assumptions (read: real economic data and models) showed America losing jobs once again as we did under NAFTA. Rep. Meeks was told this and I know this for a fact because I told it to him. Rep. Meeks had no clue what he was talking about and kept bringing up Hugo Chavez, president of Venezuela, which, consequently, wasn't included in the CAFTA agreement.

McKay is ill informed or just ignorant. After NAFTA, just on a quick search of ther DOL website, over 525,000 trade ADjustment Assistance cases were filed. CAFTA is a worse trade agreement than NAFTA- do the math.

As far as some stating that Union members make up a majority of Wal Mart shoppers, where on earth did you get that stat? I suspect it's something that was made up as how do you measure that? Second, as far as Labor not representing people of color, I would point to the VP and Sec Treasurer of the AFL-CIO- both Hispanic...Robert Roach at IAM, African American..it's insulting to have to even name these off because someone hasn't done their homework. I would also point out that Labor walked arm and arm with our brothers and sisters during civil rights marches with great men like Rep. John Lewis. Why aren't more people of color represented by unions? It's a complex answer.

1) Before the aforementioned civil rights movement, people of color weren't really even in the job market so to speak. We're talking roughly 40 years ago and we do still live in a society which is predominantly white. So, if you're going by strict percentages, as African Americans make up around 12% of the population...I think its safe to say that union representation is higher than this as overall population represented by unions is around 13%.

2) It is becoming harder to form unions. (See Employee Free Choice Act) www.aflcio.org Unions are under the most intense attack ever faced. 3 anti OSHA bills passed the House recently, overtime regulations last year...etc

As for Brother Kevins post- yeah, that's a great strategy, just latch onto any job..worked well before the great union movement duing the early part of the 20th century. talk to some Flint sit downers about that strategy, I would be interested to see exactly how hard a 100 year old man can hit someone. Go down to Long Beach and say that to some ILWU guys..have a nice swim.

Labor vet makes one good point or accurate one- over 30% of union members voted for Bush. So, my question is, what do you plan to do about it? Get out there in 06 and make sure your brothers and sisters don't do this again. Volunteer..run for city council or dog catcher or something. WE win when we get active. The other part about union members living out in the suburbs is because they can afford to because union members are paid about 26% more than non union employees. Tell that to people of any color and see if we can get them to join and build or power.

Summary- Meeks screwed us, his party, his leader and all working families. So did 14 others in the House and 11 in the Senate. So we, stay out of those campaign headquarters and those campaign coffers. Simple. In closing, McKay needs to go. Anybody that ill-informed to call the NAACP racist (NAACP opposed CAFTA as well) is just plain foolish. I don't take kindly to being called a racist by a foolhardy imbecile. His first line tells you exactly how politically naive he is when he says that labor is politically ignorant. WEll bucko, your boss just made it easier for one more embattled Republican to save his/her butt in 06 by allowing them to vote against CAFTA in states like PA and OH. So...15 GOP were let off the hook..Dems need exactly that number to take (231-202) a 1 seat majority in 06...who's politically stupid?

[Little Brøther]

Real Moral majority | August 9, 2005 05:32 PM

A masterful commentary; so succinct and information-rich that it needs to be read more than once. Wow.

[NewYorkAfricanAmerican]

Majority - just a couple of points:

The AFL-CIO themselves readily admit the union-sponsored credit cards have more charges at WalMart than anywhere else.

In my post, I specifically said, exclude municipal unions because they are usually governed by civil service rules for hiring, which make it harder to discriminate. I also specifically said New York City. Being able to point out one or two leaders as minority is like saying "what do you mean I'm racist, one of my best friends is black". You just can't walk up and join unions, believe me, I tried and was denied admittance. I notice you didn't question the green card issue.

During the civil rights movement, labor was pivotal in its success. That's a fact. It's also a fact that African Americans had to form separate unions before they were aceepted by the overall movement. Read up on A. Philip Randolph. Also read up on how locals discriminate, and internationals when alerted, have to come and correct the problem.

I don't agree with Meeks' vote, but I understand his angst.

[Tasini]

Hmmmmm...a few quick thoughts:

I do agree with John Halle--opposition to the CAFTA 15 (and also, as some have pointed in my previous posts) Republicans who went bad and shouldn't have) has to be shown to have teeth. At least for those of us in the labor community, to get there means a lot of people keeping the pressure on union leaders to hold these people accountable in 2006. But, compared to the post-NAFTA environment (when very little was done to the 100 or so Dems who voted for NAFTA), the letter to Pelosi is almost revolutionary.

