With thanks to Susan G over at Daily Kos for pointing this out, the Christian Science Monitor had a decent article reporting on a joint effort by the AFL-CIO and Change To Win to coordinate political efforts in 2006. I always thought that this would happen after the split–after all, coordinating phone and walk lists and GOTV is not rocket science once you get over the squabbling.

Ignoring split, labor makes election push
Rival union federations agree to coordinate get-out-the-vote and other efforts for November.

By Amanda Paulson | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

One year after America’s labor movement saw its largest schism in decades, unions are gearing up for a high-stakes political battle in November.

It’s the first test of how the split between the AFL-CIO and the new seven-union Change to Win labor federation will affect the political activities of the labor movement. It’s also a chance for unions to demonstrate that they still wield political heft despite dwindling membership.

Clearly, labor smells blood in the water:

With several key gubernatorial battles and a chance to take back the House and, possibly, the Senate for Democrats, unions see these as particularly critical midterm elections. They’re doing their best to prepare:

• The AFL-CIO is dedicating the most it ever has for a nonpresidential election – $40 million – for political mobilization this fall. It has zeroed in on 21 key states to focus on and will be active in more than 200 Senate, House, gubernatorial, and state legislative races.

• AFSCME announced a new initiative this week that, among other things, will create an army of 40,000 volunteers to do political registration and get-out-the-vote work. The union will also aggressively raise funds for its large political action committee and raise membership dues $3 a month to help fill coffers for future elections.

• The AFL-CIO and the Change to Win federation have set up a national labor coordinating committee for political activities. They’ve agreed to merge member lists, work together on phone banks, walks, and leaflet distribution, and help state and local groups work closely on key elections.

But, as loyal readers here know, the question becomes: what will the Democratic Party stand for post-2006? If it still has members who vote for so-called “free trade,”, then, what will be the long-term future for working people here and abroad?