Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Monday, August 31, 2009

The 800-Pound Gorilla That Wants to Make a Mayor

Posted by on Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 11:06 AM

On election night two weeks ago, union people tried to smile as they surrounded Mayor Greg Nickels at the headquarters of the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 21 in south Seattle. They had been standing around him for years. In 2001, the local labor council's support is widely credited with pushing Nickels—a reliable vote for 14 years on the county council—past draconian City Attorney Mark Sidran in his bid for mayor, winning by about 3,000 votes. And Nickels didn't forget it. He paid them back handsomely with unfaltering allegiance in their struggles, from backing grocery workers in a showdown over better wages to the main contention of this year's election: the tunnel. (Unions don't want a tunnel so much as they'll take any second freeway through the city for freight traffic. And Nickels turned a citywide vote in 2007 against a waterfront tunnel and a viaduct rebuild into brokering an agreement with state powers to fund a different tunnel that the voters hadn't exactly shot down.) So unions stood by him, loyally. But on primary election night, as returns came in just after 8:00 p.m., Nickels was in third place, and union operatives forced smiles and carefully stood out of view of the television cameras before heading to their cars by 9:10 p.m. Nickels continued to lose by wider and wider gaps in each successive batch of results: The unions' man—the guy beloved by umbrella groups and nurses and Safeway checkers—was a goner.

"Unions are used to having a strong representative in the mayors office," says political consultant Cathy Allen. "Labor is still very strong and one of the determinants of who wins, if not the most determinant."

The two men who remain standing, Mike McGinn and Joe Mallahan, are not so embraced. "We have the same concerns that many in the labor community have," says Adam Glickman, a spokesman for Service Employees International Union, 775 NW (SEIU). McGinn and Mallahan, he says, have "no experience or record."

Rumors surfaced six days after the election that state senator Ed Murray (D-43) was mulling a write-in campaign for mayor; voters started getting calls from polling firms asking if they would vote for him. Who was paying for those calls? All roads seemed to lead to the SEIU, but Glickman refuses to confirm—or deny—whether the SEIU funded it. "We are not recruiting someone but are also not satisfied by the choices and excited by someone of Ed's stature getting in," he says. Some have rumored that the SEIU pledged a sizable contribution to a potential Murray campaign, which seems possible. SEIU chapters have donated over $150,000 to local campaigns so far this year, Washington Public Disclosure Commission records show. But Glickman says, "I'm not going to speculate how much we money we would give."

McGinn's vow to stop a tunnel proposal—his battle cry in the primary election—could make unions dismiss him entirely. "He has made a religion of attacking this compromise that was put together on the viaduct replacement," says David Frieboth, executive secretary of the M.L. King County Labor Council, the AFL-CIO umbrella group of over 175 local unions. Eliminating the tunnel and the viaduct, he says, "could have a devastating impact on industrial capability of unions. The maritime industrial unions are very, very, very concerned about not only his position on the subject but also his unwillingness to work the issue."

Mallahan worked for T-Mobile, a company that was revealed to use strategies to prevent unions from forming—practically a mark of the beast. The unknown, says Frieboth, "is the degree to which his corporate culture really rubs off on him." The Seattle police and firefighter unions, after holding out on endorsing even Nickels in the primary, have announced that they will official give their support to Mallahan. But most unions that loved Nickels—those representing thousands of employees—are still undecided.

The value of a fairly unified labor endorsement cannot be overstated in Seattle politics. More than their organization's name on a mailer and money, support from the labor council brings fleets of door-knocking union workers and phone banks staffed by volunteer union reps speaking to their candidate's virtues. "It was our labor-neighbor campaign" that put Nickels over Sidran in 2001, Frieboth explains, "targeting our membership to get out the vote."

Lacking for a leader, unions see in Ed Murray the hope they saw in Nickels eight years ago. In his 14 years in the legislature (in addition to being a leading lion for gay-rights causes), he has a 96 percent voting record on union issues. "He's got a record, not only how he has cast votes, but how he works with people," Frieboth says. "So he is the known quantity."

