According to the AFL-CIO’s Washington DC Metro Council website, “Actions are currently being planned for noontime andafter work on Friday, February 10.”

Apparently, the unions plans to attempt to disrupt the conference with rats, puppets, and more:

WE’VE HEARD ENOUGH FROM THE 1%! Join the rally featuring tents, an inflatable fat cat, puppets, “candidate Walmart,” and more to LET THE VOICES OF THE 99% BE HEARD!

There is also a Facebook page for Occupy CPAC, posted by Change to Win staffer, Trina Tocco. It is important to note that Change to Win is the SEIU-led federation that broke away from the AFL-CIO in 2005—which means both union federations are involved in planning the attacks on CPAC.

Unlike the Americans for Prosperity event, where #OccupyDC violently protested outside Washington Convention Center, as well as tried to lock attendees into the building, CPAC’s event is at the Marriott Wardman Park, which is on private property and is set back from the street.

Therefore, if the AFL-CIO, Change to Win and their #Occupy goon squads do attempt to storm the hotel, while it may not immediately address any of those union occupiers who are inside the event, DC police should be able to keep them from gaining access from the street.

Stay tuned…

__________________

“Socialism has no place in the hearts of those who would secure the fight for freedom and preserve democracy.” Samuel Gompers, American Federation of Labor, 1918

Cross-posted on LaborUnionReport.com

However, since Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels signed Right-to-Work legislation on Wednesday, making the Hoosier State the nation’s 23rd Right-to-Work state and, coincidentally, Ohio’s Attorney General approved language that will allow a Ron Paul supporter and Tea Party consultant to use his “Ohioans for Workplace Freedom” to gather signatures to put Right-to-Work legislation on Ohio’s November ballot, perhaps it’s time we explore what’s right and what’s wrong with Right to Work.

What is Right-to-Work? First, for those unfamiliar with Right-to-Work laws, it is easy to be misled by the hyperbole often thrown around (mostly by unions and their allies) that Right-to-Work has anything to do with anything other than the collection of union dues. It doesn’t.

Very simply, Right-to-Work laws outlaw a union’s ability to require employees to pay union dues (or agency fees) as a condition of employment. In states without Right-to-Work laws (known as Non-Right-to-Work states), it is legal for a company and a union to agree to a contract that requires every employee in the bargaining unit to pay dues or be fired.

For a union, the ability to collect union dues is the lifeblood of the union; it is how unions function, it is how they get paid. Therefore, the inability to require dues for their services (whether good or bad) threatens their very existence which is why, very often, unions in Non-Right-to-Work states will strike over their ability to collect dues.

As importantly, it should be noted that, since Right-to-Work laws only came about as a result of the 1947 Taft-Hartley Amendments to the National Labor Relations Act, Right-to-Work laws apply only to companies and employees covered under the NLRA. They do not apply, for example, to airline and railroad companies and employees, since they are covered under the Railway Labor Act. This is why airline workers in Texas (or any other Right-to-Work state) can be required to pay union dues as a condition of employment.

• Note: Even in Non-Right-to-Work states, it is possible to removed forced dues from a union contract through a ‘Deauthorization Election.’

The Union Argument. For unions, there is a legitimate issue that arises with Right-to-Work laws and that is the requirement to represent so-called “free loaders”—those employees who pay nothing to the union, but are “entitled” to union representation as well as “enjoy” (or suffer) the union-negotiated wages and benefits. This, however, is part of the problem with the foundation of the National Labor Relations Act.

Since the enactment of both the RLA and NLRA, unions have been granted “monopoly bargaining power” privileges, or the ability (or right) to represent entire bargaining units (even those who don’t want the union). However, this fundamental problem cannot be addressed unless federal labor laws are entirely re-written or eliminated.

The double-edged sword of monopoly bargaining power is that unions in Right-to-Work states are required to represent non-members as well as well as dues-paying members. To a union representative, it is frustrating to have a “free loader” demand a grievance be filed on his behalf over something as benign as a vending machine continually being broken and taking his money, all the while knowing that this individual will never join the union or pay union dues, not out of ideology, but because he is cheap. [Yes, this actually happened.]

The Upside of Right to Work. The economic impact of enacting Right-to-Work laws has been largely beneficial to those states as they do attract more business and incomes do rise. In that regard, because there is less union density in Right-to-Work states, unions decrying the fact that Right-to-Work entices companies to leave Non-Right-to-Work states is accurate.

