Guess Who’s Funding the Republican Civil War

Labor unions. And they’re doing it through a pro-business Republican PAC.

Dressed in pig costumes, members of the Laborers' International Union of North America rally outside the National Association of Homebuilders lobbying conference at the Washington Hilton April 30, 2008 in Washington, DC.
National Journal
Scott Bland
Add to Briefcase
Scott Bland
Dec. 9, 2013, midnight

The Re­pub­lic­an Main Street Part­ner­ship has emerged as an out­spoken, deep-pock­eted play­er in pro-busi­ness GOP plans to beat back tea-party chal­lengers next year. But the group’s new su­per PAC has an un­ex­pec­ted source for its seed money: labor uni­ons.

The su­per PAC, called De­fend­ing Main Street, has not yet sub­mit­ted a ma­jor donor dis­clos­ure to the Fed­er­al Elec­tion Com­mis­sion. But doc­u­ments filed by oth­er groups show that two labor or­gan­iz­a­tions, the In­ter­na­tion­al Uni­on of Op­er­at­ing En­gin­eers and the Laborers’ In­ter­na­tion­al Uni­on of North Amer­ica, dir­ec­ted a com­bined $400,000 to the Re­pub­lic­an group in Septem­ber and Oc­to­ber.

Main Street says it has raised roughly $2 mil­lion total between its su­per PAC and an af­fil­i­ated non­profit group so far — and that means labor has sup­plied at least 20 per­cent of those funds.

For the uni­ons, this is not a sur­pris­ing move. While both labor groups dir­ect most of their mil­lions to Demo­crats, they have con­sist­ently giv­en smal­ler amounts to friendly Re­pub­lic­ans.

But the scale of these six-fig­ure dona­tions — $250,000 from the Op­er­at­ing En­gin­eers and $150,000 from LI­UNA — makes this ef­fort dis­tinct. Plus, the money is com­ing as the Main Street group has been pub­licly de­clar­ing its in­tent to crush tea-party chal­lengers in Re­pub­lic­an primar­ies, go­ing head to head with con­ser­vat­ive bank­rollers such as the anti-tax Club for Growth.

“Hope­fully, we’ll go in­to eight to 10 races and beat the snot out of them,” Main Street Pres­id­ent Steven La­Tour­ette told Na­tion­al Journ­al in Oc­to­ber.

That puts these labor groups on the front line of the GOP’s in­tra-party ideo­lo­gic­al con­flict, a battle where the af­fil­i­ation to uni­ons won’t be con­sidered ad­vant­age­ous, to say the least.

Take Idaho, for ex­ample, where La­Tour­ette and Main Street have vowed to help Re­pub­lic­an Rep. Mike Simpson win his primary against club-backed chal­lenger Bry­an Smith.

The Club for Growth has already cri­ti­cized Simpson for earn­ing uni­on en­dorse­ments in past elec­tions, and it has turned oth­er groups’ sup­port back around on Simpson, too. When the U.S. Cham­ber of Com­merce re­leased a TV ad back­ing Simpson on Thursday, Club for Growth pres­id­ent Chris Chocola said in a state­ment, “I guess pro-bail­out, pro-Obama stim­u­lus spend­ing, pro-debt birds of a feath­er flock to­geth­er.”

La­Tour­ette has pledged that Main Street will seek to match the Club’s spend­ing in that con­test.

“We don’t care about where Main Street gets its fund­ing from,” said Club for Growth spokes­man Barney Keller. “But it’s not sur­pris­ing that Mike Simpson, who is anti-school choice and was backed by the Idaho teach­ers’ uni­on six elec­tions in a row, would get back­ing from groups that are sup­por­ted by labor uni­ons.”

Cer­tainly, labor is not alone in fund­ing Main Street. The group’s money is “com­ing from busi­ness folks, from private donors,” said spokes­man Chris Bar­ron. “It has a wide range of folks who are in­ter­ested in sup­port­ing the gov­ern­ing wing of the Re­pub­lic­an Party.”

Bar­ron re­jec­ted cri­tiques of Main Street’s fund­ing and po­s­i­tion­ing. “If the money came from Moth­er Teresa, the Club for Growth would at­tack where it came from,” Bar­ron said.

Both the Op­er­at­ing En­gin­eers and the Laborers’ Uni­on have giv­en mil­lions of dol­lars to Demo­crat­ic can­did­ates and mil­lions more to the party’s quasi-of­fi­cial House and Sen­ate su­per PACs over the last few years. Only one oth­er PAC gave more to Demo­crat­ic can­did­ates than the Op­er­at­ing En­gin­eers’ in 2012, ac­cord­ing to the Cen­ter for Re­spons­ive Polit­ics.

