 |
|
|
|
| Monday, May 05, 2008 |
|
In the News on May 5, 2008
By Eric Livingston ::
2 Comments :: Email to a friend
|
|
The Wall Street Journal is reporting on Senator Obama's support for ending strict federal oversight of the International Teamsters Union and the groups subsequent endorsement.
It's an unusual stance for a presidential candidate. Policy makers have largely treated monitoring of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters as a legal matter left to the Justice Department since an independent review board was set up in 1992 to eliminate mob influence in the union.
Sen. Obama's rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Hillary Clinton, has declined to take a stance on Teamsters oversight. During his eight years in office, President Bill Clinton took no action to end the special board. Democratic presidential nominees in 2000 and 2004 -- Al Gore and John Kerry -- didn't address the issue, according to Teamsters officials.
Neither Sen. Obama nor Teamsters President James P. Hoffa has spoken publicly about easing up federal oversight, a top priority for Mr. Hoffa since he became union president in 1999. On the campaign trail, Mr. Hoffa stresses Sen. Obama's criticism of the North American Free Trade Agreement as the big factor in winning the 1.4-million member union's support.
But John Coli, vice president for the Teamsters central region, who brokered the Teamsters endorsement, said Sen. Obama was "pretty definitive that the time had come to start the beginning of the end" of the three-member independent review board that investigates suspect activity in the union. Mr. Coli said that Sen. Obama conveyed that view in a series of phone conversations and meetings with Teamsters officials last year.
The three-member independent oversight panel was intially implemented to root out rampant mob influence and corruption in the Teamsters. It is surprising, then, that Senator Obama would take the unprecedented position to end the oversight that has been so effective in cleaning up this union. So long as the Justice Department finds there to be cause to continue these anti-corruption efforts, politicians in Washington should support cleaning up big labor rather that usurping this oversight for political gain. |
|
|
|
|
| Comments |
By
keeeemosabe @
Monday, May 05, 2008 2:43 PM
|
|
How about let's cleanup CEO pay that is totally unrealeted to performance, rather only governed by the groups of buddies that voted themselves pay packages of $100 million per year, even as they go bankrupt or just keep pace with average market returns. Any teamster corruption is unwelcome, but a pittance compared to the legalized crime at the corporate CEO level.
|
|
|
By
Virgil @
Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:00 PM
|
As a stock investor, I will be the first to vote against excessive executive compensation and have always voted against them. Union leaders are not saints themselves and nobody mentions that they spend tens of millions of their union members dues to support candidates that they like which they expect favors from. Being a member of SEIU, I am disgusted with the tens of millions spent on Obama when I do not support him. Don't get me wrong, McCain or Clinton don't cut the mustard as well so, I am sitting this one out. The way I figure it, 4 years of Obama should be punishment enough both for the McCain loyalists as well as the liberal left on Obama's side. They can cry uncle then, but, will be stuck with the crap for the next 4 years! There won't be a recall like we did to ex-Governor Gray Davis in California so, voters you have yourself to blame for electing inept politicians to run the United States. Enjoy!
|
|
|
Click Here to post a comment
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
 |