Evidence abounds that President Obama’s radical union-backed nominee to the National Labor Relations Board is ACORN tainted.
President Obama’s radical union-backed nominee to the National Labor Relations Board lied to a Senate confirmation panel earlier this week about his ties to the embattled leftist advocacy group ACORN.
The nominee is Craig Becker, who, at least until recently, was longtime associate general counsel to SEIU. Becker is considered radical in part because he believes that “employers should have no role in the unionization process,” according to Brian Johnson, executive director of the Alliance for Worker Freedom.
During a hearing Tuesday by the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) asked Becker this question: “Do you perform work for and provide advice to ACORN or ACORN-affiliated groups while employed by your current employers or on a volunteer basis?”
Becker responded, “Senator McCain, I have never done so.”
But that answer — that Becker “never” provided advice “to ACORN or ACORN-affiliated groups” — is demonstrably false. Evidence abounds that he gave advice to SEIU Local 880, which, as I will show below, was part and parcel of ACORN before it merged with another SEIU bargaining unit.
As the Wall Street Journal noted, Becker acknowledged previously that he had “worked with and provided advice” to Local 880.
And in a blog post last April, ACORN founder Wade Rathke couldn’t help bragging about Becker’s NLRB nomination, calling it “a big win no matter how you shake and bake it.”
Rathke, who is also founder and chief organizer of SEIU Local 100 in New Orleans, reminisced about the good old days. “I can still remember Keith Kelleher negotiating the subsidy for SEIU Local 880 in Chicago and always making sure that there was the money for the organizers, but that SEIU was also still willing to allow access to Craig.”
Local 880 no longer exists. According to “terminal” LM-2 disclosure report (file number 515-963) filed by 880 official Keith Kelleher with the Department of Labor on April 30, the local wound up its affairs on March 31 of last year. It merged with SEIU Healthcare Illinois and Indiana (also known as SEIU HCII).
On the form, Local 880 gave its address as 209 W. Jackson Ave., Suite 200, Chicago, Ill., which just so happens to be in the same building as the national headquarters of ACORN Housing.
Back in the day, SEIU Local 880 was such an important member of the ACORN family of affiliated groups that ACORN listed the local on the “allied organizations” page of its website. The local was included in a list with a select group of major ACORN affiliates such as ACORN Housing and President Obama’s former employer, Project Vote.
Then last spring ACORN abruptly scrubbed the “allied organizations” page and removed all references to the two ACORN-controlled SEIU units, Local 880 and Rathke’s Local 100.
This attempt to rewrite history did not go unnoticed. Kevin Mooney, then a reporter for the Washington Examiner, wrote about the event at the time and I posted a snapshot online of what the web page looked like before it was altered.
Ever since hidden camera videos surfaced in the fall showing ACORN employees acting badly, SEIU has been trying to publicly distance itself from ACORN.
But it is far from clear if SEIU really has severed its ties to ACORN.
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?