But both uni­ons have also con­sist­ently in­ves­ted in the cam­paigns of friendly Re­pub­lic­ans, in­clud­ing La­Tour­ette’s (when he was in Con­gress). Earli­er this year, LI­UNA en­dorsed New Jer­sey Re­pub­lic­an Gov. Chris Christie for reelec­tion, and its PAC gave $300,000 to the Re­pub­lic­an Gov­ernors As­so­ci­ation, which ran pro-Christie ad­vert­ising in the Garden State.

The Op­er­at­ing En­gin­eers’ PAC has giv­en 23 per­cent of its dona­tions to fed­er­al can­did­ates to Re­pub­lic­ans this year, ac­cord­ing to the Cen­ter for Re­spons­ive Polit­ics, and it sup­por­ted a su­per PAC called “Lunch Pail Re­pub­lic­ans” last year. At the AFL-CIO’s na­tion­al con­ven­tion in Septem­ber, the Op­er­at­ing En­gin­eers and an­oth­er group offered a suc­cess­ful res­ol­u­tion ur­ging “that the AFL-CIO take prac­tic­al steps … to cul­tiv­ate and nur­ture re­la­tion­ships with mem­bers of all parties” and “en­cour­age mod­er­ate can­did­ates” in Re­pub­lic­an-lean­ing con­gres­sion­al dis­tricts as part of a “prag­mat­ic, bi­par­tis­an ap­proach” to its polit­ic­al giv­ing and ad­vocacy.

“Es­pe­cially with this crazy polit­ic­al at­mo­sphere, this is a place where we need to be lend­ing sup­port to middle-of-the-road Demo­crats and Re­pub­lic­ans both, and this is part of that ef­fort,” Jef­frey So­th, the Op­er­at­ing En­gin­eers’ polit­ic­al dir­ect­or, said.

De­fend­ing Main Street will file its next fin­an­cial dis­clos­ure with the FEC in Janu­ary.

What We're Following See More »
INDICTMENTS NOT PROOF OF COLLUSION
Rosenstein Holds Presser On Russian Indictments
3 days ago
THE DETAILS
Source:
CONTRADICTS TRUMP’S DENIALS
U.S. Indicts 13 Russian Nationals For Election Interference
3 days ago
THE LATEST

The indictment, filed in the District of Columbia, alleges that the interference began "in or around 2014," when the defendants began tracking and studying U.S. social media sites. They "created and controlled numerous Twitter accounts" and "purchased computer servers located inside the United States" to mask their identities, some of which were stolen. The interference was coordinated by election interference "specialists," and focused on the Black Lives Matter movement, immigration, and other divisive issues. "By early to mid-2016" the groups began supporting the campaign of "then-candidate Donald Trump," including by communicating with "unwitting individuals associated with the Trump Campaign..."

Source:
“QUEEN FOR A DAY”
Gates Said to Be Finalizing a Plea Deal
3 days ago
THE LATEST

"Former Trump campaign adviser Rick Gates is finalizing a plea deal with special counsel Robert Mueller's office, indicating he's poised to cooperate in the investigation, according to sources familiar with the case. Gates has already spoken to Mueller's team about his case and has been in plea negotiations for about a month. He's had what criminal lawyers call a 'Queen for a Day' interview, in which a defendant answers any questions from the prosecutors' team, including about his own case and other potential criminal activity he witnessed."

Source:
ZERO-FOR-TWO
Another Defeat for Immigration Legislation in the Senate
3 days ago
THE LATEST

"The Senate on Thursday rejected immigration legislation crafted by centrists in both parties after President Trump threatened to veto the bill if it made it to his desk. In a 54-45 vote, the Senate failed to advance the legislation from eight Republican, seven Democratic and one Independent senators. It needed 60 votes to overcome a procedural hurdle. "

Source:
DISPUTE ASSERTION OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE
House Intel Panel Could Charge Bannon with Contempt
3 days ago
THE LATEST

"The House Intelligence Committee has scheduled a Thursday meeting to hear testimony from Steve Bannon—but it's an open question whether President Donald Trump's former chief strategist will even show up. The White House sent a letter to Capitol Hill late Wednesday laying out its explanation for why Trump's transition period falls under its authority to assert executive privilege, a move intended to shield Bannon from answering questions about that time period." Both Republicans and Democrats on the committee dispute the White House's theory, and have floated charging Bannon with contempt should he refuse to appear.

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login