What do union campaign contributions to council candidates get the unions?
October 19th, 2009
We recently wrote about how much money had been raised by the people running for the four open Thornton City Council seats. This was done as an exercise in understanding not only how much it costs to run for local office but also where that money comes from.
In looking at the candidate contribution reports, it became very obvious that unions spend big bucks on local elections and more specifically on Thornton elections. The initial reports (click here to view them) show that nearly $10,000 has been given by unions to council candidates. That is a lot of money and considering that represents nearly a full quarter of all campaign contributions given in this election cycle it is worthwhile wondering what that money buys.
- Editor’s note: The contributions listed on the forms only include those as of the date the city posted them. Candidates may very well have received more money from unions after that and candidates that currently do not list any now may as well have received union contributions. Unfortunately we won’t know any other contributions until after the election.
- Related: How much does it cost to run for city council?
Three unions comprise the biggest donors: United Food & Commercial Workers (UFCW), International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).
Today we received some interesting documents that were distributed to candidates from the Denver Area Labor Federation. According to their website, the Federation is “the AFL-CIO Central Labor Council for the Denver Metro Area.”
The documents include a questionnaire which asks a number of questions surrounding union supported issues. These stem from everything from organization, to prevailing wage issues, “worker retention” and on and on. All of course are issues that are set to protect union jobs first and foremost rather than doing what is best for the taxpayer.
Most troubling though is another document titled the “Employee Free Choice Act Support Form.” This act is also commonly known as ‘card check’ and would do away with the secret ballot that workers now enjoy when deciding whether or not to unionize. Instead it also would allow workers to unionize if the union can get 50% or more of the company’s employees to sign cards.
They can simply walk up to worker and ask them to sign the card in a public forum. This obviously introduces intimidation, peer pressure and a whole host of other problems. Once the union reaches the magic 50% number, they are done organizing. The remaining workers never even get a say.
Imagine if your vote in this city council election or any other election was made public? Doesn’t sound like a good thing does it?
- More information: How the Employee Free Choice Act Takes Away Workers’ Rights
The third document we received titled “Denver Area Labor Federation Labor 2009 Candidate Briefing Contact Information” includes contacts from the SEIU, the Communications Workers of America, American Postal Workers Union and others. As such, we assume the information in these questionnaires is shared with a number of different labor groups.
So that begs the question, how did the city council candidates answer the questionnaire and did they sign the “Employee Free Choice Act Support Form”? In particular, it would be interesting to know the responses of those council members that received so much money from unions to help them get elected. Remember though as noted in the Editor’s note above, unions may have given even more money and given it to candidates that haven’t listed the contribution yet.
Their answers will reflect their beliefs and ultimately affect you. It will determine what types of businesses may be welcomed into the city, whether you as a citizen can expect higher costs for goods and services and so much more. A candidate that supports the same issues as the union most likely will be anti-business – not something we need in Thornton during these tough economic times.
Before you cast your ballot, contact them and find out!
- Click here for contact information for the city council candidates
- Click here for more information on which candidates received union contributions
On the net:
2009 City Council Election Coverage
That’s small potatoes compared to the last go round. In the last cycle one candidate (now council member) got $25,000 from unions alone! That’s a lot of money for a local election and it is one of those things that make you go hmmm.
[...] Tony’s Rants Similar Stories What do union campaign contributions to council candidates get the unions? [...]
[...] What do union campaign contributions to council candidates get the unions? [...]
I notice that you do not point out the amount of money developers have donated to the city council candidates. I know in the Ward 4 race Drennen has gotten over $2000.00 in developer money and lobbyist money.
Jo,
Thank you very much for the comment and you are right in that if land developers or any other business entity type has a big stake in the election, it should be known. However, you are incorrect about the donations to Mr. Drennen’s campaign.
When you look at the candidate’s contribution forms, a company may be listed because it is sometimes required. However that doesn’t necessarily mean the donation come from that employer. If I contributed, my employer might be listed but does that mean my employer donated? Of course not. It is a personal contribution.
I took another look at Drennen’s forms (link below) thinking I might have missed something but as I study them, I tallied only $650.00 from ‘developer’ type companies. That is nowhere near the $2,000+ figure you mention.
