According to Reuters,  President Obama “is expected to raise $1 billion, which is unprecedented in U.S. politics” for his re-election campaign.  Based on the National Institute of Labor Relations Research (NILRR.org), Big Labor has average spending $1.1 Billion per election cycle.  That will allow Obama and his Big Labor allies the ability to coordinate campaign expenditures of over $2 Billion in effort to mask the the Obama record of forced-unionism expansion and Big Labor payoffs.

As often said before, it costs more to sell a lie than the truth.  And, the NILRR research exposes the billions of dollars from forced-union-dues funded labor unions are spending to keep their forced-unionism power and selling it as “worker rights.”  Taking away an individual’s freedom choose to belong or not to belong to a union, and then, giving the power to union bosses to force people to pay tribute to union as a condition of employment does not equal “worker rights” — it is tyranny.  That is why unions must pour in billions to elect politicians to pass legislation that takes away individual rights. And, they have just that according to the recent NILRR analysis of labor union financial:

During the 2010 election cycle, which covers the years 2009 & 2010, Big Labor spent more from its combined union treasuries than the record-breaking Billion-Dollar Barack Obama presidential campaign then from any other source. In 2009, Big Labor reported to the U. S. Department of Labor that it spent $563.2 million on Political Activity, including lobbying. In 2010, Big Labor bosses reported spending another $572.4 million politics from forced-dues-funded union treasuries. Big Labor poured over $1,135.6 million into political activity during the 2010 election cycle.

Big Labor had funneled another remarkable $1,056.8 million from union treasuries during the prior election cycle; $455.9 million and $600.9 million for 2007 and 2008 respectively.

(Link to NILRR Big Labor Political Outlays Report, Link to raw LM-2 data, Link to AFSCME National Headquarters LM-2 reported political outlays)

NRTW President Mark Mix Op-Ed in the Washington Examiner (read full article, click here):

Imagine the outcry if McDonalds executives demanded that franchise owners collect “voluntary” contributions totaling $25,000 for the company’s Political Action Committee (PAC) from employees at every restaurant.

What if the fast food titan’s headquarters followed up with a threat – pay us, or face a $37,500 fine? Do you think this heavy-handed scheme would raise a few eyebrows at the Federal Election Commission (FEC)?

Replace “McDonalds” with “SEIU” in that description and you’ve got a pretty good idea of Big Labor’s latest political fundraising strategy. To meet their ambitious fundraising targets, Service Employees International Union bosses are now threatening to fine any local affiliate that doesn’t meet its PAC contribution requirements.

… After SEIU bosses announced their new policy, the National Right to Work Foundation filed a formal complaint with the FEC. Foundation attorneys argued that the union’s new constitutional provision coerces political campaign contributions from employees.

Although the FEC dismissed the Foundation’s complaint in April, Foundation attorneys were only notified of the decision 23 days after the fact. Adding insult to injury, the FEC finally got around to releasing the reasoning behind its dismissal in August, 111 days after the original decision was made.

Coincidentally, all FEC appeals must be filed within 60 days of any ruling. By delaying its announcement and only releasing its reasoning until well after the window period had expired, the FEC effectively made it impossible to appeal the decision to federal court.

… The DISCLOSE Act, a bill being pushed in Congress that would require political organizations to release the names of top donors, features yet another Big Labor carve-out. Prompted by union operatives, Obama and the Democrats have largely exempted unions from the bill’s disclosure requirements, but other activist groups are out of luck.

The FEC’s antics reveal what should have been obvious as soon as Big Labor’s money started pouring into Obama’s campaign coffers: Under Obama, the union bosses have effectively bought themselves immunity from any laws that get in the way of their massive forced-dues money-making machine.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has filed a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) asking it to investigate charges made by two Alabama educators who discovered a union scheme to divert their money into the National Education Association’s (NEA) political action committee (PAC).

Claire Waites, the chair of the science department, and Dr. Jeanne Fox, an assistant principal, both work at Daphne Middle School in Bay Minette, Alabama. Waites and Fox are both members of the Baldwin County Education Association (BCEA), Alabama Education Association (AEA), and NEA teacher unions.
In July 2008, Waites and Fox attended the NEA’s annual convention in Washington, DC, as delegates of the BCEA. By telephone, BCEA union president Saadia Hunter informed Waites and Fox that contributions to a “children’s fund” in their names were made from money included in their expense reimbursements for their trip to the convention.

Although Hunter told Waites that these contributions were not political in nature, they actually went to the NEA’s PAC, the NEA Fund for Children and Public Education.

Later, Hunter admitted that the money would be contributed to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. Sworn statements by Waites and Fox indicate that the AEA union boss also admitted that the PAC contributions were paid with BCEA members’ dues. However, it is illegal for unions to contribute to political candidates using “dues, fees, or other moneys required as a condition of membership in a labor organization.”

Teacher union officials also violated federal law by encouraging and soliciting contributions under false pretenses and without informing Waites or Fox of their right to refuse to contribute without any reprisal. Federal law also forbids campaign contributions made in the name of another person.

“This union money laundering scheme makes a mockery of federal election law,” said Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation, which has joined Waites and Fox as a complainant. “We suspect this scheme was widely used by the NEA union hierarchy and could involve hundreds of thousands of dollars. We urge the FEC to take decisive action.”

According to the complaint, the NEA illegally laundered teachers’ dues into a union political action committee. Adding insult to injury, when confronted by the teachers, union officials tried to dupe them into thinking they were contributing to a “children’s fund.”

You can read the Foundation’s news release here.

You can also listen to the Foundation’s podcast on the NEA scandal here.