ShareThis Page

SEIU spending priorities

| Tuesday, May 9, 2017, 9:00 p.m.
Supporters of a $15 minimum wage for fast-food workers rally in front of a McDonald's in Albany, N.Y. (AP file photo).

Whether or not members agree with the Service Employees International Union's liberal, Democrat-friendly stances — and whether or not those stances actually benefit its members — the SEIU spends so much on politics that it reportedly is considering budget cuts, according to media reports.

A filing with the federal Labor Department shows the SEIU “spent $61.6 million on political activities and lobbying in 2016, roughly 20 percent of its $314.6 million budget,” according to The Washington Free Beacon. While adding about 15,000 members, revenue was down by $17 million, leaving a $10 million budget deficit.

Deepening that financial hole was another $19 million spent on the “Fight for 15” campaign for fast-food minimum-wage increases. That spending was labeled “support for organizing” in the federal filing, not “political activities and lobbying,” despite being undeniably political.

Richard Berman, Center for Union Facts executive director, told The Free Beacon that the SEIU's political spending would be better directed toward bargaining efforts that would actually help its members: “Instead of fighting for workplace benefits, the union is going behind their members' backs to bankroll Democrats and liberal advocacy groups.”

And that won't change unless SEIU members force SEIU leaders to focus on advancing their interests, rather than on supporting left-wing causes and politicians.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.