Postage-paid envelopes that were inserted in the March-April issue of the Graphic Communicator started coming in to GCIU's Political Action Fund slowly at first. Then bigger batches started arriving.

A strong return, with most of the envelopes containing contributions for the GCIU's PAF, showed that many GCIU members are fed up with being Bush-whacked and are working to ensure that President Bush is defeated in the Nov. 2 election.

Included among the deliveries to GCIU headquarters were a few envelopes from strong Bush supporters. Some included nasty comments written in the spaces where contributors were supposed to write their names and addresses. But, these dissenters, who mostly chose to remain anonymous, were greatly outnumbered by those who sent envelopes containing donations and words of praise for the GCIU's effort to unseat Bush with a more worker-friendly president.

At the first tally, donations surpassed $5,000 a relative drop in the bucket considering that President Bush and his clique of "fat cats" can raise $2 million or $3 million in one night of partying with his corporate friends. But it's a start to help the GCIU to contribute toward good government.

The donations from members and their families ranged from $2 from one anonymous donor to $1,000 from GCIU Pres. George Tedeschi. Most checks were between $5 and $50. Short comments were often written on the small envelopes voicing strong support for the GCIU's efforts to elect a new president who would be supportive of working American families.

'Most important presidential election'

The idea for the political donation envelopes came from GCIU Pres. George Tedeschi and me–in charge of political action. Both of us, who have spent our lives in the labor movement, agreed that the Nov. 2 election would be "the most important presidential election" we have experienced.

Both of us realized that even though the GCIU had not had a history as a "player" in politics, the drastic shift of the political scene was hurting the GCIU membership and their families across America. When President Bush was elected in 2000, his campaign pronouncements did not suggest he would go as far as he eventually did to get revenge on the unions and the union workers who supported his opponent, Al Gore.

But after Bush was handed the White House after a controversial decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in the face of an election that Gore won by more than half-a-million popular votes, the Bush-Cheney administration proceeded to do all that it could to please corporate supporters at the expense of unions.

They started on their anti-worker crusade with a vengeance. Many of the Bush administration policies reversed the traditional federal role to protect workers against the political and monetary power of corporations. The word went out to federal agencies to follow the "hands-off our corporate friends" line.

Life suddenly got tougher for labor unions and their members.

Instead of functioning as the impartial negotiator between labor and management, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) turned decidedly pro-corporation. And the federal workplace safety watchdog – the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) – put any effective enforcement of federal job safety regulations on the back burner. In one recent decision, the NLRB of five – voting or partisan lines – reversed a long-standing policy to allow non-union workers to have a chosen representative with them when facing disciplinary hearings. This reversal further erodes the rights of workers who are especially vulnerable in non-union shops.

There are some GCIU members who refuse to see how hand-cuffing the NLRB and OSHA makes life tougher for working Americans. There are a host of additional areas of Bush administration policies that should clearly show that Bush and Cheney do not have the interests of American families at heart.

Bush plans to privatize Social Security

Have we forgotten how President Bush announced with great fanfare how he planned to privatize Social Security? Social Security was passed into law in 1935 despite vigorous opposition from the Republican Party. Bush explained that it was a "no brainer" that the national senior assistance program, which had worked well since it was launched by Pres. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, could allegedly be "improved" by letting pension funds rise with the stock market.

Of course, Bush did not bother to explain what happens if the stock market declines. Nor, more importantly, did Bush explain who pays the transition costs, projected to be in the trillions of dollars, while the current system was transferred to the care of private brokers. And, none of the Bush pronouncements on Social Security privatization even mentioned the increased commissions and other administrative expenses. No one heard a word from the White House about how Social Security now costs less than a penny per dollar to run and how it was a very effective way to assure retirement income for the seniors who had helped build our country.

And then there was the so-called "trickle down" theory espoused during the Reagan presidency that hypothesized that all tax cuts to corporations and wealthy Americans "trickled down" and improved the lives of poorer working citizens. This theory sounded great for the high rollers. But it never seemed to pan out. Instead, the rich pocketed their tax savings rather than reinvesting in the economy. This created a wider than ever gap between rich and poor.

Most economists and political historians realized that "trickle down" did not work for Reagan – but not the neo-conservatives behind George W. Bush. In one of his first major legislative initiatives, Bush pushed dramatic tax cuts (drafted specifically to benefit the wealthy much more than average Americans) through the Republican-controlled House and Senate over strong opposition from outnumbered Democrats.

Limiting overtime pay

Then there was another corporate-serving attempt to limit overtime pay – a benefit to workers that was hard-won by unions over the past century. But the Bush administration and Labor Secy. Elaine Chao are still trying to eliminate overtime pay by classifying workers as management and exclude them from the existing wage and hour laws.

There are many reasons why average working Americans should fear the reelection of the anti-worker incumbent. Bush has much more on his agenda to cripple meaningful worker rights laws. If there is also a Republican House and Senate, it could become nightmarish reality.

This is why we are attaching an envelope again in this issue to give our U. S. sisters and brothers another opportunity to contribute to the success of the GCIU Political Action Fund campaign that is so crucial to the well-being of America's working families.

GCIU Vice Pres. Lawrence Martinez directs political action for the International.