In Indiana’s case, according to one study:

…if Indiana had adopted such a law in 1977, by 2008 per capita income would have been $2,925 higher—equating to $11,700 higher for a family of four.  Another way to put it: Indiana’s personal income in 2008 would have been $241.9 billion, 8.4 percent more than the actual $223.2 billion. Nearly $19 billion in annual income was lost because of Indiana’s lack of a right to work law.

• Related: Right to Work States Benefit From Faster Growth, Higher Real Purchasing Power – 2011 Update

Just as importantly, unions in Non-Right-to-Work states often use union dues to fund political activities to elect anti-business politicians [mostly Democrats] who, in turn, chase more businesses away by creating more burdensome regulations and higher taxes. Ironically, the more unions are successful in Non-Right-to-Work states, the more it hurts them by making “union states” less attractive to business investment and, as a result, less jobs are created (if not lost). [See California, for example.]

The Downside to Right-to-Work. While Right-to-Work laws do have real economic benefits, unionized workplaces in those states are often rife with division between union dues payers and non-members. Very often, non-members in those workplaces are subject to harassment or harangued by union members and, occasionally, a “bounty” is placed upon them by union officials to try to get members to sign up non-members.

• In the 80s, our union paid between $15 and $25 per new member, although other unions pay more today.

Legislative Action Vs. Ballot Initiative

With Indiana’s passage of Right-to-Work legislation yesterday, the Hoosier State’s AFL-CIO boss, Nancy Guyott, shouted from the Statehouse steps, “We’ll take our state back, one citizen at a time! You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.”

It is worthwhile to note this because, in Indiana’s case, the Right-to-Work legislation was passed over and above the tantrums of union-bought Democrats. During the fight inside the Statehouse, union-bought Democrats attempted to have Right-to-Work placed on the ballot in November.

The purpose of this effort was simple. Union-bought Democrats like to ignore the fact that the United States is a Republican-form of Democracy. If given the opportunity to have Right-to-Work placed on November’s ballot, unions would spend tens of millions of their members’ money on deceptive advertising to defeat the legislation, as well as to turn out votes for Barack Obama and against “those evil Republicans.” In effect, it is running two campaigns for the price of one.

This brings us back to Ohio. Ron Paul supporter and Tea Party consultant Chris Littleton is spearheading an effort to put Right-to-Work on Ohio’s November ballot. If successful in getting enough signatures to have the initiative placed on the ballot, Littleton and his compadres will likely do nothing more than ensure an Obama victory in Ohio.

With unions collecting more than $8 billion per year in union dues, no amount of money Littleton can raise will be enough to outspend the unions on the issue Right-to-Work—as evidenced by the recent fight over SB5 (Issue 2) in November.

In fact, union bosses and Democrats are likely hoping for Littleton to get enough signatures to put Right-to-Work on the ballot. [Don't be too surprised if unions, either directly or indirectly through third-party operatives, quietly encourage people to sign the petitions.] Once Right-to-Work is on the ballot, unions can turn Ohio into World War IV (again).

Regardless of the amount of money Littleton and his associates may make from putting Right-to-Work on Ohio’s ballot, his efforts put the rest of the nation at risk of seeing Barack Obama win Ohio and, as a result, likely re-election. This is something that, hopefully, even Littleton’s presidential pick, Ron Paul, would see the practical ramifications of avoiding if it meant putting Obama back in the White House for four more years.

• Even though Ron Paul has been cagey on stating he would not run as a third-party candidate, his son, Rand Paul, has stated that it would be impractical, knowing that it would ensure an Obama victory. Hopefully, his Ohio supporters are as practical in that regard when it comes to placing Right-to-Work on November’s Ohio ballot.

As the saying goes: “Pick battles big enough to matter, small enough to win.” Or, in the case of Ohio, another way to put this is: Forego the battle for now, if it helps you win the war later.

With the nation nearing $16 trillion in debt and owing $117 trillion in unfunded liabilities, despite the legislature in Indiana winning Right to Work, putting a Right-to-Work initiative in Ohio is not worth the risk. Not now. Not this year.

