Connect with us

Politics

Column: Lorena Gonzalez is a foul-mouthed Latina troublemaker. That’s good for California workers

Published

on

Lorena Gonzalez, former politician and present union troublemaker, dislikes quite a lot of issues — and folks, for that matter.

Most cancers, arsonists who gentle her home on fireplace, Elon Musk, Pearl Jam, being known as Lo-rain-a as an alternative of Lo-wren-a, simply to call a number of.

However what she hates most are poisonous employers. The sort who don’t pay additional time, who deliver on costly attorneys to maintain unions out, who laid off of us in the course of the pandemic and tried to rent again cheaper employees when enterprise picked up. When she talks about such predatory bosses, it’s typically with an intense, no-holds-barred disdain that features greater than occasional F-bombs.

As soon as, she ran a complete invoice about vacation pay after being outraged that her waitress at a Thanksgiving meal wasn’t getting extra cash to work the day. Gonzalez cried when the invoice failed (although it’s true that even a well-done cat industrial can get her tears flowing). When a colleague instructed her weeping on the Meeting flooring made her look weak, “I used to be like, come at me, I dare you,” she says. And she or he meant it, as a result of she’s high quality with metaphorically stepping out into the alley, if that’s how issues go.

Advertisement

“The eagerness was by no means an indication of weak point. It was all the time the signal of my power,” she says.

Which is why a number of weeks in the past, she resigned from the state Legislature (the place she was representing components of San Diego) and her essential job as head of the Meeting Appropriations Committee (which decides cash issues and the place the ax comes down on quite a lot of payments) and signed as much as lead the California Labor Federation. There have been political issues, too — the governor handed her up for secretary of state, and he or she was dealing with a Democratic challenger for her seat due to redistricting. However principally, she needed to grab an opportunity to be true to herself and the values she’s most keen about — in a job that harnesses the may of two.1 million employees throughout 1,200 unions.

Then-Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez and husband Nathan Fletcher assist arrange a COVID-19 altar in San Diego in November.

(Kristian Carreon / For the San Diego Union-Tribune)

Advertisement

“Nothing you’ll be able to legislate ever makes the world nearly as good for employees as a union contract,” she instructed me, evangelist-style, a number of weeks in the past in her new workplace a block from the state Capitol. And it feels “so good” to be freed from the constraints of the Legislature, the place being herself was typically a disadvantage.

“I felt confined. And also you don’t even notice how confined you are feeling till you’re gone,” she says. “It’s a constructing with guidelines and norms that have been created by white males who have been very previous like 100 years in the past.”

When she formally takes over the Labor Federation in July, virtually a 12 months to the day she was identified with breast most cancers (which is now in remission after a double mastectomy), she’s going full-Lorena to assist unions battle for extra collective contracts for extra sorts of employees, and extra laws to maintain California on the chopping fringe of labor rights. Anticipate speak of elevating the hard-fought $15-an-hour minimal wage ever greater, and persevering with battles over gig employees (who by some estimates make up 40% of the state’s labor power) and their standing as workers or contractors.

And California, I’d not guess in opposition to her.

Gonzalez has a means of delivering in opposition to the percentages. Having her on the helm of union labor within the state is a shake-up that, to make use of a phrase her frenemy Gavin Newsom is keen on, meets the second.

Advertisement

Unions are having fun with a reputation and approval not seen in many years throughout the nation (bear in mind Strike-tober?). Biden is arguably essentially the most union-friendly president ever, and California essentially the most union-friendly state — in 2020, about 16% of California employees have been in a union, in contrast with about 11% nationwide. There’s momentum for employees’ rights, fueled by the inequalities the pandemic laid naked and anger over the rising problem of incomes a paycheck that covers the fundamentals — particularly for younger folks and folks of shade (ladies particularly) who’re over-represented in low-wage jobs.

In an period when political energy is as a lot about character and presence as it’s about precise wrangling of votes and allegiances, Gonzalez delivers much-needed charisma. Lately, the visibility of organized labor largely has come from particular person unions — Hollywood crews preventing for contracts, nurses demanding healthcare for all, quick meals employees placing for greater pay, and most lately, Starbucks baristas organizing. Although California has a storied historical past of turning out labor icons (Cesar Chavez, Dolores Huerta, Larry Itliong amongst its most well-known), labor in California has lengthy lacked a visual chief, the sort who’ll tackle an Elon Musk and even Newsom, and do it with a vivacious, pugnacious enchantment.

Although Artwork Pulaski (the present head of the Labor Federation) is probably not a family title, there’s not a politician within the state who doesn’t know him, or of him, or the ability he’s wielded behind the scenes for years. The Fed is the umbrella underneath which lots of the state’s largest and most influential unions come collectively to cross laws and win elections — Democrats want labor to win elections, its cash and its folks, who exit within the hundreds to knock on doorways, run cellphone banks and have the one-on-one conversations that change minds.

