The Voters Got It Right

On Tuesday The Washington Free Beacon reported that Rachel Mitchell has won in Maricopa County attorney’s special election. Her opponent, Julie Gunnigle, was funded by some very interesting people.

The article reports:

Julie Gunnigle (D.), a George Soros-backed prosecutor whose radical pro-abortion stance made waves throughout the campaign, has lost the Maricopa County attorney’s special election to Republican Rachel Mitchell.

Mitchell was winning by 4 points with 94 percent of ballots tabulated when Gunnigle conceded on Monday. The Democrat said the results prove “a continuation of the legacy of corruption within the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.” Mitchell, a veteran prosecutor who has served as acting Maricopa County attorney since March, declared victory in a press release later that day.

“Public safety isn’t partisan,” she said. “All Arizonans demand safe communities in which to live, work, and raise their children.”

Gunnigle took $6,550 from Way to Lead PAC, which received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Soros’s Democracy PAC. During the campaign, she caught flak following a Washington Free Beacon report that she partnered with abortion clinics that sold fetal organs. Mitchell allies referred to the story in direct text messages to voters, prompting Gunnigle in a September tweet to dismiss the report as “disinformation.”

The article concludes:

Gunnigle also ran for county attorney in 2020, losing to Republican incumbent Allister Adel, who resigned in March. Gunnigle’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Mitchell is widely known for participating as an expert on sex crimes in the 2018 Senate confirmation hearings for Justice Brett Kavanaugh. She informed senators that “a reasonable prosecutor” would never have relied on Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony against Kavanaugh.

Mitchell will serve two years before she is up for reelection to a full, four-year term in 2024.

We need to pay attention to who is making campaign donations to candidates. One of the best sources for up-to-date information on candidate funding is Open Secrets. It is helpful to occasionally check in with Discover the Networks just to see the connections the news media somehow overlooks.

If You Are Pro-Choice, Is This What You Signed Up For?

The gruesome story about five premie-sized babies found in a box being sent from a Washington, D.C., abortion clinic to a waste facility has been all over the conservative news media this week. The Daily Wire is one news outlet that has reported on the matter.

The article at The Daily Wire reports:

On Thursday, April 7, I drove downtown in the rain to an abortion clinic run by Dr. Cesare Santangelo, an abortionist accused of using gruesome techniques to end the lives of unborn babies.

I can’t stop thinking about what I saw.

I have been asking officials for answers and explanations all week — the D.C. Medical Examiner, Mayor Muriel Bowser, the Metropolitan Police Department, Washington Surgi-Clinic, Curtis Bay Medical Waste Facility, Planned Parenthood Baltimore City Center, the Department of Health and Human Services.

But no one will address why a box, allegedly containing 110 pulverized 1st-trimester babies and five premie-sized babies, was about to be sent from Washington Surgi-Clinic to Curtis Bay Medical Waste Facility (a facility that continues to insist to me, ignoring photographs of its labeling on the box of aborted babies, that it does not burn fetal remains).

Officials have said that autopsies will not be performed. Authorities will not address whether the five babies were alive when they were extracted.

The only interest that D.C. officials have seemingly shown in this matter is whether members of a pro-life group, the Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising (PAAU), committed a crime when they took a box of aborted fetal remains from a dolly outside Washington Surgi-Clinic.

PAAU told me that they asked the driver of a Curtis Bay Medical Waste truck if they could take the box to give the babies a proper funeral, and that he agreed, noting that he had already scanned the box into the system and its disappearance would likely go unnoticed.

Live Action photographed these five babies. Pro-life medical professionals and experts who examined the photographs estimated that they were in the end of the 2nd trimester or in the 3rd trimester when they were aborted.

There are two laws that the Clinic seems to be violating–the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, which prohibits physicians from performing partial-birth abortions except when the mother’s life is in danger, and the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. If that is the charge, the authorities should be willing to examine the evidence and make a ruling. However, it seems as if that is exactly what the authorities are avoiding.

Abortion is a million-dollar industry. It shouldn’t be, but it is. It is also an industry that makes large political campaign donations.

Open Secrets has the following chart posted on their website:

Please follow the link above to read the article at The Daily Wire. It is troubling that we are allowing this to happen in our country.

Seems Fair To Me

On Saturday, The Washington Free Beacon posted an article about the logical next step after the Supreme Court decision that mandatory government union dues violate the First Amendment.

The article reports:

In 2018, Mark Janus convinced the Supreme Court that mandatory government union dues violate the First Amendment. Now he wants his money back.

