Craig Becker, one of Barack Obama’s nominees to serve on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), was returned to the White House for reconsideration last week, alongside Dawn Johnsen. Becker is counsel for both the AFL-CIO and SEIU, and was nominated to fill one of three vacancies on the Labor Board.
So why’d Becker’s nomination get returned? President McCain placed a hold. The Workforce Prof Blog reports:
The Washington Post is reporting that Craig Becker’s nomination to the NLRB (among five other nominees to different agencies) was “referred back to the White House for reconsideration.” It’s unclear to me how significant this move is. The Post includes the six under a list of nominees who were “rejected,” but it appears that they could be renominated, based on the following quote:
No formal vote was taken, but the six nominees who were “returned to the White House” for reconsideration and possible renomination “ran into opposition,” said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
It seems that the problem is Sen. McCain’s hold on Becker’s nomination. Under Senate rules, nominations not acted on at the end of a session essentially “die” and can’t be acted on again unless they are formally renominated. However, the Senate can adopt a unanimous consent agreement that waives this rule and permits further action without renomination. But the Senate refused to do so with Becker and the others. The upshot is that Becker could get renominated, but unless there’s a way to break McCain’s hold on him it may not matter.
McCain placed a hold on Becker for, get this, Becker’s views that workers should have a voice at work for having a union without employer interference. The horror!
McCain voiced similar concerns in a letter to HELP Committee Chairman Tom Harkin of Iowa, also seeking a hearing. McCain wrote that Becker’s writings “indicate that he would prevent employers from having a role in union representation elections in their workplaces by doing away with requiring fair, secret ballot union elections when requested by an employer.” McCain added that he wanted a chance to question Becker about these positions in person and in public.
Of course, McCain neglected to mention they haven’t held such a hearing for almost 30 years.
McCain complained that HELP hadn’t held a public hearing on Becker. HELP Chair Tom Harkin pointed out that the committee hadn’t held a public hearing on a rank-and-file NLRB member since 1980.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has the power to simply ignore McCain’s hold and bring Becker’s nomination to the floor. In which case, McCain would either have to back down or filibuster.
McCain and other conservatives’ beef with Becker stems from Becker’s beliefs that the NLRB is well-equipped to deal with significant parts of labor law reform that is currently held up by the very Senate that’s holding up his nomination. Lindsey Beyerstein at Working In These Times writes:
In this case, McCain wants to score political points by stalling a pro-labor nominee. As a legal scholar, Becker helped lay the intellectual foundation for the Employee Free Choice Act.
In one law review article, he suggested that much of the work of EFCA could be done through the existing regulatory structure. The NLRB administers the National Labor Relations Act, the primary legislation that governs labor/management relations.
Conservatives fear that if Becker is confirmed, he will use his regulatory powers to make union organizing easier. Indeed, if he is confirmed, the pro-labor faction on the NLRB will enjoy a solid majority for the next four years.
Here’s the thing. We’ve got to a point where a nominee for the National Labor Relations Board – the impotent government body charged with enforcing labor laws – can’t be confirmed because a senator objects to the nominee supports making it easier for workers to join unions. Yes, these are the same folks who objected to, and held the nomination of, Hilda Solis as Secretary of Labor because she supported workers rights. When it comes to labor, conservatives are well trained to not budge an inch.
The NLRB has had only two of its five members for well more than a year; two other NLRB nominations from Obama were neither voted on nor sent back and may get taken up by the Senate next year. In order for Becker’s nomination to have any chance of going forward, the White House will have to find a way to assuage McCain, or Harry Reid will have to grow a pair and push the nomination through. I’ll let you bet on either of those happening.



25 Comments









Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Work in Progress
New rule: If you don’t know how to run a database query to find out the facts about employer intimidation, you’re not allowed to block NLRB nominations.
Well, same comment as I made in the post upstairs.
Or perhaps I’m misunderstanding what a hold is? I was under the impression a hold was merely a signal that said Senator is willing to filibuster this bill/nominee/whatever. And again, if the hold is effective in this Senate, then that must mean at least one “Democrat” is willing to join the Goopers filibuster. Or it means I’m misunderstanding what a hold is.
Brilliant!
sigh.
Not sure how we get this bs unstuck.