More than ever, labor has an intense motivation to influence this election—and the money and muscle to do it. Their members face onerous furloughs (members of 14 city employee unions voted on Friday to take a 10-day furlough to reduce layoffs, and County Council Member Kathy Lambert introduced a bill last week that could reduce raises and limit union negotiations). In addition to keeping their advocates in local government, unions need to demonstrate that they can make or break a candidate, one of the few bargaining chips they've got left.

"These guys are no dummies. They know that the way to keep unions strong is to keep in [office] people who have been there the longest, bottom line," Allen says. "Labor has never faced such a great time when they need to deliver for their long time members," she says. "It is very much the case that they may be able to make a mayor if they get Ed Murray in the race."

"If the SEIU goes into the legislative session and says, 'If you start messing around with cuts we don't like, beware the ballot box then you will be gone,'" says Allen. And she posits that the SEIU is simply beefing up its muscle in city and council races to prepare for defending their state contracts. "This year becomes the proof positive for that assertion next year [in the legislature]," Allen says.

As far-fetched as it sounds, this could be a good year for Murray to run as a write in candidate. All-mail elections, which King County switched to this year, prove better for write-in candidates than ballot-booth voting because people sit down with their ballot, which includes instructions about how to write in a candidate, along with mail pieces and plenty of time.

Murray says he will make up his mind this week. But that may depend on the extent that unions can support him. And that's unknown, even to unions. Whereas unions worked in unity eight years ago, national labor politics have splintered them slightly, Frieboth explains. "For example instead of having a labor council that is the primary convener of the effort, you may have more subgroups that are working amongst themselves." (For example, the police and fire unions are supporting Mallahan.) Glickman confirms that the SEIU would need a broad coalition to get Murray in office. But across the board, union leaders and politicos agree that Murray brings that sort of excitement they need to rally around. "I think that if he were on the ballot, he would be in a strong position to be the endorsed candidate by labor," Frieboth says.

 

Comments (36) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Simac 1
A write-in campaign is probably hopeless; they'd do better to focus on getting Murray to run in the next election if he's inclined to go the local career route. Personally, I think he should set his sights on state-wide office instead.
Posted by Simac on August 31, 2009 at 11:08 AM
2
Interesting that Kathy Allen is willing to be quoted here. It confirms what I have been hearing: that the Great er Seattle Chamber of Commerce and the Downtown Seattle Association are both furious about Mallahan and McGinn and are working with labor to anoint Murray.
Posted by poor losers on August 31, 2009 at 11:19 AM
Reality Check 3
A write in vote for Murray = an easy win for Mallahan.

Voters swayed by the siren of Ed, will learn that it costs them the ultimate decision in the election. Just think of those McNikels voters and how nicely they will split the vote between McGinn and Murray..

What will the Stranger do? Support Ed? They've already thrown their scrawny weight towards the hipster wannabe McGinn?

Oh nose!
Posted by Reality Check http://www.nraila.org on August 31, 2009 at 11:19 AM
4
Why is it that quen quoting politcal consultants, all we are able to get is them stating the obvious? I'm sorry, what I meant to say is "fuck the connections group, the Karl Rove outfit of Seattle"
Posted by fk.c.a. on August 31, 2009 at 11:23 AM
Baconcat 5
@3: Why won't Mallahan voters vote for Murray? And why will Murray sop up all the Nickels/McGinn votes? And why do you think Nickels will simply let Mallahan walk away with this one?

Oh right, you can't answer any of those questions.
Posted by Baconcat on August 31, 2009 at 11:27 AM
Will in Seattle 6
Ed who?

....

seriously, elections have consequences.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on August 31, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Will in Seattle 7
and @3 for the insightful and correct win.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on August 31, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Cato the Younger Younger 8
I love how everyone assumes that less than 30% of the vote somehow is a mandate for either Mallahan or McGinn. With both of them that still leaves 40% of the electorate up for grabs.

