Silent Majority

Construction speaks softly but carries a big vote

By Jeremy Harrell

When political candidates build their campaign platforms, rarely do the planks include retainage reform, lien-law revisions or the establishment of apprentice ratios on projects.

Most candidates have little more than a passing knowledge about the debate over the use of design/build on public projects, and few will take a firm position on what role the state should play in amending the statutes relating to hold-harmless clauses and indemnity provisions. You'll never hear about a candidate being swept into office on his position to exempt the sales tax on materials used for public projects or extending the quality-based selection process to all public owners.

But even if politicians don't mention the construction industry by name in their stump speeches, it doesn't mean they're not interested in builders. And it certainly doesn't mean builders aren't interested in politics.

Sometimes it comes down to using a kind of code system. When candidates talk about diminishing the role of government in business and reducing the tax burden, they're not only identifying themselves as Republicans, they're making a pitch to construction executives.

"The construction issues are great, but to me there's more of a fundamental battle going on for the soul of our country," said Ben Ganther, president of Ganther Construction Inc., Oshkosh. "I personally want less government in my life." Smart candidates, he added, can "tailor their message to their audience," and citizens don't necessarily need to know a politician's specific beliefs to get a clear understanding of how they'll vote when they get to Madison or Washington, D.C.

By the same token, Democratic candidates talk a lot about protecting working families and preserving the right to organize, and unions typically turn out in numbers to vote for them. When Jim Doyle ran successfully for the governor's seat in 2002, he frequently skipped past the subjects of infrastructure investment and prevailing wage to speak about public education and law enforcement, yet the state Operating Engineers union provided Doyle's campaign with its single largest political-action committee contribution.

One candidate, however, is attempting to upset the normal balance of construction politics. Days after he bested his challengers in a four-way primary to run against incumbent U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold, Republican candidate Tim Michels announced that he would target union construction workers for votes. Michels is the co-owner and vice president of Michels Corp., Brownsville, the largest contracting company in Wisconsin and the 97th biggest in the country, according to Engineering News-Record's most recent annual survey.

Michels Corp. is a union shop and employs hundreds of workers from the Operating Engineers, Laborers and Carpenters unions, to name a few. His plan is a shrewd move. Unions traditionally adore Feingold, whose talk about lowering health-care costs and fighting for workers usually earns him the title of "good friend to labor." But one union leader, who refused to be identified because of the delicate nature of political endorsement, said he was actually sitting on the fence about which candidate to support.

Publicly, however, unions pounced on Michels' suggestion that union workers could be easily swayed, issuing a collective statement that amounted to "not over our dead body."

"In a (Senate) dominated by millionaires, Russ Feingold has always stood out as a senator who understands the values and needs of working people," said Terry McGowan, president of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 139.

"He has been in the corner of working families since Day 1," said Lyle Balistreri, president of the Milwaukee Building and Construction Trades Council.

"From fighting for our jobs to working to ensure affordable health care for all Americans, Feingold has been on our side," said Mike Ryan, business manager of the Wisconsin Laborers District Council.

When asked whether Michels would gather enough steam to lure carpenters away from their traditional Democratic ally, Mark Reihl, executive director of the Wisconsin District Council of Carpenters said, "Absolutely not. We're going to let our members know we're supporting Russ Feingold."

Michels, however, said unions in Wisconsin have been receptive, have let him onto job sites to talk to workers and have even given his campaign money. But "when they run (an endorsement) up the flag pole" with national union leaders in Washington, "they get shot down," Michels said.

He remains unperturbed and confident that his background in construction will appeal to workers, emphasizing that there are ways to attract those votes without getting an official endorsement. "When the guys go into the voting booth, they're going to decide who to vote for," Michels said. "I'm a guy who's worn steel-toed boots. …I think they'll say to themselves, 'You know, Michels is a guy who's a lot more like me than Feingold ever will be.'"

Michels' presence in the campaign has galvanized construction company owners, who would no doubt have supported him anyway. Having a construction guy in the race, though, makes the campaign more immediate than it would have been otherwise. For instance, the Associated General Contractors of Wisconsin bypassed its usual policy of sitting out primary races to endorse Michels.

"Getting behind a guy like that early was our industry's way of saying our industry's got a good candidate," Ganther said. He added that Michels' goal of seeking out union construction workers should prove successful. "If (unions) don't support him, it just shows they'll back anybody."

But even if political races don't often specifically mention the construction industry, and even if the candidates don't have a construction background, there are plenty of hot-button issues and contests out there to keep contractors and workers interested. Start at the top.

One of President George Bush's first actions after assuming office was to outlaw project-labor agreements on any federally funded job. He championed a tax policy that temporarily phases out the estate tax — a pet peeve of contractors, many of whom own businesses that get passed from generation to generation — and Bush has been vocal in seeking a permanent repeal. He has appointed industry-friendly representatives to key construction bodies such as the National Labor Relations Board.

Democratic nominee John Kerry, on the other hand, supports PLAs for federally funded jobs and in fact goes a step farther in suggesting that PLAs be used on all energy infrastructure projects. Kerry would also reinstate the estate tax but raise the minimum threshold so only the wealthiest families would be subject to the levy.

Though he doesn't mention the National Labor Relations Board by name, it's a sure bet that his strong support from groups like the AFL-CIO would ensure a more union-oriented panel.

Back at home in Wisconsin, a big issue in this fall's election is a constitutional amendment to limit government spending and taxation. The Taxpayer Bill of Rights never made it to passage in 2004, but it's guaranteed to come up in 2005. The push gained extra momentum after state Rep. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, trounced fellow Republican, fellow West Bend resident and now former Senate Majority Leader Mary Panzer by a 4-1 margin in a September runoff. Their election focused almost exclusively on TABOR and, more pointedly, Panzer's failure to whip the Republican-controlled Senate into approving it.

For Republicans, the elections are about solidifying their majorities in both houses, especially in the closely divided Senate, to ensure that TABOR finally becomes reality. They've targeted Sens. Bob Wirch, D-Pleasant Prairie, and Dave Hansen, D-Green Bay, as possible victims. For Democrats, it's first about playing defense and maybe picking up a few stray Assembly seats, sources said.

The industry has taken a keen interest in TABOR. For some, its tight restrictions on spending could deliver a severe blow to public construction, which has happened in Colorado, where that state has been living under TABOR for more than a decade. Others in the industry, however, are attracted by the prospect of reduced taxes and limited government. In the months of debate on the measure in 2004, TABOR never emerged in a solid, consensual form and is still something of an elusive target — more of a rhetorical gesture at this point than an actual document.

During this campaign season, just about every construction-related association has been holding legislative breakfasts where members can screen the candidates. The meetings aren't just about learning politicians' stances but also educating them about the interests of the building industry, so when it comes time to draft a final version of TABOR, construction might emerge unscathed.

And for a field like politics, where the industry usually goes unmentioned, that wouldn't be a small accomplishment.