However regardless of his heft, Pulaski is the sort of man who solely makes himself recognized when it serves a aim. He’s powerful and devoted, however a consensus builder who stays out of the highlight. His final tweet (on an account I significantly doubt he handles himself) was in September.

Gonzalez, by her personal description, can’t assist speaking smack. I assure her final tweet was about 10 minutes in the past, and will have concerned something from Ukraine politics to why her children are interrupting her Zoom as a result of they can’t find the ketchup. It’s exhausting to not know her biography or what’s occurring in her life — daughter of an immigrant farmworker and a nurse, raised by her single mother who died of breast most cancers, levels from three prestigious universities, 5 children Brady Bunch-style together with her husband, Nathan Fletcher, a politician in San Diego. She places all of it on the market, typically in provocative methods.

Advertisement
A screenshot of a home damaged by fire

The fireplace that broken Lorena Gonzalez’s residence Jan. 12 is being investigated as arson.

(OnScene TV)

Lately, she tweeted about waking up in the midst of evening to seek out her household’s home on fireplace (which is being investigated as arson), coming into the hallway and for a second, with out her glasses on, pondering her son was on fireplace. It’s a trauma so deep that the thought somebody focused her household is among the few issues she gained’t discuss after that put up within the instant aftermath, although final week she tattooed “unbreakable” from elbow to wrist on her forearm.

However on being instructed she’s too in-your-face?

“I’m not yelling at you. That is simply how I speak.”

Advertisement

On the anger she’s provoked in her battle with gig corporations?

“I take quite a lot of crap. It doesn’t trouble me to take quite a lot of sh—.”

On her viral F-bomb tweet about Elon Musk?

“It’s the one time I’ve been invited on CNN so no matter.”

On being the primary Latina to go the Labor Federation?

Advertisement

“It’s greater than symbolism. It’s a background.”

That final one could be the coronary heart of all of it. Gonzalez has the background of the ladies of shade she might want to attain to evangelise her love of unions and develop their energy in California. She’s considered one of them, and he or she understands that unionism isn’t and might’t simply be about work. It’s about schooling for the kids of working households. It’s about race, gender fairness, housing, immigration, LGBTQ rights, pathways to the center class and all the opposite considerations that working-class households grapple with, on and off the job.

However she’s additionally a troublemaker — a very good factor within the union world — the sort old-school unionists love as a result of organized labor is constructed by troublemakers, those who aren’t afraid to face their floor and curse at you whereas they’re doing it. Those who don’t care in the event that they offend, as a result of they discover oppression offensive.

And with out the constraint of being a publicly elected official, Gonzalez is about to indicate us much more of her earnest, profane, susceptible, fierce genuine self — and trigger quite a lot of conspicuous bother alongside the way in which.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

Supreme Court rules to allow emergency exceptions to Idaho's abortion ban

Published

on

Supreme Court rules to allow emergency exceptions to Idaho's abortion ban

The Supreme Court Thursday ruled that doctors in Idaho must – at least for now – be allowed to provide emergency abortions despite the state’s near-total ban, in order comport with the federal law that requires emergency rooms to give “stabilizing treatments” to patients in critical condition. 

In an unsigned opinion, the Court held that writs of certiorari in two cases involving the law were “improvidently granted,” and vacated stays the Court granted earlier this year. 

The consolidated cases, Moyle v. U.S. and Idaho v. U.S., had national attention following the high court’s 2022 ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade. 

SCOTUS TO HEAR ARGUMENTS IN BIDEN’S LAWSUIT ‘SUBVERTING STATES’ RIGHTS’ ON ABORTION

Abortion rights demonstrators protest outside the US Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., US, on Friday, June 24, 2022.  (Ting Shen/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Advertisement

Idaho’s newly enacted Defense of Life Act makes it a crime for any medical provider to perform an abortion with exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.  

The Justice Department argued that the state’s law does not go far enough to allow abortions in more medical emergency circumstances.

The DOJ sued the state, saying that the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) requires health care providers to give “stabilizing treatment” – including abortions – for patients when needed to treat an emergency medical condition, even if doing so might conflict with a state’s abortion restrictions.

The state had argued that “construing EMTALA as a federal abortion mandate raises grave questions under the major questions doctrine that affect both Congress and this Court.” Proponents of the state’s abortion restriction accused the Biden administration of “subverting states’ rights,” citing the Dobb’s decision which allowed states to regulate abortion access.

Advertisement

This is a developing story. Please check back here for more updates.

Continue Reading

Politics

Supreme Court rejects Idaho's appeal — for now — to ban abortions in medical emergencies

Published

on

Supreme Court rejects Idaho's appeal — for now — to ban abortions in medical emergencies

The Supreme Court retreated Thursday from ruling on Idaho’s near total ban on abortions, leaving in place a judge’s order that for now allows doctors to perform abortions when necessary in medical emergencies.

