AFL-CIO Cranks Up Money Machine for Leftist Pols

President Bush is up against a huge international socialist machine out to undermine the principles of his presidency.

That movement is lending its full weight to efforts to impose global taxes on Americans, about which NewsMax.com reported last week.

Beyond that, the movement is out to extract money from 13 million to 14 million Americans to see that an anti-Bush Congress is elected in November.

To add insult to injury, efforts to curb this machine are being met with foot-dragging and resistance within the president’s own administration. That resistance comes from Clinton holdovers and career bureaucrats. Let’s take the last item first:

Bush loyalists are seething with anger and frustration over the fact that more than a year into the Bush administration, the Justice Department’s efforts to deal with this are being undermined from within. The frustration is magnified by Big Labor’s blatant violation of a court order that unions stop spending members’ dues for political activity without their permission.

In 1988, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that workers could not be compelled to pay dues for politics or other activities unrelated to collective bargaining. Left-wing politicians – the same ones who piously proclaim that the Supreme Court’s pro-abortion decision in Roe vs. Wade is "the law of the land” – have scoffed at the Beck decision and refused to enforce it.

A worker can sue to get a refund for any dues money he has paid that has gone to partisan political causes or otherwise not gone into collective bargaining. However, any worker who does that runs the risk of reprisals.

Now, AFL-CIO President John Joseph Sweeney wants every union within his federation to kick in more money to build a political war chest for the midterm congressional elections in November.

The federation’s executive council approved the increase at its meeting in New Orleans in late February. At a May 22 meeting in New York, the board, consisting of presidents of all 66 affiliated unions, will be asked to adopt the recommendation.

Some of the federations are dragging their feet on this. A well-placed source told NewsMax.com that when Sweeney met with the federation’s executive council last month, the top labor official walked out of the council meeting with a sour look on his face. The council members had just insisted on cutting down the amount of money to be taken out of worker’s pockets.

Instead of assessing the rank-and-file members $12 a year, the council decreed the amount would be 48 cents. Added up, that gives Sweeney and his compatriots somewhere between $5 million and $6 million to fund left-wing candidates.

If the dues increase is adopted, even the dissenting brotherhoods will have to pony up or be kicked out of the federation. Only the entertainment unions are exempted from mandatory political contributions.

A two-thirds vote is required. So if you are a member of any AFL-CIO affiliated union and you prefer to decide for yourself what candidates for office you want to support, you may want to contact your union leadership about the issue.

It is estimated that $800 million in union dues was spent during the 2000 election cycle, 90 to 95 percent of it on left-wing candidates. That includes all the "in kind” and "get out the vote” contributions that do not come under the heading of direct money offerings. Sweeney wants to up the ante this time.

If decisions of the highest court in the land meant anything, officers of the law would be on hand at the May 22 meeting in New York to cuff the ring leaders when and if the new surcharge is voted through.

The Justice Department is dragging its feet. The problem is not with top-ranking officials such as Attorney General John Ashcroft. Rather, at the lower levels, Clinton holdovers and careerists have little enthusiasm for moving things forward.

"We need to move this case up to higher levels at Justice,” a Bush loyalist told NewsMax.com.

According to a carefully researched report, "Big Labor and Its Global Socialist Agenda,” published by America’s Survival Inc., Sweeney has been publicly identified by the "democratic left” as a member of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), one of the few leftist groups in the U.S. that does not shy away from the very word "socialist.” Sweeney’s membership in DSA is not widely known to union members.

DSA in turn is affiliated with the worldwide Marxist group Socialist International (SI). According to the America’s Survival paper, SI brings together about 140 socialist and "former” communist parties and leaders around the globe.

"There is absolutely no evidence that Sweeney himself is a Communist,” says the report’s author and investigative journalist, Cliff Kincaid.

However, the report notes that under Sweeney’s leadership, AFL-CIO has softened its longstanding opposition to communism and communists, and instead has adopted an "anti anti-communist” stance.

In 1997, for example, the federation dropped its opposition to allowing Communist Party members into its organization. This goes against the decades-long policies of Sweeney’s predecessors George Meany and Lane Kirkland.

In fact, under Meany and Kirkland, the late DSA member and militant socialist Machinists Union leader William Winpisinger had been a dissident who was marginalized and isolated.