Another $300 came from his employer which happens to be a construction firm but this would appear to be more of a donation due to his employment as the company has never contributed to Thornton candidates in the past. It wouldn’t be fair to count that one.
When you look at the forms, you have to go by the address. If it is a residential address – as the vast majority of Drennan’s donors have – then it is a personal contribution. It was donated through someone’s personal checking account, not a business. It just so happens that the person’s employer is listed.
So in the end, only 16% of campaign contributions he received came from ‘developer’ type businesses and amounts to much less than the union money that has been put into the campaign.
Again, just to remind everyone, I linked directly to the City of Thornton’s site which has the donor forms available for download. You are certainly welcome to check them out yourselves. I encourage everyone to be educated about the candidates before they vote!
Thanks again!
Tony
http://www.cityofthornton.net/cclk/Election/Election_Reports.asp
Mr Tony, You are very niave. Developers and lobbyist are very aware that a personal donation means personal favors. Developers do have employees donate to candidates that will favor projects in the city. I also notice that you deleted part of my comment. It is a shame that a small amount of critism is threatening enough to delete.
Naive? Perhaps. But are you saying you don’t believe the same can be said about union contributions? Of course not. Justifying one evil by pointing out another really accomplishes nothing and isn’t much of an argument.
As for deleting part of your comment, I certainly did no such thing. Please remember that you posted two similar comments on two different stories. I believe that the one you are looking for was posted on this story:
http://www.tonysrants.com/thornton/how-much-does-it-cost-to-run-for-city-council/
Having said that, I was disappointed at the personal attack and accusation that you launched there. By all rights the last part of the comment probably should have been deleted as it contains an accusation that has no proof behind and steps over the lines that I normally allow on here – no matter which side says it.
In the past have deleted similarly inflammatory and inaccurate comments as I find them offensive. I wholeheartedly encourage debate but the personal attacks are wrong. Further, when I do delete / edit a comment, I always leave a note saying why.
It is interesting how rather than justify their own contributors, people like Jo try to turn things around in an attempt to distract from the original issue.
Jo/Tony,
I’m always happy to clarify any questions about anything contained on my financial reports or anything else related to my campaign for that matter.
With regard to the claims made by “Jo” in the comment, I simply can’t agree with or draw the same conclusion. I looked at my report again and would gladly stipulate that $1150.00 of my total contributions came from a variety of development based companies or individuals. Not one of these contributions exceeds $300 individually. So none of them exceed 8% of the total I raised. Furthermore, in total they represent less than 30% of the total raised by the campaign.
I’m happy to take responsibility for these reports and the information contained within. Your facts are simply incorrect and unsupported and your conclusion that I’ve been “bought” is entirely unfounded.
For the record, my campaign also has ties to a union organization (as this was the basis for the original article) although they are not financial and do not show up on the finance report. I’m proud to be endorsed by the Thornton Professional Firefighters Local 2376.
Check out Charles Stevenson’s ad in the Sentinel this week. Apparently the unions approve of him as the ad has logos of the SEIU, AFSCME, DALF, and IBEW. It’s really too bad the next campaign finance reports don’t come out until after the election. It would be interesting to see how much they gave him.
[...] City council members that have received significant campaign contributions from organized labor managed to pass a resolution providing “meet and confer” recognition of unions granting them the ability to represent employees in what amounts to something just short of collective bargaining. These council members pushed this through despite the potential cost to their constituents (you the taxpayer) and the fact that employees had not even asked for it. [...]
[...] City council members that have received significant campaign contributions from organized labormanaged to pass a resolution providing “meet and confer” recognition of unions granting them the ability to represent employees in what amounts to something just short of collective bargaining. These council members pushed this through despite the potential cost to their constituents (you the taxpayer) and the fact that employees had not even asked for it… (Read Entire Article) [...]
[...] they pushed aside what is best for the city and their constituents and put the unions first. Councilman Goodman, Councilman Val Vigil, and the others who have accepted thousands of dollars from…, will rake in much more and the taxpayers foot the [...]