From Flopping Aces

Obama lifts accountability and transparency rules for Unions as he cuts CEO pay of bailout firms!

Remember the shock this week when Obama’s pay czar announced up to a 90% cut in the salaries of executives at firms which took federal bailout help? The thinking is that those firms, which include Chrysler and General Motors took government help and will live by government rules.

Fair enough perhaps but what about the Auto Unions? They got a huge handout in both GM and Chrylser bailouts. The Auto workers union will end up owning Chrysler. Yet, in a move which got no publicity at all, not even on Fox News, the Obama Administration quietly moved to reduce transparency and accountability requirements for ALL labor unions:

The U.S. Department of Labor has formally rescinded a series of reporting changes designed to enhance union disclosure.

The aim of these rule changes is to weaken union oversight requirements - a trend this Administration started with its FY 2010 budget, which cut $4.4 million from the Office of Labor Management Standards, more than a 10 percent reduction in its overall budget. Judging by the profligate spending this Administration has applied to nearly every other department - giving the federal budget a nearly 10 percent boost in spending, cutting union oversight seems an odd place to “save money” - unless reducing transparency, and not saving money, were their aims.

Part of the transparency roll back for union bosses includes the following items that the Labor Department will no longer require of unions:

•Disclose the total value of benefits received by union officers and employees;
•Disclose the names of parties buying and selling union assets; or
•Itemize union receipts

Federal labor law is intended to ensure that rank-and-file union members have a full, equal, and democratic voice in union affairs. Armed with knowledge, union members will have better tools to elect leaders who work in their best interest — and to hold accountable union officials who serve their own interests.

also

Democrats Allow ACORN To Have Authority Over Financial Institutions

You have got to be kidding me:

During consideration of H.R. 3126, legislation to establish a Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA), Democrats on the House Financial Services Committee voted to pass an amendment offered by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) that will make ACORN eligible to play a role in setting regulations for financial institutions.

The Waters amendment adds to the CFPA Oversight Board 5 representatives from the fields of “consumer protection, fair lending and civil rights, representatives of depository institutions that primarily serve underserved communities, or representatives of communities that have been significantly impacted by higher-priced mortgages” to join Federal banking regulators in advising the Director on the consistency of proposed regulations, and strategies and policies that the Director should undertake to enforce its rules.

By making representatives of ACORN and other consumer activist organizations eligible to serve on the Oversight Board, the amendment creates a potentially enormous government sanctioned conflict of interest. ACORN-type organizations will have an advisory role on regulating the very financial institutions from which they receive millions of dollars annually in direct corporate contributions and benefit from other financial partnerships and arrangements. These are the same organizations that pressured banks to make subprime mortgage loans and thus bear a major responsibility for the collapse of the housing market.

Oh, Maxine and Barney will argue that they didn’t specifically SAY members of ACORN could serve on the board but the fact remains that with this amendment it doesn’t exclude them either. It allows ACORN to jump aboard and give them power they should never have.

Of course this shouldn’t surprise me coming from Maxine or Barney…seeing as how they both directed TARP funds to banks they have financial ties in. Corrupt beyond belief and now they want another corrupt organization to be including in the process of deciding what kind of rules should be in place in the bank industry.