BigGovernment.com reports that Big Labor White House insider Patrick Gaspard (SEIU-ACORN) has failed to accurately report his financials on at least two occasions. Administration officials continue to mock President Obama’s proclaimed high ethical standards:
Has Congressman Darrell Issa’s request that White House Political Director Patrick Gaspard explain his failure to report a $37,000 payment from his previous employer SEIU Local 1199 evolved into a cover-up? It’s beginning to smell like it!
Rep. Issa’s request refers to the same Patrick Gaspard who while working for a Soros-SEIU political committee employed convicted felons to go door-to-door. In fact, that same Soros-SEIU committee received one of the steepest fines in Federal Election Commission history ($750,000) because its leadership, in Machiavellian fashion, chose to ignore federal laws and take the risk of paying fines if caught. So, ignoring a few pesky public disclosure laws is not as unlikely as it may sound.
Questions:
- How did Gaspard work six days in January for SEIU 1199 h while simultaneously working for the “office of the President-Elect” during “January 1-16” of 2009?
- How did Gaspard earn, in those six days of work for SEIU 1199, “$17,238.56 [of] carried over leave & vacation,” in particular, after apparently having already been paid 2.5 to 4 months vacation pay in 2008?
- How did Gaspard earn a 9 week severance payout from an employer (SEIU 1199)? According to available SEIU 1199 financial reports (2000-2009), Gaspard was not paid by SEIU 1199 in years 2000, 2002, 2003, and 2004. For the year 2001, SEIU 1199 paid Gaspard only $3,723. It appears that in at least 5 of the 9 years Gaspard was not on the payroll or worked only a week or two.
An investigation by the House Oversight Committee is warranted. Unfortunately with (more…)
Politico is asking “Did Democrats Exempt Unions from the DISCLOSE Act?” We’re asking “What do you think?”
A Democratic amendment tucked into campaign finance legislation Wednesday night appears to exempt big labor unions from proposed disclosure requirements. The change, inserted by Rep. Bob Brady (D-Pa.), chairman of the committee charged with handling the bill and a key union ally, would also affect other groups funded by members who pay dues of less than $50,000.
We all know it is true that congress gives Big Labor legislative gifts and often at the expense of individual worker freedom; however, rarely do we see a congressional committee provide a modicum of insight. But, times may be changing based on this U.S. House Committee’s press release:
Wednesday, 09 June 2010
House Administration Releases Chart Explaining How the DISCLOSE Act Exempts Unions from Major Campaign Finance Restrictions (more…)