The justices in an unsigned order said they had “improvidently granted” Idaho’s appeal in its dispute with the Biden administration over emergency care.

A draft of the order was inadvertently posted on the court’s website on Wednesday.

Justices were sharply divided when they heard the Idaho case in April. Justice Amy Coney Barrett accused the state’s attorney of giving shifting answers on whether certain emergencies could justify an abortion.

Advertisement

The justices were unable to agree on a majority ruling.

On Thursday, the justices split four ways in explaining their views. Barrett, joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, said the court made a “miscalculation” by intervening too soon. She said both sides have continued to change their positions on what the state and federal laws require when it comes to emergency abortions.

Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor said the court was right to step back and allow emergency abortions to resume. They noted that because of the strict ban, women have been airlifted out of Idaho to have abortions in other states.

Dissenting, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said the Biden administration would say hospitals “must perform abortions on request when the ‘health’ of a pregnant woman is serious jeopardy.” That cannot be right, he said, because the law refers to protecting an “unborn child.” Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch agreed.

Dissenting alone, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said the court should have ruled for the administration and held hospitals must provide emergency abortions if needed to stabilize a patient. “Today’s decision is not a victory for pregnant patients in Idaho. It is delay,” she wrote.

Advertisement

In January, the court issued an order that allowed Idaho to temporarily enforce its law. That too was set aside on Thursday.

Idaho’s abortion ban is among the nation’s strictest. It permits abortions only when “necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman.” It makes no exception for emergencies or medical conditions which could endanger a patient’s health.

The Biden administration sued Idaho in 2022, arguing that the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act requires hospitals to provide “necessary stabilizing treatment” to patients who arrived there. And in rare cases, U.S. health officials said, doctors may be required to perform abortion if a woman is suffering from a severe infection or uncontrolled bleeding.

Idaho’s state attorneys and state legislators sharply disagreed. They said the federal law has nothing to do with abortions.

But a federal judge in Idaho ruled for the administration and handed down a narrow order that permits abortions in certain medical emergencies. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to lift that order while it weighed the state’s appeal.

Advertisement

The case of Moyle vs. United States posed a clash between the federal law that requires hospitals to provide emergency care and the state’s authority to regulate doctors and the practice of medicine.

Arguing for the administration, Solicitor Gen. Elizabeth Prelogar said pregnant woman “can suffer dangerous conditions that require immediate medical treatment to prevent death or serious injury, including organ failure or loss of fertility. And in some tragic cases, the required stabilizing care—the only treatment that can save the woman’s life or prevent grave harm to her health—involves terminating the pregnancy.”

She said Idaho was among only six states that make no exceptions for protecting the health of a pregnant patient.

After Idaho’s law took effect, doctors reported that six women who needed an abortion because of medical complications were transported to hospitals outside the state.

Doctors in Idaho contended that the state’s law endangers patients, and they spoke out against it during the court battle.

Advertisement

In medical emergencies, “delay puts the patient’s life and health at risk. But the lack of clarity in the law is creating fear in our physicians,” Dr. Jim Souza, chief physician executive for St. Luke’s Health System in Boise, said in an earlier interview.

He said doctors in emergency rooms often see pregnant women whose water has broken, or who have a severe infection or are bleeding badly. An abortion may be called for in such a situation, but doctors know they could be subject to criminal prosecution if they act too soon, he said.

Continue Reading

Politics

Biden, Trump face off at CNN Presidential Debate which may 'change the narrative in a massive way'

Published

on

Biden, Trump face off at CNN Presidential Debate which may 'change the narrative in a massive way'

ATLANTA — In a presidential election rematch that remains extremely close and where every vote may count come November, it’s no understatement to say that there’s an incredible amount at stake in Thursday’s first of two debates between President Biden and former President Trump.

The two presumptive major party nominees will face off on the same stage at the CNN Presidential Debate, which is being held at the cable news network’s studios in Atlanta, the largest city and capital of the crucial southeastern battleground state of Georgia.

“This is a toss-up race and there’s over two months until the next debate. This showdown is going to set a tone and a narrative heading into this summer’s conventions,” longtime Republican strategist and communications adviser Matt Gorman told Fox News, as he pointed to the earliest general election presidential debate in modern history. 

And Gorman, a veteran of numerous GOP presidential campaigns, emphasized that the debate, which will be simulcast on the Fox News Channel and on other networks, has the potential “to change the narrative in a massive way” as Biden and Trump “try to break out” from the current status quo.