Why is Murray even thinking of a run? Because niether of the two candidates has managed to define themselves beyond "not being Nickels" and even now that's all they are running on for the average voter on the street.

Both Mallahan and McGinn have put themselves in this spot by not being about something other than "Hey, vote for me, I'm no Nickels". A Murray write in would mean simply that no one will win 50% plus one in November.
Posted by Cato the Younger Younger on August 31, 2009 at 11:42 AM
9
Ed Murray is the only local politicial name that can pull this off.

Run, Ed, run.

No where does this article accurately portray the broad support Ed can activate overnight. 1. GLBT, beyond question ..2. Conservation, he is beloved by old time conservationists ..3. Anti Death penalty folks, one of his strongest stands..4 Older voters who know his name, his politics and his handshake. Ed is famous for supporting the elderly, and they vote, always ..5. Asian voters will respond, his life partner, Michel is Asian and always at his side, and his early political career was with Martha Cho, yes, Asians will support Ed....6 Labor as is pointed in the article 7. the 43rd and 37th will go soildly for Ed. "Queen of Queen Anne", maybe very good in the 36th.

All the reasons he was in strong position to go to Congress in a dog pile fight now work for him to be the next mayor.

What an upset that will be. Yes, working class Irish Catholic progressive gay boy can pull it off.

More history in the making for Seattle.

Posted by Ace, number One on August 31, 2009 at 11:48 AM
gloomy gus 10
Nice summary. "Cannot be understated" doesn't mean what you think, though.
Posted by gloomy gus on August 31, 2009 at 11:54 AM
11
It has been nearly two weeks since the primary, and we still don't know anything more than we did then about the stealth candidates McGinn and Mallahan or what either would do as Mayor. This grows more and more tiresome to see folks who deliberately keep their message narrow vague rewarded with ballot box victory -- Susan Hutchison, anyone?

And why does anyone listen to Cathy Allen anymore? Is she really relevant -- who was the last candidate she got elected to anything? She collects more money for doing nothing than any political consultant since Ralph Reed.
Posted by Murgen on August 31, 2009 at 11:54 AM
12
Why would the tunnel result in more LOCAL jobs than something like the surface-transit option? I would think that a tunnel would involve more national or international firms.
Posted by Gidge on August 31, 2009 at 11:55 AM
DavidG 13
If labor is so powerful, how come they couldn't get their man past the primary?

I'm for unions in general, but they aren't first on my list of priorities, and I think probably most Seattle voters feel that way. Of course, unions like to throw their weight around - that's why they're organized labor that stands up to corporate management - but do we have any statistics on my much their endorsement is actually worth? I could see them tipping a close election, which this may be, but they can't be worth more than 5% or so, right?
Posted by DavidG http://portableshrines.com on August 31, 2009 at 11:57 AM
Cato the Younger Younger 14
The other item we all love to ignore about write-in candidates is this. Most are running against at least one candidate who is well established and well known in the community. And the write-in candidate is usually (but not always) a relative unknown.

Murray's office claims that 70% of Seattle voters early last week were open to voting for a write in candidate. 70% folks! Yes, that number is no doubt soft but it exposes a huge weakness that niether McGinn and Mallahan have corrected.

And BTW Sloggers: Are you really going to beat up on Unions now after spending last summer going crazy with excitement after they backed Obama? Really??

Posted by Cato the Younger Younger on August 31, 2009 at 12:08 PM
15
#13 - surely you jest. Or, you do not live in Seattle.

They give money and workers, and, if they feel something is really on the line in their town, those assets will be big time. Unions must provide 15 per cent of the vote and can do it.

Remember, off year election, lower turnout and he who wins is he who does the grunt work along with TV and print and mailing.

Don't negate all the other pieces of a good Ed for mayor campaign, Ed is not a one issue or one trick pony. Every person I talked to this weekend thinks he can pull it off. And they are preparing to write him in.... the campaign is already underway ... another smart move by Ed.

He is getting tons of free media and good lead up to the launch.

I am not a union member, but most of my family are. Yes, unions still count a lot in this city.

Posted by Clyde on August 31, 2009 at 12:16 PM
Will in Seattle 16
Change is scary.

Doubly so for the continually attacked unions that our extreme-right-of-center country has been trying to destroy.

But a write in still is a douche move.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on August 31, 2009 at 12:20 PM
Will in Seattle 17
@8 - so, Cato, that means I can build a tunnel under your property, right? Since 30 percent voted for a Billionaires Tunnel ...

Hope you don't mind paying all the taxes for it.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on August 31, 2009 at 12:21 PM
18
So far not mentioned about Ed - an amazing funding, money give away he has done for years.

Ed will enjoy big support from Democratic opinion makers because he has for yeard donated hundreds of thousands of dollars he raised in Seattle, but did not need for his own re - election. Yes, he gave the $$$$ to other candidates without the luxury of a safe seat and money flowing in...

Pay back time, they will push hard for whatever is his political goal. The dollars donated over time are now an asset to him, a big one, the list is long of folks who he has helped.

It is like a liquid starting to gel.
Posted by Coffee Boy on August 31, 2009 at 12:29 PM
19
Put down the bong for just a minute. Murray as a write in candidate is dead on arrival. With the money Mallahan is going to raise, he'll blanket the airwaves. McGinn could be an effective rabble rouser, but, seriously, do you trust this guy who blithely claims he's going to throw out the tunnel deal which was years and years in the making? Not to mention his idea of the mayor's office taking over the schools. Baaad juju.
Posted by Westside forever on August 31, 2009 at 12:37 PM
Cato the Younger Younger 20
@17, McGinn can't stop the tunnel at this point and you know it. (please look at the two stadiums sitting in Seattle NO ONE WANTED and we STILL got fucked with) And besides,this doesn't have anything to do with the tunnel; it's about McGinn getting off his ass (yeah I voted for him too) and defining himself before he and his supporters find out what it's like to be on the fucked up the ass with a chain saw the first day of January.

McGinn has handed this opportunity to Murray to run as a spoiler and you know it. Politics is a blood sport, and McGinn better grow a pair or it's going to be Mallahan after a long court process over the Holidays.
Posted by Cato the Younger Younger on August 31, 2009 at 12:38 PM
21
This Murray flurry still seems like little more than sour grapes from the forces backing Mayor Nickels (as I did too, BTW). Face it: we lost; it's time to move on.

Getting +/- 40% of Seattle voters to write in a candidate's name, spelled exactly right, darken the right oval, etc., just isn't going to happen this time around.

A write-in campaign can work when there's one target candidate we have reason to hate. Nothing like that in the mayor's race, only that we don't know the candidates well enough -- yet.

Sorry, but that just doesn't get the juices flowing, outside of the small cadre of political blogreaders.
Posted by Citizen R on August 31, 2009 at 12:51 PM
22
My aunt is in the state legislature and is one of the key players there. I saw her recently and we spoke at length about all of this, and here is basically what I can say, semi-off-the-record.

(1) The people asking Murray to run are not simply union people, but the legislature. If Murray wins, it's a win-win for them because he's a known entity and can work with the legislature and not piss them off.

(2) The real reason they want him to run is to be a spoiler and prevent McGinn from getting in. She actually used the word "spoiler" to my face.

(3) Nobody seems to realize the laws of voter intent, but in a race this close, people who write-in Murray's name would also need to (a) spell it correctly and (b) mark the oval. Given that for many voting is rocket science, if 10% of the voters who vote for Murray don't do all of that above, he loses votes. That's right --- it is my understanding that we do not recognize voter intent here, as they did in Florida in 2000 (until they stopped counting votes) and in Minnesota with the Franken/Coleman debacle. So if somebody wrote "Ed Murray" but didn't fill in the oval or someone filled in the oval but spelled his name "Ed Murry," our state is so fucking ass-backwards that even voter intent may not be recognized, thus making it increasingly difficult for Murray to win under such circumstances.