Well, a hold is valid in and of itself as a block of Senate procedure (except when Dodd did it on FISA…). It could portend a filibuster, which, if followed through, may invite one or two Dems. It’s not just a signal but an active block.
Ah, you assume _facts_ are in play here. Tsk tsk.
The Senate has to fix its house or risk getting blown up by The People. This shit is seriously out of hand.
Maybe some action will come of this if workers start fires in their pants?
A labor lawyer on the NLRB? Shocking! This must NOT be allowed to happen.
Long time lurker, first time poster – Can’t Obama make a recess appointment for this (as well as Dawn Johnson)?
Don’t know why anyone is surprised. The stated goal of the Rs was to make sure that Obama did not succeed. So far they are doing a good job. Still want to vote the Dems out next time and let people like McCain run the country?
It only lasts for a year, but yes he can.
Going through cloture is more time consuming than going through unanimous consent. Rethugs are just dragging their feet – but anti-labor Dems could be using that as cover so they can still get labor money.
You just beat me to it. A recess appointment is what I was just thinking of.
“A labor lawyer on the NLRB? Shocking! This must NOT be allowed to happen.”
New Rule:
Henceforth: Labor Lawyers to the Treasury and Bankers to the Labor Relations Board.
You are assuming that Obama will forcefully rebuff McCain.
Idea at #9 & #22 will help us decide.
McCain, working on his conservative creds–J.D Hayworth lurks in primary.
Do you think in a democracy the republicans would still be running things?
I don’t assume anything at all these days. I am furious at the Dems but I admit that I am terrified of the Rs taking over again. I think it would truly be the end of our democracy.
I think our democracy IS over. Rather than let appointments linger and then be under-the-bussed, I don’t understand why the R’s aren’t required to vote…..time and again. Also let’s let the BlueDopes show their real leanings. If the appointees are going to lose anyway, we should at least have a record of who voted which way.
I hear you, and understand.
I guess where I would disagree is that IMO we’re losing our democracy equally effectively under these supposed Dems. And I also believe that the only way we’ll ever get our Party back is for them to learn the lesson of our votes can no longer be taken for granted. Because, IMO, they’ve learned the lesson well that they can be taken for granted, and that’s why we get the piss poor Dems that we get.
It sucks, in fact it really really really sucks, but IMO that’s the only way they’ll change… or to be more precise, that’s the only way there’s a CHANCE they’ll change.
But I understand and respect your opinion as well.
Just wish it wasn’t like this. And really am somewhat surprised. I literally couldn’t wait for election day last year to vote for this guy, and the D Senator on my Va. ballot. I just can’t believe how bought and paid for the D Party is. Always knew the R party was. Never realized until now how far the D party is.
The trickle up economic policies put in since Reagan has resulted in the super rich being so damned rich they can afford to buy both parties.
Assholes.
OT, how’s the Iranian revolution progressing? Have we won yet?
Absolutely agreed. And there’s been an awful lot of righting lately about the “abuse” of the filibuster. Well, if Harry Reid actually made them, you know, actually filibuster, then maybe, just maybe, it wouldn’t be abused.
The only conclusion I can draw is that both parties really are in some kind of tandem. I’m sorry, and know that sounds like a nutty conspiracy theory, but all the facts just seem to point at that.
Just like Obama most definitely having the goods to go after Cheney for violations of the law, yet choosing not too, AND Cheney still takes every opportunity to trash the guy publicly. WTF? It has to be scripted. It must be. I mean, if you had the goods on someone, and decided not to pursue it, wouldn’t you change your tune if that same someone then proceeded to try and “ruin” your Presidency? It must be all a show.
I think your surprise about how corrupt the Dems are is what has so many of us upset. Hell, I knew the R’s were not going to do anything in my best interests…..I just didn’t think the D’s were just as dismissive. I’m way too old to be so naive!
“righting”.
Nice. An awful lot righting. It takes a moran to right stuff like that. *g*
Y’know, it sure would’ve been sweet if, during the Dubya Debacle, our Democratic Senators had remembered that JUST ONE of them could have crippled the entire Administration by putting ‘holds’ on every nominee.
On the other hand, our side wouldn’t rather destroy the country because they could not rule it.
The repubs are trying to bluff and bully Obama into picking people that they think are acceptable to them, they know how much he hates conflict and they are banking on the big putty cat backing down from this. My money is on the big putty cat backing down and choosing someone that the republicans can agree with.