Related:

• Right-to-Work is a Bandaid
• ‘Collective Bargaining’ is Compulsory Bargaining

__________________

“I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.” Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776

Cross-posted on LaborUnionReport.com

Commenters across the web provided their take on the membership numbers with the Heritage Foundation’s James Sherk providing perhaps the best analysis as to why union membership keeps falling.

Deregulation and free trade have since made the economy more competitive, giving Americans more choices. Now Americans can buy from whomever offers the most value. Unfortunately for the union movement, that company is often nonunion.

One particularly interesting commentary on the BLS numbers was that from former co-founder of ACORN and ex-SEIU bigwig Wade Rathke, who opined that private-sector union membership might fall as low as 5% “unless something serious and drastic happens.”

Apparently, to Rathke, a National Labor Relations Board stacked with union lawyers bent on shaping the law to accommodate their employers and clients is not drastic enough; nor, apparently, is having a President of the United States giving away taxpayer money to subsidize unionized industries.

Notwithstanding Rathke’s ominous 5% prediction, that, however, was not the interesting part of his statement.

What was extremely interesting was the nut that Rathke dropped by implying the AFL-CIO may have misled, duped, or otherwise tricked people into joining its community organizing project called Working America and is using those fallacious numbers in reporting to the BLS.

Here is Rathke’s comments [emphasis added] in context.

Bureau of Labor Statistics announced another slight drop last year of union membership compared to the overall non-farm workforce from 11.9 to 11.8%.   Steven Greenhouse in the Times reports that union membership is now 14,760,000.  The public sector percentage was 37% and about 7,560,000 and the private sector percentage is now only 6.9% with about 7,200,000.  Private sector membership is clearly heading towards 5%, unless something serious and drastic happens.

The numbers could have been worse.  There is speculation that the AFL-CIO is claiming 3,000,000 members from its Working America unit as part of their membership totals, which would be wild, since these are “canvassed” members rather than “real” dues paying members in local unions around the country.

Then, there is this…

There are still scars on the ears of AFL-CIO staffers from 2008 who did phonebanking to the call list with that group and heard in no uncertain terms from many of these “members” that they had no idea they were part of a union?!?

If Rathke is accurate, and there’s no reason to believe otherwise, not only is the AFL-CIO using 3,000,000 non-dues paying members of a community affiliate of the AFL-CIO to pump up its numbers for the BLS—but many of these “members” did not know they are part of a “union.”

Now, one could wonder how people could be part of a union without knowing they’re part of a union. Well, one way could be to sucker sign up people who are interested in things like #OccupyWallSt and offer them a free bumper sticker:

Or, another way to dupe people into becoming a quasi-union member is to put it in very fine print—like the following language at the bottom of a webpage calling for action:

By participating in this campaign you become a member of Working America, a powerful voice for working people.

Of course, in 2008, there was no OccupyWallSt. However, there was a large push toward nationalization of the health care industry and, according to the Washington Times, Working America had set up a website called “Health Care Hustle.” However, with the exception of the small reference to the AFL-CIO in the logo, there is no indication that by joining Working America one would also be joining the AFL-CIO.

Given the disingenuousness of today’s union bosses, nothing should be all that surprising any more—except, however, to those who may have been duped into being part of the AFL-CIO without their realizing it.

__________________

“Socialism has no place in the hearts of those who would secure the fight for freedom and preserve democracy.” Samuel Gompers, American Federation of Labor, 1918

 Cross-posted on LaborUnionReport.com

Although Stern became a corporate insider soon after his departure from the union movement, to many, he still remains the public face of the SEIU. This is despite the fact that there is a far lesser known and much more powerful SEIU operative running both the Democrat National Committee, as well as Barack Obama’s re-election campaign machine, Organizing for America.

Meet Patrick Gaspard. In an e-mail last week from 1199SEIU to its members, the union begins with: “In a series of recent interviews, our brother Patrick Gaspard discusses the presidential election…” Outside of the Beltway Bubble and the SEIU, few people know who Patrick Gaspard is, nor do they know just how politically powerful he really is.

Currently, Gaspard is the Executive Director of the Democratic National Committee and, according to a 2009 Huffington Post piece, Gaspard “may very well be the most brilliant strategist and organizer you have never heard of.” As a life-long community organizer, 44-year old Patrick Gaspard is one of the most powerful, outwardly unassuming, as well as unknown figures to those residing outside Washington, DC.