"Under his hero, Sweeney,” says Kincaid, Winpisinger was "considered mainstream.”

Although labor groups have demonstrated against such world bodies as the World Trade Organization and the World Bank, Sweeney gives the United Nations a clean bill of health.

"Like DSA member and former Congressman [Ron] Dellums, Sweeney wants the UN to dominate the new global order,” according to the research of America’s Survival Inc.

SI has been hospitable to the idea of "global governance,” which includes the so-called "Tobin tax” that would impose taxes worldwide.

As reported last week by NewsMax.com, this scheme would set up an international order to give the U.N. trillions of dollars with an ability to raise its own army and bring about the world government that internationalists have dreamed of for most of the past century.

Under this system, proposed to the same U.N. group that has been meeting this week in Monterrey, Mexico, Americans could be taxed by foreigners elected by no one.

The issue has been sidelined for the time being. But no one expects the globalists to give up. The left never does.

President Bush is due to address the Monterrey conference this week. One wonders to what extent he is aware of the forces, at home and abroad, arrayed against the kind of America his administration represents.

In fact, there appear to be some loose cannons in his administration, including one Patrick Cronin, assistant administrator for the U.S. Agency for International Development.

While rejecting a global tax proposed by Mexican President Vicente Fox, Cronin told the Washington Times that the global tax at this time was a non-starter only because no one had figured out how to use it.

"In the right time,” he said, "there could be a serious discussion about global taxes.”

However, NewsMax.com understands that there is a "total skepticism” of anything involving the United Nations at the White House and that there has been no serious discussion there of global taxation.

The Republicans in general are doing precious little to combat the power of this international socialist machine. While Sweeney wields his clout in national and international circles, most GOP politicians are keeping their heads down or hiding under the bed, hoping he won’t get too angry with them.

Recently, conservative activist David Horowitz proposed banning political activities by government employee unions and corporate contractors who do business with the government. He makes the logical argument that "these are walking conflicts of interest.”

But Republicans won’t consider anything like that. They’re too busy hiding. In his book "The War Room,” Horowitz says the left has declared outright blood-sport political war against the GOP. If the Republicans intend to survive and win that war, he warns, they will have to go on offense.

There has to be something more to this.

The Wall Street Journal spent years carping about Beck. Bush rallied for Beck on the campaign trail. Ashcroft mentioned Beck in his confirmation hearings. All the Senators and House Members have talked about Beck.

But nothing is happeneing.

After more than a year with Bush in the White House and Ahscroft as head of DOJ, it can't be bureaucratic inaction.

But what is it?

I'm mystified.

There has to be something more to this.

But nothing is happeneing.

After more than a year with Bush in the White House and Ahscroft as head of DOJ, it can't be bureaucratic inaction.

But what is it?

I'm mystified.

Lower level career civil servants within the Justice Dept. (the Pentagon and elsewhere in Bush's admin.) are mostly as you'd expect in gov., liberals..and can't be fired by President Bush. Employees at the VOA actually said no to the President's request not to play Osama/Taliban news after 9-11 (NPR types) and walked out at this suggestion that our radio station, playing for an international audience, paid for by taxpayers should play pro-American news. Imagine. The DC career types laugh at the "pretense" of anyone but themselves controlling the agenda...they are many, organized and corrupt. Our President and every Republican in DC are surrounded by enemies.

To top it off, Republicans back in their safe homes are quick to do the press's bidding and damn their own party. The Dems. to Reps. are as a cancer to a minor irritation. Freepers who cry after being flamed cannot know how a hate filled diatribe in the NY Times affects one of our own in DC...week after week. They are human - surrounded by those who have sold their humanity.

In order for a union member to assert Beck rights, one must resign from the union. On becoming a nonmember, one pays a reduced dues rate for activities relating to collective bargaining. The union is required to provide a breakdown of this reduced fee and the Beck objector has the right to challenge how this fee was calculated. An arbitrator may deem certain challenged expenses non-chargeable — hence the refund. Beck only applies in non-right to work states because union-security clauses can legally be used in collective bargaining agreements.

The principle enforcer of Beck right now is the National Labor Relations Board. Their track record of enforcing the Beck decision is abysmal. Additionally, the average union member has no idea Beck rights exist. Most who do learn about these rights are afraid to assert them because of all the potential hassles.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.