More on union political spending

by | Dec 9, 2004 | News

Here is a take very similar to my own on political spending by liberal organizations. It makes the case I’ve made here and here, that unions (this article refers mainly to “liberal 527 organizations” but the ones listed received huge contributions – tens of millions – from unions): 1. Spent the majority of their money on 527 organizations as opposed to PACs (and that corporations spent virtually all their money on PACs); 2. The amounts spent through these organizations put unions on a par with corporate political spending; 3. That labor’s voice, as compared to that of corporations, is much more powerful since corporate spending was split about evenly between the candidates; and 4. Notwithstanding its disproportionate “voice,” labor’s message is not resonating with american voters (or its own members – remember over 1/3 of them voted for Bush) because it just doesn’t connect. This does not mean that labor is not a powerful voice in politics (at least in terms of spending), only that its power is being squandered. I think the argument for splitting away from the Democratic party is strong. Whether that means a true labor party (even though I’d disagree with a lot of its agenda, I’d love to see a strong third party emerge in our system and a labor party is probably the only true possibility) or simply backing candidates from whatever party that support your agenda, labor’s marriage to the Democratic party is a disaster.

INK Newsletter

APPROACHABILITY MINUTE

GET OUR RETENTION TOOLKIT

PUBLICATIONS

Archives

Categories