To reward and punish: A classification of union political strategies

Do Unions Punish Democrats? Free-Trade Votes and Labor PAC Contributions, 1999–2012

“…This has largely been so since 1898, when American Federation of Labor (AFL) President Samuel Gompers articulated the “reward your friends, punish your enemies” mandate as the guiding principle to describe labor’s relationship to elected officials. Since the New Deal, Democratic candidates have been seen as friends and have received substantial campaign support from labor unions (Dark 2003). In a typical election cycle, labor unions award about 90 percent of their campaign contributions to Democratic candidates (Francia 2006) and provide many of the volunteers that help Democratic candidates with voter mobilization (Delaney, Masters, and Schwochau 1990; Masters and Delaney 1987; Radcliff 2001).…”

“…Indeed, punishment strategies were first studied in the context of union punishment of disloyal Democrats (Dark 2003; Engel and Jackson 1998; Jackson and Engel 2003). Jackson and Engel (2003) estimated a vote for PNTR cost Democratic incumbents US$13,257 each and vulnerable Democratic incumbents US$36,635 each in contributions from labor PACs, all else being equal.…”

“…. in the primaries.” Dark (2003) also theorized that labor may choose to withhold campaign resources in the general election because doing so would have a “strong demonstration effect” and because it “encourages competition by both parties for labor support” (Dark 2003, 459). Despite previous theoretical work, incapacitation punishment in the primary and general election has not been tested empirically.…”

Labor Union Political Strategy in an Era of Decline and Revitalization

“…Maintaining lobbying operations in Washington, DC, and various state capitals is expensive for unions, which must pay legislative representatives to do the direct work of influencing legislative decisions in addition to accruing a host of discretionary expenses. And, these legislative departments’ work often competes for resources with extensive political departments, which can spend millions on direct campaign contributions and mobilizing volunteers and get‐out‐the‐vote efforts for favored candidates, among other efforts to influence the makeup of legislative bodies (Dark ). Meanwhile, the political landscape for policy advocacy organizations is always changing.…”

“…Thus, some unions are losing their single‐occupation or single‐industry character as they organize workers in sectors far removed from their origins, exemplified by the United Auto Workers’ aggressive organization of university administrators and graduate students. Meanwhile, the political environment in which unions operate is volatile, becoming more hostile when the dividends of the labor‐Democratic Party alliance disappear along with Democratic control of political institutions (Dark ). And, leaders of some labor organizations have invested heavily in maintaining a strong relationship with a relatively small number of congressional leaders, making for efficient high‐level advocacy while their favored leaders are in power (Dark ).…”