A Massive Incumbent Protection Program by Brad Peck

by Brad Peck @ the Chamber Post

Unions to spend big on the status quo:

    At least two influential unions will spend close to $100 million on the 2010 election, with most of those funds going to protect incumbents. Union officials told The Hill they plan to help endangered members — particularly freshmen — who made politically difficult votes in a year during which an anti-incumbent mood has filled the country. And the number will be even higher since the AFL-CIO declined to give its figures.

    The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) plans to spend in excess of $50 million during the 2010 campaign, part of which will fund “a massive incumbent protection program,” according to Gerry McEntee, president of the union. AFSCME spent roughly $67 million on its political activities in 2008. But the $50 million slated for the 2010 elections is the largest expenditure the union will make in a midterm election, according to union officials. The money will go to help defend the union’s top tier of eight Senate seats and 34 House members.

    The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) plans to spend $44 million in total on its 2010 election program. The union spent $85 million on its 2008 campaign, according to union officials...“In the past, we have not paid as much attention to incumbent protection as we have this year,” said Jon Youngdahl, national political director for the SEIU. “In the past, decisions were made on electoral opportunities and this year decisions are being made on the healthcare reform accountability.”

    A third labor group said it plans to spend big in 2010 but wouldn’t get into specific numbers. Karen Ackerman, the AFL-CIO’s political director, told reporters on Wednesday that the labor federation will be active in 18 states, will campaign in gubernatorial and Senate races and will likely have a role in 60 to 70 House races this election. She declined to give a dollar amount.

No dollar amount, but we know that it is "even more than the $53 million laid out in 2008 to elect President Obama and Democratic majorities in the House and Senate."

Hmmm...where have I heard the phrase incumbent protection before?  Oh right, it was this Elena Kagan quote:

"Campaign finance laws...easily can serve as incumbent-protection devices, insulating current officeholders from challenge and criticism. When such laws apply only to certain speakers or subjects, the danger of illicit motive becomes even greater..."

Indeed it would seem illicit if we were to suddenly see new campaign finance laws proposed that would impose "stifling regulatory pressures" on some speakers and not on others, particularly if the speakers exempted from such pressures historically spent over 90% of their money supporting the party proposing the legislation. Illicit, immoral, cynical, despotic, un-constitutional...so many adjectives, none of them good.

[James Moore]

There was a time when I was a union steward. I never lost a greivance that I filed. However, the unions have outlived their usefulness, and are no longer needed by anyone, except the democraps, and the union higher-ups. Oh yes, I forgot, obammy needs them--boy, does he need them.

[William L. Hart Jr.]

Google; Primary Challenge and Flush For Freedom for your Liberty!
While voting this term and the ones after that, think of pulling the voting lever as that on a giant toilet. Think of the whooshing sound. Think of hundreds of incumbents flushing down the political toilet.
Haaa such a day, I dream!
...to the revolution!
FREEDOM IS NEVER FREE be vigilant and keep fighting for it.
Bill, a 48%er!
MOLON LABE!

[151t0hkvrha04]

They can spend all the money they want,it will be useless come election day.
The American People see through "The Money" anymore,and what they see is not good.

[Wiccanwolf]

If the people are fed up with a scumbag politician, the unions can wast all of their money and the person will still lose. I agree the unions need to be busted up because they no longer look out for the worker, but what the worker can get for them.

[Denis Parton]

The really insidious part of this is that they recieved this money from the TARP. That money was never spent as intended, and they kept it as a trillion dollar slush fund to pay back their supporters. Now it can be used to retain power and corrupt the system even further. If anyone has a doubt about this- you should check into it. Try to find where it was originally spent, and when some of that money was returned it was put into the slush fund-not retired from publis debt.