The Heritage Foundation - Leadership for America

April 27, 2009 Chris Hopf, Seattle writes:

Union members should question why such information is a “burden” to provide. If their union dues dollars were being managed by an efficient operation . . . that information should be easy to obtain and distribute.

Perhaps union members contributions are not being managed efficiently and enabling significant waste, as well as increased risk of fraud . . . thus the motive to call LM2 a “burden”.

I recommend union members begin to strike the very unions they thought were supporting them, as union bureaucrats are more often than they realize taking advantage of them.

Union members should be in favor of more transparency around where their dollars are going (don’t ‘assume’, rather ‘know’).

April 28, 2009 anonymous, los angeles writes:

The “loyalty oaths” were actually circulated amongst the union’s staff, not the membership. “An attack on Freeman is an attack on the workers.” You may also want to see this video that was commissioned after the story first broke: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX_Mh8dQdVc

The reporting requirements should not be relaxed.

April 28, 2009 Bob, Charlotte writes:

American business is saddled with reporting requirements which take huge accounting staffs and cost millions of dollars. The LM-2 requirements can be handled by a simple bookkeeper. The Dems don’t want to burden their largest contributors with a requirement to actually report all of the cash they are using to buy policy from the Dems.

April 28, 2009 Bluezguise - NJ writes:

Union workers are routinely ripped off more by their unions than their employers, but don’t seem to catch on. One of the first things a union does upon organizing a company is to grab their dues. Union officials then get to live in multi-million dollar homes and wear thousand dollar suits many of the business owners can’t afford. All at the expense of the workers.

April 28, 2009 Jerome Zacny writes:

All this, and Mr. Obama still supports eliminating the secret ballot of workers who will be voting for or against bringing in a union at their place of work.

April 28, 2009 Larry in Texas writes:

I guess at some point the workers themselves will wake up and police their “program” internally. The problem is of the union workers are not “ALPHA” type personalities who will take the responsibilties upon themselves to show some integrity! Truth and honor are the first things brainwashed out of the union workers in order to get them “INLINE” with the mafia way of thinkin’.Before all Y’all die hard Dems start wantin’ to hack me open for that statement, understand this- I’ve attended union meetings in my life and I know the way they insist that they know best how WE the PEOPLE should vote, both in the union elections and in the General Presidential elections! So with that being said- don’t blame the rest of us if we want to develope a vaccine to treat the rest of us against your disease, just to keep it from spreading!

April 28, 2009 Betty Hanicke, Kansas writes:

Freeze all government expenditures and salaries until they can vote on a balanced budget. A novel idea!

April 28, 2009 Ross, Florida writes:

At one time unions had a valid argument, the US government established a labor cabinet post. Even separate laws and court systems were establish specifically for labor unions. Corruption has always been a huge problem with labor unions, always. The question is;
(1) What is the function of the Labor Department? Carry the unions “water”? If so eliminate the cabinet post!
(2)Why is the Labor Department not going after corruption or seeking transparency like the Justice Department? Conflict of interest? Do away with the Labor Department. It will save the taxpayers millions.
Unions have outlived their usefulness and purpose. Today it is one of the biggest money bags for the Democrat Party. Both have socialist agenda; both want to make all equally miserable while they live “high on the hog” at the workers expense.
The first labor unions to dissolve and outlaw is any union for government employees. Since when did government employees need a union? Civil Service laws serve the same purpose. These unions are the largest source of union membership today. Afterwards the other unions will die a natural death after sending their employers into the bankruptcy courts, being unable to compete in today’s international economy while shackled by costly union contracts.

April 28, 2009 Barb -mn writes:

Love the idea!

Obama enables corruption wherever he can conduct it!

April 29, 2009 Tom in Charlotte writes:

How will we ever straightened union financiakl fraud and stealing by the leaders of the unions at the expense of the members. The members have no real way to create change as long as the leadership has control of the policies, procedures and decision making rules of the union. Without intervention by the Labor Department and the Attorney General, there is no way the members can effectively bring about reform and change. It is a true certainty that the Democrat Party will never entertain weeding out the corruption, providing any change that benefits the members of unions or provides fair voting on the choice for establishing a union. The political hacks are beholden to the union hierarchy and will continue to give them free reign in exchange for financial support to advance their socialistic agenda.

April 30, 2009 Larry in Texas writes:

For Tom in Charlotte, the anwser to the question is simple- as more union workers leave the union the union loses more money to feed the MONKEY! Er go the MONKEY gets off your back! It’s kind of like the statements I’ve made before about how everyone’s hollering “Quit spendin’ my money!” “How can I make Congress quit spendin’ my taxes on their Liberal agenda?” Well, you take a page from the Obama administrations playbook on political appointees- Simply don’t pay any federal income taxes for them to use against you!!! What are they gonna do? Take your house? Garnish your wages? Seems to me we’ll lose our homes due to job and income loss anyhow!! Without a job what wages will they garnish, the unemployment insurance they want us all to be dependent on? That’s all I got to say ’bout that for now. VIVA LA REVELUTION! OOPS, I just got lumped into the same “Black list” as our returning war veterans who speak out against or disagree with the Liberal agenda. Oh well, at least I’m in some HONORABLE company!!!

April 30, 2009 Larry in Texas writes:

Betty Hanicke, Kansas writes:
Freeze all government expenditures and salaries until they can vote on a balanced budget. A novel idea!
That’s exactly what I’ve reasoned before. When the Members on the HILL have to worry about payin’ the mortgage and light bill on their own home, perhaps they can get on our side about the fiscally responsible things to DO! I would go even further and REQUIRE ALL House and Senate members to actually start paying taxes on the income they make from our taxes paid to them for salaries. That puts them in the anty so to speak, and causes some reflection on where the money really goes!!

May 2, 2009 Obama Enables Union Corruption - Politics and Other Controversies - City-Data Forum writes:

[...] Enables Union Corruption So what exactly are the unions good for theses days??? Obama Enables Union Corruption ? The Foundry [+] Rate this post [...]

May 3, 2009 Larry Seale, Colorado writes:

I’ve worked for 45 years or so, 43 in non-union jobs and the last 2 in a union shop. I paid dues for two years with a live and let live attitude toward ATU. I needed help in January and was told “It’s none of our business” Huh? I decided to fight back in whatever little way I can and started a blog http://www.ftemployerights.blogspot.com. One thing that seems to attract a lot of attention is to post LM-2’s & 3’s. When you start looking, you see some interesting things. I wouldn’t suggest it for everyone and it only applies to private employee unions but if you have the time, it might be a start.