(4) In my discussion with my aunt in the legislature --- and from what I've read for basically months in the newspaper --- the tunnel project is a STATE ISSUE because it is a state highway. Let me be pefectly clear from what I was told by an ACTUAL lawmaker --- the legislature fully intends to move forward with this project and draw the line in the sand if McGinn wins. This means it's going to be extremely difficult for McGinn to block the tunnel and given that it's the foundation for his transporation plan (so he can expand I-5 and expand bus services), this will inevitably lead to another few years of basically nothing happening on transporation. All the while, our region will continue to expand and draw people from around the country who move here for very real career opportunities.

Aside from my discussion with her, which was pretty eye-opening, keep in mind that (5) People are tired of unions. I was part of the Seattle Times strike in 2000 when I was a college student working for them in the newsroom as a newsroom aide. Six months into the job, I went on strike because I was part of the union and the union went on strike. Like it or not, the perception of unions with a large block of the voting public is not strong and people will vote against Murray for that purpose alone. In an election this close, even losing 2-3% of the vote (or less) from a particular voting block is enough to make or break your candidacy.

So, we're basically fucked no matter what. Nickels did not deserve a third term --- too many mistakes and faults happened on his watch that could have been prevented with a better management style (he was notoriously last-minute and rude in his attempts to garner money from the legislature, prompting people to wonder where the hell he was all the time).

Mallahan's shitty voting record is a major demerit, and McGinn's campaign really hasn't gone into specifics beyond his general vision of helping schools, expanding bus service and not building a tunnel after we tear down the eye-sore that is the viaduct.

Murray could be a great mayor, but based on what I was told, his candidacy will be more of a favor to the state legislature as either a guy they can work with and manipulate versus the kind of mayor our city so desperately needs.

I fucking hate politics.
More...
Posted by seattle is awesome on August 31, 2009 at 1:20 PM
23
"Vote for Murray, he will ensure the State Legislature properly fucks with Seattle!"

Hell of a campaign message. We're sure to remember it a long, long, time, too, like whever Murray runs for congress.

Perhaps this is why the great murray needs a few weeks to mull this over?

Keep mulling, Senator.

Anyway, as they say, "Vote for Murry!" "Vote for Muray!" "Vote for Ted Murray!"
Posted by Vote for Edwin Murray! on August 31, 2009 at 1:56 PM
24
@ 23

I love you.
Posted by seattle is awesome on August 31, 2009 at 1:58 PM
Will in Seattle 25
@20 - you mean like how we couldn't stop the state highway being built over wetlands, or all the other projects we've killed.

My, history seems to belie your opinion of what's "possible".
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on August 31, 2009 at 2:03 PM
26
Will in Seattle --- I think we've chatted on facebook before :)

Trust me -- the state legislature is going to flat-out tell McGinn he's fucked on that issue for the reasons I've outlined. Doesn't mean it's not worth fighting, but it will waste years of potential travel and transporation expansion our region desperately needs to deal with the folks we have right now and the tens of thousands the future will very quickly bring.
Posted by seattle is awesome on August 31, 2009 at 2:08 PM
27
A few questions for Mayor Wannabe:

1. With R71 on the ballot, wouldn't it be better for you to not suck resources away from that effort and put them toward your own effort? Don't you think it is a better use of your time to make sure everyone is united behind voting yes?

2. Have you ever managed anything larger than a Senate office?

3. As the third person in charge of the Senate D's why didn't you intervene to stop D's from screwing labor on the Worker Privacy Act?

