Union donations for NJ Democrats dry up after pension overhaul

[no_hypocrisy]

Three major public worker unions' committees stopped donating to state lawmakers while the legislators — who face elections in November — were preparing to vote on a landmark overhaul of pensions and health benefits.

Instead, the unions waited until the benefits fight was nearly over, holding their resources to fund last-minute donations in late May and early June to individual politicians before the party primaries.

In June — weeks after primary day — eight Democrats in the state Senate and 14 in the Assembly sided with Republicans and voted yes on changes to government workers' pensions and health benefits.

The public employee unions who had opposed the measure promised retribution.

http://www.northjersey.com/news/125936098_Union_donations_dry_up_for_Democrats.html


----------

Two ways of analyzing this situation:

1) NJ could be seen as a microcosm of what will be the situation in 2012 if Obama supports changes to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid which will actually lead to their elimination or neutralization if they are still in existence. The money stopped going to democrats in the legislature and I can understand why. Having democrats in the majority who could have voted against "pension reform" is beyond indignity; it is betrayal. When they were elelcted, they didn't run on "We're going to simultaneously take away money from wages and give less to the public sector workers when they retire." I see this as an expected consequence of this vote, starting with NJ Senate President, Steve Sweeney. (If you can't count on a Union brother to protect you, who can you count on?)

2) The lack of funding of opponents to republican candidates risk putting both the Assembly and the state Senate under republican control, giving Chris Christie a rubberstamp. Don't think for a moment that he's done with his "reform" package. The dems slowed him down. But when present day democrats vote like republicans, you can't count them to vote like democrats. Which leads me to wonder are there any individuals who can successfully primary the democrats and win the general election next time? When I say "successfully", I mean getting donations and people who will vote after being let down so many times.

[xchrom]

1. Quelle surprise. Nt

[dkf]

2. But doesn't this look like pay to play?

Isn't this the reason why political contributions are bad? It goes all ways and underlying it is the fact that these donations are made in anticipation of monetary payback.

[No Elephants]

5. Yes, ALL donations are made in anticipation that legislators will act and vote certain ways.

Including the ones I made to Obama 2007-08. (NOT "monetary" payback, but legislative or Executive payback, which may or may not translate to money in the pocket of the contributor. I've never contributed for the purpose of enriching myself.)

This is not news.

The SCOTUS has ruled these contributions are political speech.

Also not news.

The only ways around that are: (1) MAYBE to make sure a Democrat is in office the next time a Justice retires, dies or becomes incapacitated; or (2) attempt a constitutional amendment, which, in all likelihood, will go the way of the ERA and so many other proposed amendments during the last 50-60 years. IOW, lots of luck.

Also not news.

What is news, is that the Democratic Party, which used to be on the side of working people and their unions, now votes against them, as Republicans always have.

Also news (apparently, to some, anyway): Democrats don't own anyone's contributions or votes, including contributions of unions and their members and the votes of union members.

[DainBramaged]

3. FUCK 'Em starve them, and let the rest of the State know why

pieces of shit.

[mmonk]

4. Working people are fighting back with the only leverage they have left.

When you are unrepresented, options are few. Other citizens will have to see the results and understand a corporate state is not in their interest. It will be a forced lesson.