I don't think the issue is whether McKay defended CAFTA--he has every right to do so, on his own behalf or on his boss' behalf. But, the question in my mind is: what's acceptable language? We have to set a standard that when there is disagreement within the progressive community (broadly defined), those disagreements can be open and even vigorous--but not cross a line, which, for me, means, for examples, you can have a legitimate criticism of the labor movement and not be a union member but not be immediately tarred as "anti-union." It's a mature environment where we support the general but criticize the specific.

Re: Wal-Mart--I don't know about the entire make-up of Wal-Mart shoppers. But, I do know that about 30 percent of the charges on the AFL-CIO credit cards are purchases made at Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart preys on poor people.

[Peter]

That's outrageous. I dropped an email to Meeks' office to get the scoop. Defenders of this wingnut need to just stop. Playing the race card whenever someone disagrees with your position is an abominable practice.

John Lewis takes a brick to the dome so some DC half-wit can call people racists? Hellllll naw - that dog won't hunt.

[The Real Moral Majority]

NYAA

First, thanks for the recommended reading. I do not know a lot about A P Randolph, what I do know is that I think his heart is in the right place.

In response, again, I named some of the highest ranking people in the labor movement and they are people of color- that was the point. I wish I had enough time to look at every local labor leader all around the country. I do know what I have seen and I would ask you to once again look at the conclusion I laid out regarding percentages. Is it right? Not sure, but it's a safe assumption I believe. There are also many unions like UFCW, UNITE HERE and UAW who have a very high porportion of their memberships as people of color.

The NY situation- you know better than I as you live there. If that's the case I don't agree with that. But I must plead ignorance on this one brother as I am not that familiar with the NY labor scene.

I did read your post and noted your exclusion of municipal unions. Two points- Unfortunately, Labor doesn't do the hiring and firing so I believe the racial makeup of locals is out of the control of said locals. That's a company racist policy.

Another sad point is that racism does exist and will exist for some time to come. I believe it has and will get better. As I noted, the civil rights movement was a blink ago..40 years is nothing in the grand scheme of things when your talking about racial harmony. It's less than one generation and let's be real- shit like that can get ingrained into a young persons head regardless of his/her race. Education is the key that will unlock those ingrained images taught daily to youngsters by adults who grew up in a much different era. In my opinion, the civil rights movement is still young and there's more work to be done.

The credit card thing..that's shameful. Can you provide a link or story, I would like access to that.

I don't see how one can empathize with Rep. Meeks. NYAA, if yo usaw what I saw and heard what I heard, I believe you would feel much much different. This guys was shameful in his actions. He's no dummie, he has a JD from Howard. He was presented with cold hard facts. Never refuted any of them. He voted for political contributions over people NYAA. I would look at his next FEC report and see who's giving. Friendly wager of a slice- you'll see DHL, UPS, FedEx Wal Mart, Pfizer, Glaxo Smith Kline, some rail companies, Microsoft, Intel, Oracle, Adobe and NY Chamber of Commerce and Hispanic Chamber of Commerce..to name a few.

[snuh]

yes, but didn't you read "the numerous newspapers articles and editorials praising Rep. Meeks"? don't you know that you should be deferring all of your political judgments to the superior opinions of newspaper editorial boards?

[Karl the Idiot]

Good thread. Who can we run against him in 2006? is a strong primary challenge on this issue the way to go? I know there'd be netroots support, and if the mofo ran unopposed, it's not like there's going to be a Rethug to take our (new) guy down after he or she wins the bloody primary?

But a guaranteed Dem district is probably the best place to run a strong left candidate. Let these pro-business anti-worker types move someplace virtually red and run their traitor ass there.

[Elaine Supkis]

The districts in question in Brooklyn snake all over the place. They are perfect examples of gerrymanderism to keep someone in office even though they represent no one.

[chumley]

This childish jerk McKay needs to be FIRED.

Then Meeks needs to be replaced with someone who WON'T sell out the people he represents. Any congressman who lets his staff act out in idiotic temper tantrums, like this clown McKay did, has terrible judgment anyway.