Shadowbosses: Government Unions Control America and Rob Taxpayers Blind (19 page)

Similarly, when the Obama Administration took over the bankruptcy process for General Motors, it shortchanged the bondholders in favor of the UAW, which also represented the General Motors auto workers. As Speaker Newt Gingrich pointed out, “According to one analysis, while the bondholders will be lucky if they recover 15 cents on the dollar, the UAW can expect to recover up to 60 to 70 cents on the dollar—four to five times what the bondholders will receive.”
⁸²
The UAW argued, “Most bondholders are investors who can spread any losses over a broad portfolio.”
⁸³
In other words, the UAW claimed that only the 1 percent got hurt, and they could take it.

But actually, it wasn’t just the fat cats that got soaked in the auto/UAW bailout. Other victims of the government reorganization were also people like Vicki Denton’s family, as the
Wall Street Journal
reported. Denton died in a car crash when her Dodge’s air bag failed to deploy. Chrysler lost a lawsuit against her family and was judged to owe them $2.2 million. But the family’s right to payment got trampled in the bankruptcy reorganization deal. “Now, two years removed from a $12.5 billion bailout, Chrysler Group LLC still hasn’t paid the damages, and doesn’t have to,” reports the
Journal
. “The reason: The company’s restructuring allowed it to wash away legal responsibility for car-accident victims who had won damages or had pending lawsuits before its bankruptcy filing. The same holds true for General Motors Co.”
⁸⁴

When government employee unions win, there are very real losses to very real people. But those real people don’t include the President or the Democrat Party. As Mitt Romney pointed out, “I think the union folks basically bought and paid for [Obama’s] last campaign, so he’s taking care of them and they’re taking care of him.” And Speaker Newt Gingrich was more specific: “Between 2000 and 2008, the United Auto Workers (UAW) union gave $23,675,562 to the Democratic Party and its candidates. In 2008 alone, the UAW gave $4,161,567 to the Democratic Party, including Barack Obama. In return, the UAW received 55 percent of Chrysler and 17.5 percent of GM, plus billions of dollars. But nobody’s calling this a scandal. It’s time we start.”
⁸⁵

It sure is nice to have a partner in the White House, although some
union bosses have complained that what the President has done for unions has not been enough.

The unions expected a 100 percent commitment to their agenda from Obama, and while the President has delivered a lot of the union agenda, he has fallen short on the unions’ highest legislative priority—card check—and in a few other areas. Union bosses have complained that President Obama sacrificed card check to get Obamacare passed, has supported trade agreements opposed by unions, and has not created enough new jobs, presumably meaning union jobs.

Richard Trumka, head of the AFL-CIO, has been one of President Obama’s most vocal critics in the union movement. In 2011, Trumka, who has been called a “thug’s thug,” criticized Obama for lack of leadership.
⁸⁶
“I think he doesn’t become a leader anymore, and he’s being a follower,” Trumka complained.
⁸⁷
He also claimed the President had been doing “little nibbly things around the edge that aren’t going to make a difference and aren’t going to solve the problem” with a suffering economy instead of offering “bold solutions and some risk taking.” He even threatened to pull the labor movement’s support for Obama and other politicians: “If leaders aren’t blocking the wrecking ball and advancing working families’ interests, then working people will not support them,” Trumka warned.
⁸⁸

Despite his criticisms, Trumka himself had experienced good times under the first Obama Administration. In addition to state dinners and White House visits for Trumka, Obama actually picked him to sit on his jobs advisory council.
⁸⁹
Trumka accompanies Obama on some of his jobs speeches—which is sort of like having Dracula accompany you on your blood drive.
⁹⁰

In March 2012, Trumka jumped back on the Obama bandwagon, and the AFL-CIO endorsed Obama for reelection. Bloomberg reported: “The backing by the group representing 12 million members, less than a year after Trumka said enthusiasm for Obama had waned, suggests unions are warming to a second term.”
⁹¹
And this seems to be the case.

The AFL-CIO’s political director has stated publically that the
union movement would expect even more from President Obama in the near future. “There’s no question that the Obama administration has done many things that have helped working people and that have been positive for the labor movement,” he said. “But on the other hand, this is the Democratic Party; it was elected on a platform to do much, much, much, much more.”
⁹²
For more, the unions will have to wait for a second Obama Administration.

Despite their grumbles with not getting everything that they wanted from the Obama Administration, union bosses lined up to endorse President Obama for reelection and will probably spend even more money on his reelection in 2012 than they spent on his election in 2008. Unions are projected to spend over $400 million on Obama’s reelection, but the figure could ultimately go much higher.
⁹³

Over the July 4 weekend in 2011, Obama secured an early endorsement for reelection from the National Education Association.
⁹⁴
It also passed a resolution that forced a new $10 assessment on members for political activities.
⁹⁵
As columnist Kyle Olson observed, “Some teachers objected, calling it the union’s ‘Obama tax.’… $35.4 million can buy a lot of votes.”
⁹⁶
Shortly after receiving this endorsement, Obama started to pay back the teachers unions by offering more Edujobs spending in his American Jobs Act. The smaller American Federation of Teachers endorsed Obama a bit later, in February 2012.

When the SEIU endorsed Obama for reelection in November 2011, Mary Kay Henry, who succeeded Andy Stern as SEIU president, explained: “As Americans we face [a] stark choice. Do we want leaders who side with rich corporations, the 1 percent who are prospering, or leaders who side with us, the 99 percent?”
⁹⁷
(They don’t just steal your tax dollars—they steal Occupy Wall Street slogans, too.)

SEIU union bosses were well treated during the first Obama Administration. Former president Andy Stern continues to sit on Obama’s deficit panel—ironic, considering that Stern’s union has helped drive America’s deficits to record levels. One commentator likened Stern’s appointment to “a serial arsonist” organizing Fire Prevention Week.
⁹⁸
Former secretary-treasurer Anna Burger was also an Obama appointee
to the Economic Recovery Board of Advisors, working alongside AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka. John Sullivan, SEIU’s associate counsel, was given a seat on the Federal Election Commission. Craig Becker, associate general counsel of SEIU, was appointed by President Obama to a seat on the National Labor Relations Board in a controversial recess appointment over the objection of a bipartisan group of senators. Current and former SEIU union officials are now operating from inside our government—only to shuttle back to the labor movement when Obama finally leaves office, taking with them inside knowledge of how best to pressure government into advancing their agenda.

When the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) endorsed Obama in December 2011, the union also pledged
$100 million
in support for his reelection. Why so much? As AFSCME president Gerald McEntee explained, “President Obama is the only choice for the 99 percent.”
⁹⁹
Are these guys on message, or what?

What will a second Obama Administration hold in store for the unions? Endless new goodies.

We can expect a second Obama Administration would move the unions’ agenda and control over our government workers much, much further. The unions’ greatest dream is that they might one day be able to repeal section 14(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, which permits states to pass right-to-work laws.
¹⁰⁰
Repealing right-to-work laws nationwide through an act of Congress would give the unions twenty-three more states in which to collect forced dues—and could almost double their dues income overnight. It is hard to imagine, but no dream is impossible with a second term for President Obama (and a Democrat House and Senate).

Already, the Obama Administration is also looking at requiring federal agencies to negotiate an expanded list of issues with the government employee unions.
¹⁰¹
This expansion would require agencies to negotiate with unions over the “numbers, types, and grades of employees or positions assigned to any organizational subdivision, work project, or tour of duty,” and “on the technology, methods, and means of performing work.”
¹⁰²
In other words, government employee unions would have a lot more say in staffing and how employees perform their work, which is normally the prerogative of the government employer. What unions know about these issues is anyone’s guess.

Government employee unions continue to expand and increase their control over our nation. But the greatest threat to the people of the United States by far is the undermining of the education system, thanks almost entirely to the teachers union bosses, as we’ll see next.

I
MAGINE sitting in a large room packed with human beings. Imagine that all of them are crying, or praying, or grimacing—because at the front of the room, a man is reaching into a basket of Ping-Pong balls. Each person in the room has been assigned a number. And each of those Ping-Pong balls carries a corresponding number. If your number is drawn, you have a chance at living a better life than your parents had—maybe going to college or to a technical school, getting a good job, making enough money to support yourself. If not, you’ll likely end up dropping out of school, may face limited job prospects, and perhaps end up dependent on the government.

You don’t have to imagine it. Each year, thousands of children across America enter into such lotteries, trying to get into decent public schools. Their normal public schools are educational sinkholes—kids fail out or they pass to the next level through social promotion without having met the learning objectives of the previous grade.

“Either the kids are getting stupider every year, or something is wrong in the education system,” master educator Geoffrey Canada tells the camera in Davis Guggenheim’s 2010 documentary
Waiting for Superman
. Guggenheim—the same man who directed Al Gore’s propaganda film
An Inconvenient Truth
and President Obama’s thirty-minute tribute reel at the 2008 Democratic National Convention—is no conservative. But he recognized that America’s education system is in serious trouble.

Guggenheim points out that although we have doubled the money
that we spend on K–12 schools in recent years, there has been little or no improvement in student performance. In the film, a huge share of the blame falls on the teachers unions—a conclusion Guggenheim desperately did not want to come to. “In this case, I’m a Democrat, and I believe, I really believe in unions, I’m a member of a good union,” he lamented. “So that was an uncomfortable truth for me to have to talk about, but I’ve tried to make a reasonable film.” He notes that “somehow it’s written that you can’t criticize the unions. Otherwise, you hate teachers.”

What’s wrong with the teachers unions? Guggenheim explains that union contracts run to 200 pages and control so many aspects of how our schools are run: “School day ends at 3, principals can’t visit the classroom, can’t fire a teacher, can’t reward another good teacher.”
¹
Teachers union control over schools stops innovation dead in its tracks and stifles creative solutions to our nation’s educational crisis.

This isn’t a partisan issue—Jonathan Alter, liberal columnist for
Newsweek
, puts it well in the film: “It’s very, very important to hold two contradictory ideas in your head at the same time. Teachers are great, a national treasure. Teachers unions are, generally speaking, a menace and an impediment to reform.”