Images (75)
Showing first 60 of 75 pages.
दस्तावेज़
| id |
id
555646092
|
|---|---|
| contentType |
contentType
document
|
| source |
source
import
|
Source image fields (6)
Extracted text
OCR Page 1 of 75OVERVIEW AND KEY POINTS
The Attempt to
Silence Working Families
Initiatives to limit the role of working families and their unions
have only one purpose, and that's to further skew the political
balance of power in America
As working families and their unions increasingly speak out on important political and
legislative issues, a coordinated, nationwide campaign to silence them is mounting.
Corporations, right-wing foundations and national anti-union lobbying groups are introducing
initiatives and legislation in all 50 states designed to limit working families' participation in the
political process by singling out unions for burdensome restrictions.
Backers of the initiatives claim to be protecting the interests of working Americans and represent
their proposals as "campaign finance reform." In truth, the initiatives are designed to silence the
voice of working America. They exacerbate -- they don't alleviate -- the flaws and imbalances in
a campaign finance system that already heavily favors corporations and the wealthy. And they
are a direct response to the AFL-CIO's aggressive education and mobilization efforts among
working families that in 1996 increased the minimum wage and prevented cuts in Medicare,
pensions and education.
In the political process, corporations already outspend unions 11-to-1. In the 1996
election cycle, corporations accounted for more than 40 percent of the $1.6 billion raised by
political candidates and parties -- while unions accounted for less than 4 percent. And the
disparity is growing. Corporations outspent unions by a ratio of 11-to-1 in 1996, compared to a
ratio of 9-to-1 in 1992. In "soft money" contributions (unlimited contributions to parties and
committees), the gap is even wider: In 1996, corporations spent 19 times more than unions did.
New restrictions on unions' participation in the political process will further tilt the balance of
power in favor of corporations.
The initiatives single out unions, proposing tight controls and burdensome regulations
that wouldn't apply to anyone else. They would silence the voice of working families, without
limiting political spending by corporations or special interest groups such as the National Rifle
Association, Chamber of Commerce or Christian Coalition. And they're just unnecessary: Union
members already have more protections than members of other organizations, and unions are
already subject to more stringent reporting requirements.
Relations
belongs_to