By Scott Martelle
Los Angeles Times
The leadership of the National Border Patrol Council – the union representing rank-and-file Border Patrol guards – came out two months ago with an endorsement of Donald Trump’s presidential ambitions, marking the first time the union had endorsed a candidate during the primary cycle. In the process, those union leaders created a problem: The folks on the front line of border protections have aligned themselves with someone who believes the Mexicans crossing the border are “in many cases, criminals, drug dealers, rapists.”
And who has denigrated women and vowed (likely in violation of the Constitution) to ban Muslims from entering the country.
As Richard Marosi reported, that has exposed a rift within the union in an agency in which (per this 2012 report) more than a third of the employees are Latino, and one in five are women.
The union faced some external backlash after making the endorsement, including calls for the AFL-CIO to kick it out of the labor federation. That’s silly. The union – any union – has a right to endorse a political candidate, though I wish they were a bit more democratic about it rather than having, as in the case of the Border Patrol union, the leadership make the call. And they are within their rights to align with any candidate they like – the AFL-CIO shouldn’t bounce a member union over its political positions, since the main point of the union is to represent its workers.
But the Border Patrol union did its members a disservice by backing a demagogue who demonizes some of the very people its members encounter as a core function of their jobs.
To read more click here.
Other Stories of Interest
- What We Know About FBI’s Investigation into Clinton’s E-Mails
- FBI Agents Seize Documents in Orthodox Jewish Community
- FBI Planted Bugs in Oakland Courthouse Without a Warrant
- FBI Investigates Frisco Hospice for ‘Overmedicating’ Patients
- FBI Offer Reward for Suspect in Shooting of Rosebud Police Officer
