POWIP Piece of Work In Progress

Obama’s Pending Recission of Unions’ Duty to Report Expenditures

From Big Government comes the news that Obama and company are about to repeal rules that require mandatory reporting on expenditures by labor bosses.  They are giving us eleven days during which to voice our objections, and this alteration will be retroactive, extending over the period during which unions have been legally compelled to file but have resisted so doing.  In other words, unions are being rewarded for flouting the law.

By all means go to Regulations.gov and tell them what you think about this, but for the moment, at least, try to make it more polite than, "You fuckers have to get the fuck out of my fucking face," as hard as that may be.  You'll find that their comment form requires a great deal of information, including regarding your employment, much more than is required in many places to vote.  Strangely enough, they want the kinds of information about you--i.e., where you get your funding--that they wish to permit labor unions and their satellite political action organizations to obscure.

I would like to have the President explain to me why unions should be exempt as a matter of public policy from the duties of disclosure that apply to corporations and PACs, much less private citizens.  I want to understand, from his own mouth, the "logic" behind such a policy, if he can.

Not unrelated is Michelle Malkin's report on how Pelosi and company intend to forward unused TARP funds to unions.

My email:

You know, it's amazing the amount of information that you want about me. Can you tell me how my employment is supposed to be relevant to my thoughts about this? Considering that you wish to make labor unions not have to comply with the kinds of reporting that the rest of us have to do, your intrusive questions are repulsively offensive. You require more information about us in this form than is required of most people in order to vote in Federal elections. If someone were to ask for a person's place of employment at a polling place, they'd be accused of intimidation. Considering also the fact that President Obama and his partisans want to extend the Census to cover non-citizens, this is doubly offensive. Can anyone explain to me why unions ought to be exempt from reporting what corporations and PACs have to report? Will the President go on TV and explain to voters why they should enjoy such an extraordinary exemption, particularly after their stonewalling?

Of course, it would be mere paranoia to connect such a maneuver to the Soros-funded attempt to have more prog-friendly Secretaries of State appointed, so that there can be more Minnesotas and NY23s, because wingers are attempting to steal elections.

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

Website - More Posts