The Black Labor Vote and the 2000 Election

by Norman Hill

More than a month after Election Day, and following a roller coaster ride of sudden ups and downs, George Bush finally emerged as the victor in the presidential race. He lost the popular vote nationally, and may have lost the crucial popular vote in Florida, too. But Bush did win, by a single vote, a U.S. Supreme Court decision that prevented a hand recount of Florida's ballots. That left Bush with a margin of less than 600 votes, wafer thin but enough to carry him into the White House.

Throughout the campaign, trade unionists and African Americans were aware that Bush's anti- union, anti-civil rights agenda threaten to roll back hard-fought gains made through the black- labor alliance's struggle for economic and social justice. That's why black voters gave Bush only 9 percent of their ballots, even less than the 12 percent that the last Republican presidential candidate, Bob Dole, captured in 1996. It's also why only 32 percent of trade union voters chose Bush, compared to the whopping 63 percent received by his opponent Al Gore. This was especially meaningful since the union vote as a proportion of all ballots increased to 26 percent, compared to 23 percent in 1996 and 19 percent in 1992.

But does the outcome of the presidential contest mean that union members and African Americans wasted their time going to the polls? It does not by any stretch of the imagination. If they had not voted, Bush would have won by a significant majority, giving him a mandate to go full steam ahead with his huge tax cut for the wealthy, his social security privatization scheme, his anti-affirmative action views, and his other retrograde policies. As it is, his minuscule victory will force him to offer some resistance to the most extreme right-wing elements of his party and perhaps to finally give some substance to the concept of "compassionate conservatism."

There's another reason why Bush will be hard-pressed to push through his campaign agenda. It's because pro-union, pro-civil rights forces made significant gains in Congress. In the House of Representatives, voters have been cutting the radical-right majority since 1996. That trend continued this year as the right-wing margin was sliced from eight to five. That means that a switch of only three votes is needed to halt the legislative machine of Dick Armey, Tom Delay, and their reactionary colleagues.

More important gains were achieved in the Senate, where the forces backing economic justice and racial equality took six seats from the reactionary right. In Delaware, Thomas Carper beat longstanding incumbent Republican William Roth; in Florida, Bill Nelson was elected to the seat vacated by right-winger Connie Mack; in Michigan, Deborah Stabenow defeated freshman conservative Spencer Abraham with a thin edge; in Missouri, Jean Carnahan took a seat previously held by long-time Republican incumbent John Ashcroft, again by a thin margin; in Minnesota, Mark Dayton beat another incumbent right-winger, Ron Grams; and in Washington state, Maria Cantwell edged veteran incumbent Slade Gorton by a slender margin. The right wing captured two seats previously held by progressives, giving the latter a net gain of four seats. This creates a 50-50 tie in the upper house of Congress. It is true that Vice President Dick Cheney, as president of the Senate, will be able to break a tie in that chamber. But a shift of just one senator to the progressive side on any given vote can create a majority that is beyond Cheney's reach.

The A. Philip Randolph Institute is proud of its role in Election 2000. No less than 82 APRI affiliates conducted voter participation programs in black communities across 28 states. They distributed one million pieces of literature, made countless phone calls, and rang many thousands of doorbells in order to maximize African-American turnout. Black voters are the group that votes most heavily for progressive candidates, and in many of those states, African-American ballots made the difference in the presidential race.

In all six states where a Senate seat shifted from the right-wing to the progressive column, the APRI had a voter participation program. In all of these states except Minnesota, the black vote was decisive. In two of these states, the African-American vote increased substantially as a proportion of the total vote compared to 1996: from 10 percent four years ago to 16 percent this year in Florida, and from 5 percent to 12 percent in Missouri. Finally, the African-American vote enabled progressives to hold onto open Senate seats in New York, where Hillary Clinton beat Rick Lazio, and New Jersey, where Jon Corzine edged Bob Franks. In both states, the APRI was there, turning out the black vote.

Does that mean we are satisfied? No, we are not. Despite these successes, questions concerning the presidential election linger. Who really got more votes in Florida? That, unfortunately, we will probably never find out, thanks to the Supreme Court. Many African Americans in the sunshine state have reported that they came to the polls but could not, for various reasons, cast their votes. Why did that happen? This is something we must find out, so that we can make sure it never happens again.

Our final word on the Election 2000 is this: reactionaries beware, because we at the APRI are determined that this year's election, far from discouraging us, will instead motivate us to work just that much harder in future elections. We now recognize more than ever that an extra effort, an extra push as we drive toward the finish line, can mean so much. We will be applying that lesson in 2002, 2004, and far into the future.

Norman Hill is president of the A. Philip Randolph Institute, a national organization of black trade union activists.