The El Paso County Sheriff's Officer's Association - a labor organization - endorsed a Republican for Sheriff.
The boys at the EPSOA are notorious for making bad political decisions. They almost always back the losers in political campaigns. They recently supported a guy against Commissioner Vince Perez that didn't even live in the precinct he was trying to run in. That was a major face-plant for the EPSOA because they were careless in their endorsement.
At least in the past when they endorsed a candidate, even a terrible one like Dora Oaxaca, you could at least understand why. Dora and Marrufo, the head of the union at the time, went to Socorro High together.
But their decisions lately, despite not having Marrufo in charge anymore, defy logic. Lets set aside the Quintanilla endorsement. Lets chalk it up to old-fashioned payback.
But endorsing a Republican is not only stupid, its an embarrassment to labor. Labor has no friends in the GOP. Republicans are not union friendly. Sure, they'll happily accept the support in this circumstance, but there's a reason unions only support Democratic candidates.
You got issues with the boss? Of course you do, labor and management rarely get along all the time. That is natural. If things get really bad, you support someone in the primary against him. But supporting a Republican over Sheriff Wiles is beyond stupid.
I don't know what their process is like, but with other unions I've worked for there is an established process. Sometimes a guy like me is brought in to do some opposition research on the candidates, poke them with a stick, and kick the tires. Its called vetting a candidate.
A recommendation is made and that is taken into consideration along with the decision of board members after consultation with membership. The point is, someone with an ounce of political sense is usually involved to prevent unions from pulling a Hector Montes and AFSCME, you know - completely destroying the credibility of the union.
I don't know anything about the Republican that is running other than what I have seen in videos he's posted online. I certainly have questions that I will be asking about important policy matters when I come across him on the campaign trail, but does the EPSOA actually think they will be better off under a Republican?
There is no defense for the endorsement either. The argument that you have to send a message just doesn't hold any water. Not in a general election. The only message it sends is that the EPSOA will cut off their nose to spite their face.
The EPSOA always puts money behind a candidate. That is hard working union member money. They might as well take the boys out to a gentlemen's club, light cigars with it, or pass out cash at the Sun Bowl Parade. It would be just as useful as using it to back a Republican.
Now all of this puts their political contact, Chris Acosta in a weird position. She is part of Wiles' staff and she almost always runs a campaign with the EPSOA money. So that is a little awkward knowing that they are supporting someone against her boss.
Political karma.
The reality is that they are throwing away any credibility that they may have left, which honestly isn't a lot. From a labor perspective its obvious they are going to have issues with Sheriff Wiles. But when you endorse a Republican, you are endorsing policies that aren't in-line with the community. And lets be real, how credible is the EPSOA when they endorse someone with no law enforcement experience. The guy has never been a detention officer, written citations, testified in court, or been on patrol.
Sure, he was a Special Forces Sergeant Major and all, but its not comparable experience no matter how much he dresses like a cowboy. Wiles has walked in the shoes of a line officer.
But now they are the union that backed a Republican. A union with the ability to raise money and have a lot of bodies should be king and queen makers.
Backing a Republican makes them look like the court jester.