Green Room

In Wisconsin, 93 Cents of Every Union Dollar Given Goes to Democrats

posted at 8:00 am on March 9, 2011 by

Forget the stuff about collective bargaining “rights.” For Democrats and their union allies, this is all about the Benjamins:

Of the nearly $7 million labor unions have contributed to state candidates in Wisconsin over the last six election cycles, 93 cents of every dollar has gone to a Democrat.

Among educators, it’s 75 cents of every buck. For public employees, 73 cents.

The data compiled by the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign for the State Journal starkly illustrate why the high-stakes battle between Republican Gov. Scott Walker and labor unions over the last three weeks is about more than budget shortfalls and bargaining.

“I consider organized labor to be the backbone of the Democratic Party,” said Mike Tate, state party chairman. “Part of Scott Walker’s strategy is to weaken the infrastructure of the Democratic Party.”

Got that? An attack on unions is an attack on Democrats. That’s a level of honestly that hasn’t made it into the debate much thus far. We’ve heard a lot of talk about “union busting” and the “right” of collective bargaining. We haven’t heard much about where all that money goes after it’s bargained away from the taxpayers.

What we haven’t heard at all is an explanation for why any American should be forced to support someone else’s political party with their earnings. In essence, Democrats want to be allowed to lay an extra payroll tax on certain professions to fund their operations. When the other party objects to this set up, they then claim people’s “rights” are being taken away.

Since when is being forced to donate to one political party a right?

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Somewhere in my stack of stuff is an article from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel from a couple weeks ago quoting “good-government guru” Mike McCabe bemoaning the potential limiting of union political donations precisely because they donate almost exclusively to Rats.

steveegg on March 9, 2011 at 9:03 AM

There’s another way of looking at this. It’s job discrimination. For example: In WI if a Republican is qualified for and wants to go after a job as a public employee or teacher,he/she can’t because they would be forced to contribute to casues and people that are against their values. Ergo, they cannot apply for or take these jobs. They are excluded. I call that job discrimination. Why has no one approached it from this angle? Surely keeping one segment of the population out of public jobs IS discrimination.

jeanie on March 9, 2011 at 9:20 AM

Since when is being forced to donate to one political party a right?

More and more of the Left’s agenda these days is about the use of force to compel people to bend to their wishes.

They want to force you to buy into Unconstitutional Obamacare.

They want to force you to drive less with higher energy prices that are the direct result of their polices.

Time was when ‘Liberal’ meant the same thing as being for Liberty. These days, the Left is all about Oppression and forcing society to bend to their will.

That should really bother them, but it does not seem to.

Chip on March 9, 2011 at 10:38 AM

Stop it! You’re making way too much sense for the left!

Pervygrin on March 9, 2011 at 12:59 PM

More and more of the Left’s agenda these days is about the use of force to compel people to bend to their wishes.

No mention of this since obama took office, but the Chinese system of commnunism is seen as the preferred one by the socialist/communist in our government. In short they like the ability of the government to compel their people to accept any decision the government makes with no questions allowed. Obama was trained in the old soviet methods, but the process is the same. He seems to particuliarly have a preference for no questions asked part, ie, no more than six pre selected questions at any news event.

They want to force you to drive less with higher energy prices that are the direct result of their polices.

An interesting point. One of the commnunist political planks during the late 90’s was to destroy the large corporations through “green laws” that forced them into bankruptcy through forced pollution clean ups, which would naturally have popular support until the end results were seen. Once that goal was met they said the large corporations would be replaced with smaller local ones. Obviously union controlled.

The goal would result in a soviet style control of the population movement and reduce transportation to frieght and the previlage elite who have the need to travel within the United States.

Today the corporations still stand, but Obamacare, along with Obama policies, will reduce their ability to survive greatly. High fuel cost will hasten their failures and limit the populations ability move freely. It might be recalled that a few years back the democrates, Reid in particuliar, said that $15 a gallon gas was acceptable to them.

The communist party goals are the same, just the means of achieveing them has changed. Today they are less transparent and clear on their goals. For example they do not state a goal of destroying corporations through pollution clean up laws and cost. Today it is “Green Laws” in the political planks, pushed through global warming laws and redistribution of corporate wealth to 3rd world socialist countries through carbon credits.

Franklyn on March 9, 2011 at 1:40 PM


HotAir — Politics, Culture, Media, 2017, Breaking News from a conservative viewpoint
Top Pick

“The Russia investigation was by far the dominant topic…”

Top Pick

The merry little media war continues.

Criminal enterprise

Politico: Has the SPLC lost its way?

John Sexton Jun 28, 2017 3:01 PM

“The organization has always tried to find ways to milk money out of the public…”

Trump legal team backing away from Comey complaint?

Ed Morrissey Jun 28, 2017 2:31 PM

De-escalation?

Time to get up and go to work, sir

CNN gets glum, defensive after resignations

John Sexton Jun 28, 2017 1:01 PM

“If Jeff lit himself on fire, it wouldn’t appease the pro-Trump media.”

Hmmm: FBI probing Russia-based anti-virus firm?

Ed Morrissey Jun 28, 2017 12:31 PM

“I wouldn’t put their stuff on my computer if you paid me.”

He works hard for the money…

It’s not a slippery slope. It’s a freaking avalanche.

Nuts.

Showdown: Sarah Palin vs the New York Times

Jazz Shaw Jun 28, 2017 9:21 AM

Defamation

Credit where creditor’s due?

More flash than bang, but a very bad sign

“Felix was out on bond after threatening another public servant and has a history of making threats.”

Chaffetz: House needs housing allowances?

Ed Morrissey Jun 27, 2017 8:41 PM

“There are dozens upon dozens of members living in their offices, and I don’t know how healthy that is long term.”

“This isn’t going to get a lot cheaper, it can’t, it won’t.”

“…what we failed to achieve with votes, we would do with weapons.”

“[S]o dumb it’s amazing we even have to have the conversation.”

“It was not necessary.”

“You’re inflaming everyone right here right now with those words!”

“Trump’s people said, ‘We’ll be writing the speech that the President’s Audio-Animatronic figure will be saying.'”

Excuses, excuses.

Not really a “kill all the lawyers” scenario

4 pm ET!

“it has not taken serious steps to end its own complicity in trafficking, including forced laborers from North Korea.”

Currently doing a search for “good international trade lawyers”

Ransomware attack spreads through Europe

John Sexton Jun 27, 2017 1:01 PM

“A massive ransomware campaign is currently unfolding worldwide.”

At least their address rarely changes

It just keeps on happening

“Trump is good for business right now.”