DOGE Is Kicking A** and Pete Hegseth Exceeds Expectations
Two Independent Reporters Cited a Familiar Entity During 'Censorship Industrial Complex' H...
Ohio Dems Want to Regulate Ejaculation. Yeah, This State Is Going to Be...
Former GAO Head Suggest a New Homework Assignment for DOGE
What This Politico Reporter Said About USAID Came at the Worst Time
This Dem Rep Made Everyone Dumber at the DOGE Oversight Hearing This Week
Kash Patel Must Purge the FBI of Deep State Actors and Secure Justice...
America Will Win AI Race With Reliable Energy and Innovation
Federal Judge Orders Trump Administration to Restore Foreign Aid Funding
Florida Now Has the 'Strongest' Illegal Immigration Enforcement Laws in the Nation
What Voters Think About Musk and DOGE
'Pure Fake News': Did Vance Actually Threaten Russia With Sanctions?
Biden EPA Funneled Money to Leftists, Zeldin Finds
This Democrat Senator Will Not Seek Reelection
All Gehinnom Is Going to Break Loose!
Tipsheet

AFL-CIO Political Director Admits SCOTUS Ruling Helps

Guest post from the Center for Union Facts

In light of the Supreme Court ruling last week, labor leaders have been up in arms about how it opens the flood gates for corporate monies to flow unfettered into the political arena. But it is quite a bit more complex than that.
Advertisement

On the one hand you have Secretary-Treasurer of the SEIU, Anna Burger, saying this:

“Today the US Supreme Court lifted the floodgates and started dismantling century-old restrictions on corporate electoral activity in the name of the ‘free speech rights’ of corporations—meaning if you are a ‘corporate person’ (aka a CEO or corporate official), you are now free to hit the corporate ATM and spend whatever of your shareholders’ money it takes to elect the candidates of your choice.”

But experts have pushed back. From USA Today:

Analysts said they did not expect to see a flood of corporate spending on ads that call for the election or defeat of an individual candidate. “I don’t see the Cokes and Pepsis of this world writing checks for political campaigns in this economic environment,” said Evan Tracey, who tracks political advertising at Campaign Media Analysis Group. “They have shareholders, boards of directors and customers who come from all sides of the political spectrum.” Experts, such as campaign-finance lawyer Kenneth Gross, said the money is more likely to flow through trade associations and non-profit groups.

Advertisement

They are probably onto something. Even some labor leaders are beginning to muse about what benefit they themselves could gain from the ruling. From the Business Week:

“Karen Ackerman, the political director of the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest federations of unions, said last week in a conference call with reporters that the Supreme Court’s decision would open “some avenues to spend resources in different ways than we have had in the past.” It is too soon to know how, she said.”

Given the nature of labor union officials’ disregard for the dues of their members and their already creative ways of funneling dues into elections, it is possible that after the Supreme Court ruling the only people using the employees’ ATM more readily will be union officials.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement