Government oversight of unions is the only area where the Obama administration favors budget cuts and less regulation.
The Obama administration has delivered a strong message to crooked union bosses everywhere: happy days are here again.
On Thursday President Obama, who has pledged to usher in a new era of fiscal responsibility, touted $17 billion in proposed cuts to his $3.4 trillion budget. The media noted that about half of the reductions came out of the defense budget, but lost in most reports is the fact that the administration also slashed funding for the only entity in government tasked with policing unions.
Under the leadership of Secretary Elaine Chao from 2001 through this January, the Labor Department beefed up the Office of Labor-Management Standards. During this time, the division’s actions led to 929 convictions of corrupt union officials and to the recovery of more than $93 million on behalf of union members. Yet the Obama administration has proposed slashing the unit’s budget by more than 9 percent, from $45 million in 2009 to $41 million in 2010.
Funding for the agency, which was created in 1959 as part of legislation to root out union corruption, represents a tiny fraction of the projected $13.3 billion 2010 Labor Department budget.
It would be one thing if the reduction were part of a broader belt-tightening throughout the Department of Labor, but the administration boosted funding for the Wage and Hour Division, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration - all of which regulate businesses.
“The administration is cutting the budget of the only agency in government that monitors labor union activity, while at the same time ratcheting up the budget of all other enforcement agencies against employers,” Chao told TAS in reaction to the news.
The OLMS budget cuts come on the heels of a recent decision by the Labor Department to loosen union financial disclosure rules, a blow to transparency that will make it more difficult for union members to examine the finances of the organizations to which they are paying dues, as well as the conflicts of interest of labor leaders.
The Obama administration’s hands-off policy toward big labor should not come as much of a surprise. Unions played a key role in Obama’s election by helping him with fundraising and organizing, and his choice for Labor Secretary, Hilda Solis, has a cozy relationship with unions.
Solis was first elected to Congress in 2000 as a union candidate, and as a member of the House of Representatives from 2001 until this year, she racked up perfect or near perfect vote ratings from every major union. She also served as treasurer of American Rights at Work, a pro-labor group that maintained the “Shame on Elaine” attack website aimed at her predecessor, Chao.
In its justification for the OLMS cut, the Obama administration asserted that, “Since 2001, OLMS’ budget has increased by almost 50 percent, without commensurate increases in workload.”
But Don Todd, deputy assistant secretary at OLMS from 2001 through this January, dismissed the Obama administration’s claim.
“They’re just talking through their hats,” Todd said “They’re trying to justify the unjustifiable, and that is they don’t want oversight of unions.”
During the Clinton administration, the staff of the division dwindled by more than a quarter and the number of audits performed on unions dropped 70 percent.
“From 1992 to 2000, the Office of Labor-Management Standards was significantly weakened to the point where it couldn’t carry out its legislative function - to protect the rights of rank and file members,” Chao said.
During Chao’s time at the Department of Labor, the number of audits that the agency performed on unions went up roughly fourfold from where they were by the end of the Clinton administration.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online