Why Doesn't Obama Worry About Enormous Union Spending On Politics?

Why Doesn’t Obama Worry About Union Political Spending?by Chris Berg


Media reports have been decrying the corporate influence in the 2010 election cycle. If you were to read the Washington Post, New York Times, or most online media sources you would think Citizens United v. FEC is the biggest problem facing America.







That’s a narrative that President Obama has embraced. Since the Supreme Court decided Citizens United in January, President Obama has led a vocal campaign against the decision and the First Amendment rights that it protected. He has devoted at least three weekly radio addresses to the topic, one Rose Garden speech, and even made an unprecedented attack against the Supreme Court during his State of the Union address.



Recently, in addressing liberal donors, President Obama proclaimed:



“That’s the biggest problem that we have all across the country right now. We’ve got great candidates who are taking their case directly to the American people, but they are being drowned out by groups like Americans for Prosperity. Nobody knows who they are. Well, we know who they are — but nobody knows where the money is coming from, and they certainly don’t appear on those ads.





So I believe that if we are able to get our message out, if we have the same energy and focus and determination that we had in 2008 and 2006, then we will do fine. But that requires us to understand the stakes involved in this election. And I want everybody to understand, especially those who supported me, we are just in the first quarter here. We’ve gotten a lot of stuff done, but we’ve got a lot more work to do.”



The real problem is that he’s only telling half the story. Yes, corporations are financing issue advertisements, as they were allowed to before Citizens United. But they are not the only ones exercising their rights to political speech.





Labor unions have been aggressively waging a campaign against conservatives across the nation. They’ve been doing so based on another court decision that has had wide-ranging impact, SpeechNow v. FEC. In SpeechNow, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held that donations to groups that will only make independent expenditures could not be limited. That is to say, as the Supreme Court has recognized since 1976, money is speech, and the only time it may be restricted is when it would corrupt the political process. The Supreme Court has correctly determined that independent expenditures pose no risk of corruption.



In the wake of Citizens United and SpeechNow, labor unions have added this new tool to their toolbox. SEIU, one of the nation’s most politically active unions has been particularly aggressive in its use.



According to the most recent FEC report filed by SEIU’s Committee on Political Education (SEIU-COPE) they have $10 million cash on hand. That’s not a trifling sum.



What is more interesting is the information found when one drills down through the report, specifically the disbursements that SEIU has made in the past month. SEIU-COPE is aggressively funnelling donations to independent expenditure only groups to fund political ads; the kind of ads that when run by conservatives, President Obama, Senator Charles Schumer, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have been so eager to demagogue. Only here, the ads are being run against conservatives by friends of organized labor – apparently Obama, Schumer and Reid find this less objectionable.



In August alone SEIU-COPE contributed $100,000 to Florida is Not For Sale, $400,000 to Patriot Majority, $250,000 to Women Vote, $100,000 to the 2010 Fund, $100,000 to the Campaign for Moderate Majority, $70,000 to the Colorado Wins Action Fund. These are all independent expenditure only organizations.



Despite public disclosure on the FEC website, when these groups run a political advertisement, few if any Americans would realize they are being paid for by organized labor. According to compete.com, a website that provides analytics and metrics, the FEC website had 57,120 unique visitors in August. That number is dwarfed by the monthly viewers of Big Government.



Let’s do the math, if there are 307 million Americans, that means only 1 in every 5,375 people has visited the FEC website in August. Less than 0.02 percent of the population have sought out the website and any information contained therein. Of the select few that visit the FEC website I doubt many have devoted much time to scrutinizing the reports filed by any of these independent expenditure groups. Disclosure places a significant burden on organizations exercising their right to political speech, but provides little tangible benefit to the American public.



Is SEIU alone in this? Of course not — let’s just look at one of these independent expenditure organizations, Patriot Majority. Despite its heart-warming name, the organization is little more than a liberal front group, run by a Democratic strategist, aimed at opposing Tea Party candidates. You don’t have to take my word for it, their president has admitted it. Looking at Patriot Majority’s nearly illegible hand written forms filed with the FEC, Patriot Majority has received extensive support from organized labor, including the Sheet Metal Workers, AFSCME, SEIU 1199, the Ironworkers, the Bricklayers, and the Carpenters. Yet, President Obama, Harry Reid, and Charles Schumer don’t seem concerned about the influence of organized labor on the 2010 elections.



While I don’t agree with their message, I do believe in their right to express it. Citizens United reinforced the right to political speech. Now millions of Americans may join together and speak with one voice and be more effective advocates. This understandably frightens vulnerable incumbent politicians. This November, the voice of the American voter will be heard loud and clear — on the airwaves and at the ballot box, a real change is coming.