There is plenty of competition in unions, not as much in the craft unions (Carpenters, Electricians, et al) but even in some of the Crafts there are mergers of like crafts; Pipefitters in some areas merging with plumbers locals.
Then you have The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET merged with the Teamsters (IBT). Plus you have conference levels of mergers; some would, and have called that shrinkage, where local unions have combined with other locals to save on overhead.
The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say
Politicians are by design public figures. In terms of receiving money from corporations, wealthy donors, ect... they are not entitled to privacy.
Forcing them to be completely transparent is the only way to ensure they are not being bought off by big oil, big drug, big whatever.
They want privacy they can resign from their post.
What Unions offer that politicians actually want are votes, not large sums of money. Hence putting the corporations on the same level as the Unions. That's probably what American meant.
That article is correct in saying that this decision could mean that foreign companies could spend to influence our government. What it neglects to mention is that foreign companies already spend to influence our government. The article bemoans the possibility of Citgo spending billions on advertising as a way to subvert our democracy, but ignores the fact that Citgo already spends millions lobbying Congress via its American subsidiaries.
Which one of those seems more likely to "subvert democracy"?
Decision may mean more foreign cash - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.comSeveral other analysts, however, cautioned that the fear was being overblown and that foreign companies would be reluctant to dabble in U.S. politics for the same reason some American companies steer clear, to avoid angering consumers.
ďIt is a plausible inference from the courtís opinion that [foreign] money canít be restricted,Ē said Michael Dorf, a Cornell law professor who has backed giving foreigners the right to contribute to U.S. campaigns. ďFor me, thatís not such a terrible thing.Ē
Dorf said it was unlikely that large multinational companies would want to weigh in in most elections. ďIf Iím the CEO of a major corporation, Iím going to be very leery of directly supporting or opposing a candidate. ... Itís just not good business to alienate potential customers,Ē he said.
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
Last edited by Vader; 01-25-10 at 02:40 PM.
It was the Austrasians, that hewed on bravely through the thick of the fight, it was they who found and cut down the Saracen King.