One reason this year's election seems so long is because it really began when the 2006 election ended. That contest, which saw Democrats unexpectedly sweep both the House and the Senate, finally turned in favor of the good guys—after distractions over relatively minor issues—because it finally became a mandate over one sweeping, presidential issue: George W. Bush. The electorate, of course, mandated a change.

That’s where we started. Now, with Democrats battling longer than expected, and voters again getting distracted by relatively minor issues like whether Barack listens to his ex-minister or Hillary listens to economists, Philly For Change is launching a new campaign to focus attention back to the BIG issues: Bush, his policies on war, healthcare, Social Security and the environment, and the one man who stands in the way of changing them.

That’s why from now until November and in more ways than one, Philly For Change is Philly Against McCain.

Larry Farnese's victory is a major win for progressives.

That’s true for three reasons.

1. Larry is a real progressive, totally committed to open and transparent government and determined to use government to make lives better for everyone, including those who are outside the mainstream of economic life.

2.Farnese’s victory moves forward the transition to a new kind of politics. Larry has been attacked for his alliance with Senator Fumo’s team. But what the people making those attacks fail to understand is that Larry made that alliance without giving up his ideals. He is someone who understands that Philadelphia politics is not just going to be about factions jockeying for patronage, contracts, and power in the future. Ideas and innovative public policy are going to play a larger role. Farnese may now be a Fumocrat, but he is a new breed of Fumocrat.

Earlier today, workers at two nursing homes in Pennsylvania voted to organize with SEIU Healthcare PA. Over 340 workers--RNs, LPNs, CNAs, dietary aides and housekeepers--will be represented by a union. While it's an exciting day for our union, you might wonder why I'm blogging about it on YPP.

The answer is that there was a big difference in these two elections, and the difference was directly attributable to politics.

The first nursing home, in Northeast Philadelphia, is run by a national, private, for-profit company. Workers at that home were subjected to an active fight against the union, orchestrated by their employer. They were subjected to captive audience meetings, misinformation, and subterfuge while on paid work time. The workers who supported the union were not allowed to conduct meetings with their co-workers while on work time, leading most rational people to the conclusion that the company strongly opposed unionization. The workers prevailed in this vote, but with only 56%--a margin that, while a blowout by electoral standards, means they will continue to struggle to get a first contract. (Thanks to Senator Bob Casey for writing an open letter of support.)

At the second nursing home, the county nursing home in Lehigh, the yes side of the equation got 83% of the vote. In that case, the county executive, Don Cunningham, agreed to employer neutrality and an expedited election. The nurses in that home were free to make up their own minds about whether to form a union, and overwhelmingly, they chose to do so. This wasn't the first organizing drive these workers had ever attempted, but it was the first one that ever succeeded.

I worked getting out the vote today in the first home, and we were nervous all day about whether the workers would be able to overcome their fears and stand together. It gave me an important reminder of just what it is that we're fighting for, in working to elect Ruth Damsker and Joe Hoeffel in Montgomery County. We're fighting to make sure that more workers can have the experience of choosing a union--or not--in an environment free of harassment and scare tactics.