Described as Obama’s Karl Rove, Gaspard has been involved in politics since Jesse Jackson’s presidential bid in 1989 and, until Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign, bounced back and forth between political campaigns, community organizing assignments, as well climbing to the top of one of America’s most powerful union locals as Executive Vice President of New York’s 1199SEIU. In fact, it was Gaspard’s former boss at 1199SEIU, Dennis Rivera, who ran the Left’s war room from SEIU headquarters in Washington while the Obama administration’s takeover of America’s health care was being debated.

Although Gaspard’s rise through the political playing field of the Left included stints working for individuals like Howard Dean, New York’s David Dinkins, Ruth Messinger and Margarita Lopez, he has also worked for George Soros’s America Coming Together (a precursor to the DNC’s Organizing for America), the Working Families Party, and has close ties with ACORN’s Bertha Lewis.

It wasn’t until 2008, however, that Gaspard went from union boss and part-time political operative to kingmaker. Prior to joining the Obama campaign in June 2008, according to a New York Observer article, Gaspard quietly worked to block an SEIU endorsement of then-candidate John Edwards and push his union toward  Barack Obama before he finally joined Obama’s campaign as political director.

After his fellow community organizer was elected as President of the United States, Gaspard became Obama’s Director of the Office of Political Affairs inside the White House in January 2009. It was there that Gaspard quietly became known as Obama’s “glue man.”

According to the New York Observer article, Gaspard is the man who quietly gets things done for Barack Obama.

“He’s become a real player in the White House, the president himself told me,” said Representative Gregory Meeks.  “He’s a low key, behind-the-scenes, no-fingerprints kind of guy. I need something, I call Patrick. And if he calls, it’s a big deal. He’s close to the president.”

[snip]

“Don’t be mistaken about him being a gentleman–don’t even go there,” said Ms. [Margarita] Lopez. “When a situation got to a point that there was no resolution I would reach Patrick and say, ‘Go for it, and bring me no hostages, this battle is going to be won with no hostages.’ And I can tell you Patrick delivered every single time.” [Emphasis added.]

In January 2011, nearly two-full years before the 2012 presidential election, Patrick Gaspard was dispatched from the White House to become the Democratic National Committee’s Executive Director and responsible for the DNC’s campaign machine, Organizing for America. Gaspard’s move followed the Tea Party-led retaking of the U.S. House of Representatives by the Republican Party and, for the last year, Gaspard has been working quietly behind the scenes to shore up Obama’s chances at winning a second term.

Earlier this month, BusinessWeek describes the results of Gaspard and the DNC’s handiwork:

The biggest presidential primary campaign team in New Hampshire is tucked on a Manchester side street inside a four-story brick building and it belongs to the best-financed candidate seeking nomination: President Barack Obama.

The office is one of seven in the state and his re-election campaign has about 20 paid employees. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, the two front-runners in the Republican presidential primary after they emerged first and second in the Iowa caucuses, each have one office.

[snip]

Evidence of the Obama re-election campaign’s extensive ramp-up program lies beyond New Hampshire. There are 62 “tested, trained and mobilized neighborhood teams” in Michigan and 71 in Colorado, Messina said in a Jan. 4 conference call with reporters. The re-election operation has contacted more than 511,000 voters in Nevada and the Florida branch has organized 2,633 events such as door-to-door canvasses and phone banks.

“One of the most important things to remember about New Hampshire is that we never left,” said Frank Benenati, an Obama campaign spokesman, referring to “networks and relationships” built over two and a half years by Organizing for America, the president’s political arm outside the White House. Benenati said the primary is a way to “further expand our organization.”

Below is one of the two videos of Patrick Gaspard sent out by 1199SEIU to its members [the other is here].

[Note for those political observers who think that defeating Obama will be easy: At the four-minute mark, Gaspard begins a discussion about the Obama campaign's mobilization efforts in New Hampshire, Iowa and elsewhere. You should watch it, then get busy.]

“Socialism has no place in the hearts of those who would secure the fight for freedom and preserve democracy.” Samuel Gompers, American Federation of Labor, 1918

Hat-tip: Trevor Loudon

Cross-posted at LaborUnionReport.com

In fact, if Obama’s union appointees have their way, all employees who are targeted for unionization will have their employers forced to turn over their home telephone number and e-mail addresses to unions.