4. Can someone be a good mayor if they don't have the courage to put their name on the ballot in the first place? What makes you think you will be able to make the hard choices necessary as an executive?
Posted by The Seattle Way on August 31, 2009 at 3:01 PM
28
Whoever is at the top of the ballot will probably win. McGinn got the 3% advantage there in the primary otherwise he's be gone. Maybe the drawing for who gets the top of the ballot is like a Lotto drawing where the ball pops up and there you are. Ta Dah. The new mayor.
Posted by Walkable Greenwood on August 31, 2009 at 3:17 PM
29
LET"S call bull - voter intent is the rule and there is NO rule about correct spelling.

Yes, the mark of the oval. We already do that.

Just called the election office to confirm that this theory is BULLSHIT, what McGinn stooge started all that bad information/lies or disinformation??

Of course voter intent always prevails.
Posted by Aarondiaa on August 31, 2009 at 5:04 PM
30
"We're sure to remember it" .... you sound like a sill tea bagger. Who will remember what? That Ed didn't play by Mc Ginns campaign plan.... oh, shit, oh, shit.

And how long is long? Jim McDermott might stay in office 15 more years.

Ed, sit down and shut up and stay in your place - that is not rhetoric to convince Ed. He does have some balls, ie. queer and steel, in a world where mostly that is lacking.

You are not convincing at all. Going to congress from the desk of the mayor is a better shot anyway.
Posted by Clyde on August 31, 2009 at 5:22 PM
MarkyMark 31
I wonder if its legal to apply a small self-adhesive sticker with Murray's name to the ballot? There could be a mass-mailing of these to all registered voters. A problem, as people have pointed out before, is getting everyone to spell his name correctly.

Signed,
There Are Worse Things Than Nickels
Posted by MarkyMark on August 31, 2009 at 5:30 PM
32
This is one case in which labor should issue NO ENDORSEMENT. Both candidates are bad on economic justice, and know next to nothing about labor. Endorsing them now won't change that. They need to prove themselves first. And in the meantime this might be a good point to place more pressure on the city council to hold the mayor's office in check over the next 4 years.
Posted by Trevor on August 31, 2009 at 11:59 PM
33
Aarondiaa ---- I'm quoting from Murray directly from an article I read in the P-I or the Times --- let me try to find the damn link. Murray himself joked that people may screw up the spelling of his name. I'm not a McGinn stooge -- I'm just envisioning the stupidity of the electorate and our King County Elections crew. If someone writes "Ed Murray" or "Edwin Murray," as I understood it they'd have to do all three things --- spell it correctly, fill in the oval and write the name in --- to be considered and that voter intent wouldn't matter.

I sincerely hope I'm wrong!
Posted by seattle is awesome on September 1, 2009 at 7:36 AM
34
Cato @ 20:

The two stadiuims NO ONE wanted? What a lying sack of shit YOU are.
Posted by ivan on September 1, 2009 at 8:43 AM
35
All the people who think that a write-in campaign is wrong or chicken shit, that he should have put his name on the ballot if he was interested, blah blah blah. That's our democracy!!! A write-in was created for many reasons that includes when the voters f-up and kick out a hard working experienced politician and are left with two dipshit candidates who don't have public service or a platform to run on. UGH.

Seattle needs a third option and that's Murray. If he chooses to run, would it be difficult? SURE! But he's got people/organizations that will donate and volunteer in a heartbeat. With an effective marketing campaign, think check write-in M-U-R-R-A-Y and by articulating his stance on the issues, this is winnable.

I know very very few people that are interested in voting for either man. I feel my friends are representative. Without Murray, Mallahan by a wide margin. With Murray, close call. The douche environmentalist who wants to flood the city with cars and buses won't get more than 30% either way.
Posted by M Dean on September 1, 2009 at 10:27 AM
36
Ed Murray for statewide office? ROFLMAO

You can't be serious.

He gets elected over and over ONLY because of the district he is in. If he ran for anything outside the city of Seattle he would get smoked faster than a Salmon at Ivars.
Posted by Andy Simon on September 1, 2009 at 12:01 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy