Labor’s influence in the Los Angeles mayoral race is hard to predict

from Jim NewtonCalMatters

This comment was originally posted by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

One of the persistent assumptions of Los Angeles politics—and urban, liberal politics in general—is that organized labor has an outsized influence on election outcomes. Like all political assumptions, however, this is subject to periodic review, and this year’s Los Angeles municipal elections offer a new test of it.

Labor has a special place in the civic life of Los Angeles. In a city without many discernible sources of power, it provides one by organizing members to maximize their commitment and participation and help create a government—and, more broadly, a society—that reflects their interests and concerns. It is a gateway for immigrants, a set of institutions for community and a coherent voice in politics. All of this has been true since at least the 1980s.

Sometimes, however, pundits and even political operators get stuck in old assumptions. It is common, for example, to read of the “politically powerful Police Protective League” without asking what that power means. Does “politically powerful” mean the league can pick whoever they want as mayor of the city?

Tell that to Rick Caruso, who ran with the league’s support in 2022, only to be defeated by then-Congresswoman Karen Bass. Neither the “politically powerful” syndicate nor more than $100 million of his own money could carry Caruso to victory in this race. He lost by 10 points and took a pass this year in the return game. So much for political power.

But the league is only one of many unions.

Unions traditionally provide money and support for their candidates in the form of volunteers and donations. The L.A. Carpenters, for example, were major supporters of Bass in 2022, as was the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.

This time, both unions are cooler on Bass, their leaders feeling slighted by decisions Bass has made on housing union rules and the selection of a general manager for the city’s water and power department, as well as debates over pensions for workers in that department.

Many members of these unions continue to support Bass, but some of their leaders feel ignored by the mayor, who not only opposed them but did little to explain himself to them. They are unlikely to be there in force for her this time, a particularly hard blow for Bass, a politician who has a poor reputation as a fundraiser.

This does not mean that childbirth has left her behind. The County Federation of Labor, which brings together the unions under its umbrella, is staunchly supportive of Bass. And many public employee unions can be expected to adhere to it. Yvonne Wheeler, who heads the federation and is an enthusiastic supporter of Bass, confirmed the group’s support for her after councilor Nithya Raman surprised the Los Angeles political class by entering the mayoral race at the last minute in February.

“With Donald Trump’s ongoing war against the people of Los Angeles, our working families and immigrant communities, now is not the time to distract from a political opportunist — especially one who endorsed the mayor’s re-election campaign just weeks ago,” Wheeler said in announcing the federation’s supportt for bass.

This swipe at Raman as a “political opportunist” suggests the depth of the federation’s antipathy to the only opponent who poses a real threat to the mayor. It sounds personal, not just political.

Bass also enjoys the support of many prominent labor leaders, current and former, including the endorsement of State Senator Maria Elena Durazothe most important of all labor leaders in Los Angeles in the last quarter of a century. Durazo, currently a candidate for county supervisor, stood by Wheeler when the federation that Durazo once headed announced it was endorsing Bass.

But the federation does not control member unions, and others can still break away from the mayor. After all, Raman is a democratic socialist, and Labour’s historic alliances with social justice campaigns – the living wage and immigrant protections, to name two – made Raman a natural recipient of support, especially if she wasn’t opposing a sitting president with his own labor bonafides.

That could spell trouble for Bass, depriving her of money she needs to spread her message and votes in what could be a close campaign. Again, though, these risks may be less than they used to be.

Start with money: Bass isn’t good at raising it, and she’s lost some of the deeper pockets that helped her win in 2022. But she’s running against a thin field of candidates and has the name recognition and tools to hold office.

What’s more, Bass has a record to point to, and even if it wasn’t enough to blow away any opponent, there’s plenty to be proud of: Homelessness is decreasingalbeit modestly; crime is at historic lows (Los Angeles there were fewer murders last year than at any time since the 1960s), and Bass has led the opposition to President Trump, whose attacks on Los Angeles and its immigrant communities have made him a pariah.

If the enemy of my enemy is my friend, well, Karen Bass has a lot of friends.

If workers were united, powerful and uncontested, and if they rallied behind an opponent of Bass, her record might not be enough. A well-funded and widely supported critic of Bass could capitalize on this administration’s slowness to build housing, could question the role of the LAPD in protecting the city against federal incursions, could tap into the general malaise so many residents feel about a city that doesn’t seem to be living up to its potential.

But all this rests on two assumptions: that labor can unite and that it retains its old strength. Neither is true today just because it once was.

Today, many union members live outside the city. Housing prices make it very difficult for a city clerk or a hotel maid or even a construction worker to live in Los Angeles.

Unions split their support between candidates – carpenters and hotel workers may support different horses, undermining the idea of ​​a ‘Labour candidate’. And labor sometimes antagonizes other voters: The Police Protective League brings campaign money, but it also brings the mixed help of aligning its candidate with a police force viewed unfavorably by many of the city’s younger, more liberal voters.

Labor’s shaky influence, meanwhile, drew new entrants into the Los Angeles power matrix, echoing or sometimes heralds national trends. Today, the Los Angeles branch of the Democratic Socialists of America demonstrates organizational strength, discipline, patience and determination. And new organizations, including Thrive LA, are jumping into the fray, sniffing at the power vacuum and the opportunities it creates.

Los Angeles remains a working town. Trade unions continue to occupy a place of influence in civic, cultural and political life. Labor can and still picks winners in city council and other contests. This will help in choosing the next mayor. But in politics, nothing stays the same forever.

“Labor is very important in any race,” Los Angeles City Council President Marquis Harris-Dawson, a keen observer of Los Angeles politics, said this week.

He pointed to the impact of housing prices and the emergence of new groups as stressing the traditional workplace. And he noted that unions, like other players in politics, are looking for new ways to make their voices heard.

“A lot of other people who weren’t important before are also important now,” he said. “It’s changing. It’s being negotiated right now on how (Labor) impacts and what impact it has.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and is republished under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivatives license.