Congress votes for increased union corruption
Posted by BrianFrom The Hill:
Department of Labor Secretary Elaine Chao is criticizing a House vote that cuts funding for an agency that oversees union financial disclosures and is aimed at preventing union corruption.
The House effectively approved cuts to the budget for the Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) late Tuesday night when it rejected an amendment from Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.) that would have restored the budget to its current level. Kline’s amendment was defeated 186-237 on a mostly party-line vote, with eight Democrats breaking ranks.
Labor unions are notoriously corrupt. One can’t even hear the word Teamsters without thinking about persuasion through aggression. The corruption fighting statistics for the OLMS speak for themselves.
Since 2001, OLMS investigations have increased by 20 percent, according to DoL, and convictions are up 26 percent. Courts have ordered the restitution of more than $70 million in union member dues that DoL says were stolen by union officials. OLMS also obtained 760 convictions of union officers and employees, according to information from DoL.
The Democrats with the good sense to vote for the Kline amendment include my own representative, Bud Cramer, as well as other conservative Democrats like Dan Boren (OK) - Boren is a FairTax co-sponsor, by the way - and Heath Shuler (NC). The only member of Alabama’s congressional delegation to vote in favor of increased union corruption was Artur Davis. Sizteen GOP members also voted against the increased funding.
Related content:
July 19th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
I can’t help but think that you are playing a political card here. If the shoe was on the other foot you would have been championing the measure as a cut in government spending.
July 20th, 2007 at 4:45 am
As I’m sure you well know, I’m all for cutting government spending. But in this case the Dems increased the Dept. of Labor budget by nearly $1 billion. The OLMS is the only part of DoL that they cut. It’s not some wasteful entitlement program; its a crime fighting unit that had been getting an excellent return on investment.
I’m anti-union in general. They support the weak at the expense of the strong. They use violence, intimidation, and bribery to seek compensation that they can’t earn. There is no compelling reason to reduce oversight of them at a time when convictions are on the rise.
As far as the shoe being on the other foot, however unlikely that might be, I would not hesitate to condemn Republicans, which I’ve done many times.