WHICH DONALD TRUMP WILL SHOW UP AT THURSDAY’S FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE

Advertisement

Signage for the upcoming presidential debate is seen at the media file center near the CNN Techwood campus in Atlanta on Tuesday, June 25, 2024.  (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

The debate, which kicks off at 9pm ET, will be 90 minutes in length, with two commercial breaks. 

Only the Democratic incumbent and his Republican predecessor will be on the stage, as the third party and independent candidates running for the White House – including Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – failed to reach the qualifying thresholds. 

To make the stage, candidates needed to reach at least 15% in four approved national surveys and to make the ballot in enough states to reach 270 electoral votes, which is the number needed to win the White House.

HOW TO WATCH THE CNN PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE SIMULCAST ON THE FOX NEWS CHANNEL

Advertisement

Trump and Biden bypassed the Commission on Presidential Debates – which had organized these quadrennial showdowns for over three decades – and instead mutually agreed on the rules and conditions.

Those include no studio audience, each candidate’s microphone will be muted except when it’s their turn to answer questions, no props or notes allowed on stage, and no opening statements.

There will be closing statements and a coin flip determined that Trump will get the final word.

The debate comes as polls indicate a very tight race between Biden and Trump, with the former president holding the slight edge in many national polls and surveys in the roughly half-dozen or so battleground states that will likely determine the election’s outcome.

“To put it very simply – debates move numbers in a way few other events do. Period,” Gorman highlighted. “And with over two months to go until the second debate [an ABC News hosted showdown scheduled for Sept. 10], the narratives formed on Thursday night may harden into concrete, so showing up and performing well in Atlanta is crucial.”

Advertisement

Both candidates come into the debate with an ample amount of baggage that will offer their rival plenty of potential ammunition.

The 81-year-old Biden, the oldest president in the nation’s history, for months has faced serious concerns from voters over his age and physical and mental durability. He’s also been dealing for nearly three years with underwater job approval ratings as he’s struggled to combat persistent inflation and a crisis at the nation’s southern border, as well as plenty of overseas hot spots.

FIRST ON FOX: BIDEN CAMPAIGN RIPS TRUMP OVER ‘NEGLECT OF DUTY’ ON EVE OF FIRST 2024 DEBATE

Meanwhile, Trump made history for all the wrong reasons last month, as he was convicted of 34 felony counts in the first criminal trial ever of a former or current president.

Three and a half years after the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters trying to upend congressional certification of Biden’s 2020 election victory, Trump faces criminal charges of trying to overturn the results of the last presidential contest. His promises of second-term retribution against his political enemies have created a backlash, and he’s struggled along with plenty of other Republicans to deal with the combustible issue of abortion two years after the Supreme Court struck down the decades-old Roe v. Wade ruling. 

Advertisement

Arguably the biggest question surrounding Thursday night’s debate is which version of Trump will show up?

Trump, Biden debate

Then-former Vice President Joe Biden and then-President Donald Trump debate at Belmont University in Nashville, Tennessee, on Oct. 22, 2020. (Kevin Dietsch/UPI/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Will it be the undisciplined candidate who continuously interrupted Biden and debate moderator Chris Wallace dozens and dozens of times at their first debate in the 2020 election? 

Trump appeared to lose his cool, failed to condemn white supremacists, and his performance was widely panned by political pundits and viewers alike.

Or will it be the Trump of the second 2020 debate, when the then-president re-worked his strategy and his disciplined and measured performance was a vast improvement.

“If he replicates that performance, Donald Trump’s going to have a very good night,” longtime Republican consultant and veteran debate coach Brett O’Donnell told Fox News.

Advertisement

BIDEN AND TRUMP CAMPAIGNS MAKE MOVES ON THE EVE OF THE DEBATE 

O’Donnell said his advice to Trump is “watch the second debate you had with Joe Biden in 2020 and replicate that performance. Watch it over and over and replicate that performance in this debate.”

“He was measured but firm,” O’Donnell said of Trump. “You can be aggressive and passionate without being offensive.”

O’Donnell knows a bit about coaching presidential candidates ahead of their debates. He assisted in debate preparations for George W. Bush in 2004, GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain of Arizona in 2008, and Republican standard-bearer and then-former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in 2012. 

This election cycle, O’Donnell coached Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis ahead of his debate performances in the Republican presidential primaries.

Advertisement

O’Donnell said Biden needs to be careful not “to fall into the incumbent trap… Many if not most incumbents in their first debate, whether it’s Ronald Reagan or George H.W. Bush or George W. Bush or Barack Obama, most incumbents perform poorly in their first debate going for the second term.”

“So the advice to Biden is avoid the incumbent trap because if he falls into it, it’s doubly bad because of all the age arguments,” he added.

And O’Donnell emphasized that Biden has “got to somehow frame the race as a choice in defense of his record over the past four years. That is a tall order, but that’s something he has to do in order to justify picking him over Donald Trump.”

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Trending