Ever since the 1960s, when unions have targeted companies for unionization through a NLRB-supervised election, employers have been required to turn over the list of employee names and their home addresses. The NLRB, in turn, promptly gives the list of employee names and home addresses to the involved union(s).

This list, called an Excelsior List, gives union organizers the ability to conduct intrusive home visits prior to the NLRB election. As is often said, just as when any other salesperson doing door-to-door sales knocks at the door, targeted employees can invite the union organizers into their homes, or they can sic the chihuahua on them.

The requirement to furnish the employees’ names and addresses list is mandatory. In fact, the refusal by an employer to furnish the list (or providing a list with too many errors) would typically result in the NLRB’s automatic overturning of an election if a union were to lose. Again, this requirement has been the standard since the 1960s.

Now, however, the union appointees within the Obama NLRB want to expand the current Excelsior List requirement from the mere furnishing of names and addresses to also include furnishing employees’ home telephone numbers and their e-mail addresses to enable unions to perpetually propagandize employees.

• Related: The Truth About False Union Promises.

According to the AP report:

“We keep our eye on the prize,” Pearce said in an interview with The Associated Press. “Our goal is to create a set of rules that eliminate a lot of waste of time, energy and money for the taxpayers.”

One change Pearce wants is to require businesses to hand over lists of employee phone numbers and emails to union leaders before an election.

He also wants the board to consider other rule changes it didn’t have time to approve before it was on the verge of losing a quorum last year. That includes the use of electronic filings and quicker timetables for certain procedures.

“My personal hope is that we take on all of these things and consider each one of these rules,” Pearce said. “We presume the constitutionality of the president’s appointments, and we go forward based on that understanding.”

With ambush elections looming on the horizon, as long as Obama’s NLRB continues its assault on union-free employers and their employees (and as long as Republicans remain unwilling to, or incapable of truly reining in the rogue NLRB), as opposed to creating jobs Barack Obama’s alleged goal of creating jobs will remain elusive. Still, the union bureaucrats within the federal apparatchik don’t seem to understand this simple fact.

_________________

“Socialism has no place in the hearts of those who would secure the fight for freedom and preserve democracy.” Samuel Gompers, American Federation of Labor, 1918

Cross-posted at LaborUnionReport.com

In 2011, union bosses and other outside groups spent tens of millions of dollars in a failed attempt to recall six Republican state senators and are spending millions more now trying to recall Scott Walker.

The millions union bosses are now spending—paid for by union members throughout the country—has Democrats getting nervous that the money spent might strain union coffers too much prior to the November elections.

According to the Hill:

Unions have made ousting Walker a top priority and are poised to spend heavily in Wisconsin. But Democratic strategists and some senior political experts within the labor movement believe the initiative should have been launched before the November presidential election.

Labor officials are also looking at investing resources in Indiana, a red-leaning state, to battle controversial right-to-work legislation backed by Gov. Mitch Daniels (R).

But the Wisconsin fight will consume far more resources. This is a stomach-churning prospect for Democrats and their allies because the labor expenditures could come just months before the general election, when money will be needed for more important battlegrounds such as Ohio and Florida.

As union bosses continue to pour money into Wisconsin, union members nationwide may begin to wonder if, in fact that is money well spent—especially since, Scott Walker’s poll numbers are still ahead of his (potential) Democratic rivals.

According to a new Marquette Law School poll the governor leads Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, a likely candidate, 50 percent to 44 percent. He leads former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk, the only declared Democratic candidate, 49 percent to 42 percent margin, former Rep. David Obey 49 percent to 43 percent and state Sen. Tim Cullen 50 percent to 40 percent.

After a year of union and left-wing attacks, most Wisconsinites know the issues well by now. As a result, as union bosses dump more and more money that would otherwise be earmarked for other Democrat races, it is not likely to affect Walker’s poll numbers too dramatically, which may prove to be a win-win for Republicans around the country and in Wisconsin.

__________________

“Socialism has no place in the hearts of those who would secure the fight for freedom and preserve democracy.” Samuel Gompers, American Federation of Labor, 1918

Cross-posted at LaborUnionReport.com

Actually, with the exception of Obama’s promise to sign a law making Congressional insider trading illegal [Martha Stewart may have some resort recommendations for Nancy Pelosi], listening to Obama’s SOTU speech really was listening to his other speeches, as this RNC video points out.

__________________

“Socialism has no place in the hearts of those who would secure the fight for freedom and preserve democracy.” Samuel Gompers, American Federation of Labor, 1918

Most people know the name George Soros, the mastermind behind…well, a lot of stuff.

Sitting in his 33rd-floor corner office high above Seventh Avenue in New York, preparing for his trip to Davos, he is more concerned with surviving than staying rich. “At times like these, survival is the most important thing,” he says, peering through his owlish glasses and brushing wisps of gray hair off his forehead. He doesn’t just mean it’s time to protect your assets. He means it’s time to stave off disaster. As he sees it, the world faces one of the most dangerous periods of modern history—a period of “evil.” Europe is confronting a descent into chaos and conflict. In America he predicts riots on the streets that will lead to a brutal clampdown that will dramatically curtail civil liberties. The global economic system could even collapse altogether.

“I am not here to cheer you up. The situation is about as serious and difficult as I’ve experienced in my career,” Soros tells Newsweek. “We are facing an extremely difficult time, comparable in many ways to the 1930s, the Great Depression. We are facing now a general retrenchment in the developed world, which threatens to put us in a decade of more stagnation, or worse. The best-case scenario is a deflationary environment. The worst-case scenario is a collapse of the financial system.” [Emphasis added]

US Debt: $15.2 Trillion (and rising)

Unfunded liabilities: $117 Trillion (and rising)

Liability per taxpayer: $1,038,838 (and rising)

Bankruptcy: Not if, but when?

Source: U.S. Debt Clock.

Reminder: President Obama’s State of the Union Address starts at 9 pm EST. He is expected to make his re-election pitch in order to “finish the job.”

_________________

“Socialism has no place in the hearts of those who would secure the fight for freedom and preserve democracy.” Samuel Gompers, American Federation of Labor, 1918

Cross-posted on LaborUnionReport.com

Founded in 2006, the BlueGreen Alliance is a political pairing of left-wing unions and environmental groups whose mission (so to speak) is to ensure that America’s conversion to a green economy results in union jobs as jobs in industries like coal are destroyed.

Included among its stated goals are passage of cap and trade legislation, as well as the Employee Free Choice Act (aka card-check unionization).

According to the Laborers’ union press release announcing the union’s departure from the BlueGreen Alliance on Friday afternoon, at least Laborers’ president Terry O’Sullivan seems to be understanding the Devil’s pact union bosses have made by sacrificing their members’ jobs in exchange for an economically-unrealistic “green” economy:

“AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka recently said there was a divide in the labor movement over this project,” LIUNA General President Terry O’Sullivan said. “That is an understatement. That divide is as deep and wide as the Grand Canyon. We’re repulsed by some of our supposed brothers and sisters lining up with job killers like the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council to destroy the lives of working men and women.” [Emphasis added.]

Specifically, O’Sullivan was referencing the CWA, SEIU, UAW, Transport Workers Union, United Steelworkers Union and Amalgamated Transit Union who had sold their souls (and union jobs) to the environmentalists and praised Obama’s decision to side with the green activists by killing the pipeline, as well as destroying the hopes of unemployed union members.

O’Sullivan said Keystone is only the beginning of what will likely be a protracted struggle over major projects to build and strengthen America’s energy infrastructure. “LIUNA plans to unite with the support of the strong and proud unions of the AFL-CIO Building and Construction Trades Department to fight for good jobs that build America and strengthen our energy resources,” he said. “We will not stand idly by, nor will the Building Trades.”

[snip]

“Their real target wasn’t the pipeline, but the oil sands. They missed that target – the oil sands will be developed whether Keystone XL is built or not – but hit tens of thousands of working men and women,” O’Sullivan said. “It is impossible for LIUNA to stand side-by-side with these groups. Construction workers are struggling with 16 percent unemployment and 1.3 million of them are jobless. The Keystone XL was not just a pipeline to them, it was a lifeline.” [Emphasis added.]

While another BlueGreen Alliance member, the United Association of Plumbers & Pipefitters, whose members would have also seen work on the Keystone pipeline project has curiously stayed silent so far, the IBEW issued its own release on its website, which stated:

While we are deeply disappointed with the U. S. State Department’s decision not to move forward with the Keystone XL pipeline, we are more concerned that a vital project that would create 20,000 construction and manufacturing jobs, generate $585 million in state and local taxes plus another $5 billion in property taxes and strengthen North America’s energy independence, has been ensnared in the political deadlock in Washington.

On Wednesday, in addition to the Laborers’ scorching comdemnation of Obama’s decision, Mark Ayers, president of the AFL-CIO’s Building & Construction Trade Division (an umbrella group of 16 AFL-CIO construction trade unions) stated:

With a national unemployment rate in construction at 16% nationally, it is beyond disappointing that President Obama placed a higher priority on politics rather than our nation’s number one challenge: jobs.

Environmental activists who are not saddled with the economic and psychological scars that accompany long-term unemployment will applaud the fact that they successfully induced the White House to block this project. Meanwhile, thousands of proud Americans throughout the heartland will once again be faced with the terrifying prospect of losing their homes and their livelihoods as they struggle to find work.

As was noted in the 2008 campaign, Barack Obama’s plan replace jobs destroyed with his “green agenda” was faulty at best. In fact, the Sierra Club’s “Beyond Coal” campaign has already destroyed up to 1.24 million jobs in 36 states—with more surely to come.

For the sake of jobs (union and union-free), let us hope that more union bosses—and, if not them, their members—wake up from their delusion that Barack Obama is actually interested in creating jobs, as opposed to his agenda to “transform America.”

__________________

“Socialism has no place in the hearts of those who would secure the fight for freedom and preserve democracy.” Samuel Gompers, American Federation of Labor, 1918

Cross-posted on LaborUnionReport.com

According to a State Department release [emphasis added]:

Today, the Department of State recommended to President Obama that the presidential permit for the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline be denied and, that at this time, the TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline be determined not to serve the national interest. The President concurred with the Department’s recommendation, which was predicated on the fact that the Department does not have sufficient time to obtain the information necessary to assess whether the project, in its current state, is in the national interest.

Since 2008, the Department has been conducting a transparent, thorough, and rigorous review of TransCanada’s permit application for the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline project…

For more than three years, the State Department has conducted its “transparent, thorough, and rigorous review.” However, apparently, the Obama Administration believes that three years wasn’t enough to be transparent, thorough, or rigorous enough.

As Forbes’ Christopher Helman noted in November:

In the process of selecting the proposed route, TransCanada plotted and studied 14 different pipeline paths and submitted 10,000 pages of environmental studies. They’ve already studied this thing to death.

What’s worse is the fact that Obama’s purely ideological decision does not serve the national interest at all. In fact, since China will be the likely recipient of the Canadian oil, in addition to the destruction of possible jobs, Obama’s decision harm—not help—the nation’s interests.

As a result of the Obama’s job-destroying decision, Laborers’ union president, Terry O’Sullivan issued a blistering statement:

“The score is Job-Killers, two; American workers, zero. We are completely and totally disappointed. This is politics at its worst,” LIUNA General President Terry O’Sullivan said. “Once again the President has sided with environmentalists instead of blue collar construction workers – even though environmental concerns were more than adequately addressed. Blue collar construction workers across the U.S. will not forget this.”

The project would create thousands of good jobs at a time when unemployment in the construction industry is 16 percent with 1.3 million men and women jobless.

Environmental groups have used the Keystone XL as a disingenuous proxy for arguments about global warming. The pipeline would carry up to 900,000 barrels of oil a day from Canada’s Tar Sands to the U.S., reducing reliance on oil from hostile nations. While environmental groups decry Tar Sands development, the Canadian government and Trans-Canada, the company developing the Tar Sands, have made clear the oil will be developed – and possibly sold to China – regardless of whether Keystone XL is built.

[snip]

“The Administration and environmentalists have blown the whistle on workers trying to feed their families and keep a roof over their heads,” said O’Sullivan. “Instead of celebrating their victory by hugging a tree they should hug a jobless construction worker because they’re the ones who are going to need it.” [Emphasis added.]

Below is Speaker John Boehner’s reaction to Obama’s decision:

“Socialism has no place in the hearts of those who would secure the fight for freedom and preserve democracy.” Samuel Gompers, American Federation of Labor, 1918

Cross-posted on LaborUnionReport.com