After his triumph at the High Court, Janus asked a federal trial judge to require the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) pay out about $3,000 in agency fees the union collected from his paycheck between 2013 and 2018. The judge declined and Janus lost on appeal, prompting a new petition to the Supreme Court.

So-called right-to-work cause lawyers including the Liberty Justice Center and the National Right to Work Foundation are litigating some 30 cases that collectively seek $120 million in garnished wages for public sector workers. Public sector unions proved surprisingly resilient after the Janus decision, seeing modest increases in membership and limited losses of revenue. Judgments ordering restitution to aggrieved workers, however, could vindicate doomsayers who predicted the end of agency fees would devastate organized labor. Approximately 5.9 million public employees paid mandatory fees prior to Janus, a massive pool of prospective plaintiffs.

The article concludes:

Trial judges in about two dozen other cases and two appeals courts have reached the same conclusion and rebuffed worker attempts to recoup lost wages. If allowed to stand, those decisions “are likely to doom all such cases,” Janus’s petition to the High Court warns.

“This Court should grant review so the employees in these suits can recover a portion of the ‘windfall’ of compulsory fees unions wrongfully seized from them,” the petition reads.

Other Janus follow-on cases are currently pending before the Supreme Court. One petition asks the Court to declare the so-called integrated bar unlawful under Janus. Integrated bar rules require lawyers to join a state bar association and pay fees as a condition of practicing law. Another petition asks whether employers can designate a union as the sole representative of its workers in collective bargaining.

The Court will hear the case in its next term, which begins in October, if it grants review. AFSCME’s response to Janus’s petition is due on April 9. The case is No. 19-1104 Janus v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Council 31.

Open Secrets details some of what the dues paid to AFSCME were used for:

In the 2016 races, almost all of AFSCME’s more than $1.7 million in candidate contributions went to Democrats, including Hillary Clinton. The breakdown is similar in the 2018 election cycle — more than 99 percent of its $1.1 million in candidate contributions so far have gone to Democrats.

The AFSCME also contributes millions of dollars to liberal outside spending groups.

The union has given roughly $3.6 million to outside spending groups in the 2018 election cycle alone. More than 70 percent of that spending has gone to a super PAC called For Our Future, which was formed by labor unions to support Democratic candidates. Sky Gallegos, who is listed as For Our Future’s treasurer, is the Democratic National Convention Committee’s deputy CEO for intergovernmental affairs.

The union gave just over $11 million to outside spending groups in 2016, and about half those contributions went to For Our Future.

The AFSCME has lobbied Congress on right-to-work policies, according to lobbying disclosures. The union’s lobbying efforts overall have totaled than $2.3 million annually since 2009, peaking at $2.9 million in spending in 2011.

Union dues account for much of the money in politics. If people who choose not to join the union are not required to pay union dues, this will impact political campaigns in America.

This List May Be A Surprise To Some People

Open Secrets has posted a list of the top donors to Republicans and Democrats from 1989 to 2014. It is not really a surprise to me that you have to go down to number 17 to find a donor who donated more to the Republicans than Democrats. Koch Industries, the organization liberals love to cite as the buyer of elections, is number 59 on the list.

There is too much money in American politics, but it is ironic that most of the people who have traditionally complained about that fact do not realize that it’s not the rich Republicans contributing the money–it’s unions who support Democrats. Keep in mind that the union membership does not always have a say in how their dues are spent. At least in industry, a CEO is accountable to either stockholders or executive board members. Of the top fifteen organizations giving the most money, 12 are unions. Of the top fifteen organizations giving the most money, there are four organizations that gave to both parties fairly equally, and none that gave a majority of their money to Republicans.

Yes, there probably is too much money in politics, but it isn’t coming from rich Republicans.

Enhanced by Zemanta

I Guess Practicing What You Preach Is Just Not In Style Anymore

We have heard a lot of Democrats protesting the Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court and also demanding that all groups making political donations be required to name their donors.

Breitbart.com reported yesterday:

Open Secrets describes “dark money organizations” as “501(c)(4) and 501(c)(6) nonprofits that don’t have to disclose their donors.” Democrats have tried unsuccessfully to pass the DISCLOSE Act, which would “require unions, nonprofits and corporate interest groups that spend $10,000 or more during an election cycle to disclose donors who give $10,000 or more.”

Open Secrets posted two interesting graphs yesterday: saveddarkmoney2

darkmoneyConsidering that the IRS targeted conservative groups and asked them to reveal their donors (which is against the law), I find this graph very interesting. Maybe they were targeting the wrong people.

Enhanced by Zemanta