General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOnline debate help: Do unions have the right to give their funds to political candidates?
I thought this was illegal. An idiot (whose party affiliation you'd never guess ) just said that unions are free to give their money to candidates. I thought that was illegal.
Help sought before I descend into slaying this jackanapes.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Unions represent the workers, the people. They are free to donate as much as anyone else. The right to donate doesn't just reside with the Koch Brothers you know.
Bucky
(54,013 posts)Do you know if unions can donate unlimited funds directly to candidates like private citizens now can?
Triloon
(506 posts)Unions may not use funds from membership dues towards political campaigns, that is illegal under federal law. But Unions may collect voluntary contributions from the membership separately from dues to support political purposes. Anti-Union types make no distinction between these two activities, dues collection and pac contribution collection, but the distinction is very real and no one contributes political money against their wishes.
So it's a lie to say union dues go to political action committees?
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)Which is a good thing...imagine having no choice about your money going to a republican candidate. ...there are more right leaning unions than you think.
It is not true, ever.
former9thward
(32,009 posts)Unions have PACs funded by voluntary contributions. As do corporations. Citizens United freed unions to do campaigns for a candidate as long as they do not directly coordinate with the candidate. That is why the AFL-CIO filed a brief in support of Citizens United.
alp227
(32,025 posts)former9thward
(32,009 posts)Union dues are broken down into what part is actually meant for labor relations with the company and everything else. Often unions ask members to sign an agreement to give money to a PAC. Once they have signed it is automatically renewed forever. So it is a little complicated, as is everything, and there are fair arguments supporting either side.
Bucky
(54,013 posts)But I've had a good run of slapping down this wingnut and his monkeyheaded misinformation over the past couple of weeks. A couple of times I've taunted him with comments like "You notice how I keep responding to your sweeping generalizations with specific facts that show you're fully of baloney? Does that ever embarrass you?" Unfortunately that also raises the accuracy bar on what I can say in our arguments, too. So I appreciate you helping me out with the good fight.
alp227
(32,025 posts)Center for Union Facts, etc. have perpetrated this myth, as a google search of keywords union dues political contributions shows. That's "The University of Google" as Jenny McCarthy puts it, for ya.
This Congressional Research Service study about the topic:
In a line of decisions, the Supreme Court has addressed this issue and has concluded that compulsory union dues of non-members may not be used for political and ideological activities that are outside the scope of the unions collective bargaining and labor-management duties when non-members object to such use.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)But it's your world.
former9thward
(32,009 posts)That has been the case since 1912. Both may indirectly contribute through PACs.
Response to Bucky (Original post)
Capt. Obvious This message was self-deleted by its author.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)idendoit
(505 posts)It is legal. Now fall on your sword.