By Arhi Uexurini
The Rebel Press
After the uprising triggered by the killing of two young men by the police last year, district voting has been sold to the people as almost a magical formula to address police abuse and other issues that Anaheim working class communities deal with everyday. According to the partisans of this quick-fix solution, a more diverse representation,“latino” specifically, in the city council would result in a local government that would better serve the people and be more accountable to its constituency. The measure seems to be gaining support to the extent that even Disneyland has spoken in favor of it.
However, not everyone agrees with this plan or with the politics of some organizations behind the proposal.
John Earl, a local journalist and a former union employee who advocates for union reform, has criticized the involvement of organizations like OCCORD whose staff and Board of Directors include executives and ex employees of labor unions notorious for their corruption.
Photo of John Earl by the Rebel Press
Last year, Earl posted on a social media website a response to OCCORD’s CEO Eric Altman’s statements at a press conference in support of partitioning the city into electoral districts.
“My response to efforts by hotel union to organize Anaheim communities:
A message to Eric Altman: I hope that the city gets district voting that isn’t gerrymandered to make things even worse. Even with the added risk of cronyism that might help bring more equal representation–more so in the long run, but probably not much.
“The real key is the hotel union that you used to work for and that shares control of the organization you currently work for–the same union I once worked for (then called HERE). That union is the biggest obstacle to progress for Anaheim working class people because it is corrupt to the bone; if it weren’t, it would have been much more successful in helping to organize what is a virtual political gold mine of grass-roots ‘power of the people’ in the Disney Resort area.
“How pathetic that the hotel union has failed to organize much of anything because it has been preoccupied with its own internal power grabs instead of the needs of the workers; and now, it and the other local corrupt unions seek to co-opt community grass roots efforts. Same old same old. May the people wise up and join the IWW or start a real union of their own, rejecting the CEO wannabes at UNITE/HERE who worry much more about their own job security and wealth than the workers.”
In a video interview Earl gave to The Rebel Press, he elaborates on his response and, in this first part of the conversation, he also suggests advocating for the right to vote for undocumented migrants in the city, a general strike in the Disney Resort area and other more radical measures to challenge the political and financial powers as opposed to the minor administrative solutions proposed by sell out liberal politicians, non-profits, and the like.
John Earl is the publisher and investigator of Surf City Voice, an independent news blog about water boarding (resources control) in Orange County. He was also the editor of The Orange County Voice, not to be confused with the Voice of OC. Before that, he helped organize for immigrant rights in Costa Mesa with Colectivo Tonantzin. He was a researcher and organizer for the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union, Local 681 from 2000 – 2002. Subsequently, Earl helped lead a reform movement in that union.
View and hear Part I of the interview with The Rebel Press here.
I’d answer the question in your title with a “no.” It’s going to lead to a Council that more closely matches the city’s heterogeneous electorate. It’s not a “miracle cure” and I’ve never heard anyone suggest that it was. It’s just going to be better for much of the city that currently has little or no real representation.
In my dealings with Eric Altman, whom I’ve met maybe a half-dozen times, I’ve seen nothing, zero, that reminded me of a “corrupt union boss.” He looks to me, based on those interactions, to be someone who very much earns the money he’s paid to serve the interests if workers.
I get that you have a beef with him or others in the labor movement, but I hope that you won’t let that history put you on the wrong side of a popular movement for greater community representation in Anaheim — the reasons for which I presume you understand.
What you see from the outside is not the same as what you would see from the inside as I have done (with the hotel union). I try to learn from history and it’s my hope that I can help others learn something from it too, based on my own experiences and the experiences of others (such as those who have worked directly with OCCORD). My own experiences are part of the larger picture of labor history, which shows that as it now stands, organized labor is falling into oblivion, precisely because of the strategies of co-opting and personal power grabbing that so many of its “leaders” are obsessed with. If local labor unions seek to manipulate rather than to stand by the movement for greater community representation in Anaheim, or anywhere else in the world for that matter, then they will be on the wrong side of history, for reasons that I presume you understand.
My obligatory plug for single transferable vote…
Proportional representation with no political parties, no districts, no gerrymandering
See:
http://electionreform.wordpress.com/
and look toward the bottom for explanations of STV.
I know I speak for a many in Anaheim when I say that this post, and John Earl himself have absolutely no relevance.
Funny, I don’t believe I’ve seen him at a single hearing.
The logic of your argument is fatally flawed and, therefore, irrelevant. Funny, you didn’t refute a single thing I said.
I’d like to think I am one of the sincere people who think that district voting is necessary, I came to this conclusion not knowing the people behind this initiative. I do not think that the “system” will wither away in our lifetime, and your creative ideas of “shadow” elections, rolling strikes, and voting by the unauthorized residents are not feasible. Your critique of the unions is sad, not because there maybe certain truth on what you are saying but because you are not proposing a pragmatic, doable on today’s times, alternative. See the link below for a sober explanation of the diminishing role of the unions, and the efforts to create a responsible alternative :
http://billmoyers.com/segment/richard-wolff-on-capitalisms-destructive-power/
District council is not a magic solution, and it contains the potential negatives that you and others have mentioned. You emphasize the potential for corruption but gloss over the corruption of the current electoral system. We may end up with the traditional type of corporate politicians we have in both parties. However, the chances that the disfranchised community could be heard and represented are greater. Would not this be ” revolutionary”? If this is to be co-opted, let it be.
Richard: there is a second part to the interview in which I believe I will answer directly or indirectly some of the issues you bring up. I saw the Bill Moyers interview. That’s one view but there are others, of course. There are various alternatives for rebuilding unions, all worth trying, but none involve the current corrupt system. It’s like the fallacy of many progressives that you can cure the Democratic Party from within, but you can’t. But in the case of unions the solution is much more hopeful because it has, basically, been done before successfully already. No, I don’t think there’s anything revolutionary with district voting, nor with at-large voting either. The revolution won’t come from voting at the ballot box (that has value mostly after the revolution) but from the power to organize, strike, boycott, etc.
Just to clarify, I don’t mean that union reform has worked from within but that alternatives have worked before and, anyway, there is no other choice today than to let the current corrupt unions destroy themselves, as they are doing quite well overall, and to create better unions to replace them in the meantime.
Significant changes can be made without calling for strikes, boycott, etc, especially in these still hard economic times. Unions are important but as you strongly state, they have been losing relevance. Until better ones are created, the issues affecting the community need to be addressed anyway.
So far your position against reasonable community organizing and adequate levels of representation is similar to the 2 GOP Chrisses . I am firm believer on finding common grounds on issues that could improve the quality of our lives. Your unintended common ground with hardline republicans is something to ponder. Looking forward to the second part of your interview.
Steve, don’t leave out his buzzwords: obsessed, illegal, secretive, propoganda, amused and corrupt. choose one word from each column, add the adjective, and you can write a blog post too.
Director Fisler (aka deadwhitemale): would you like a doughnut?
After they get district elections they will go after non-citizen resident voting – just watch.
This article could be summed up as – “don’t support your corrupt union, support my corrupt union.”
Unions have a tough history of corruption to try to overcome.
Who doesn’t? At least the unions have been doing a good job doing so. Wall Street, by contrast….
So we let the Bloombergs of the world make our laws then counselor?
That makes eminent sense…NOT!
Carl, do you truly believe that that inference is derivable from my comment?
If not — and “no” is the correct answer — why are you even saying that?
Apparently Putin supports district elections too.
“Putin supports single-mandate constituency representation”
http://english.ruvr.ru/news/2013_05_15/Putin-supports-single-mandate-constituency-representation-099/
Well, THAT proves … something.
Maybe he admires our House of Representatives.