Obama demands contractors provide all “political” donation data – Unions exempt

An executive order is in the works to implement parts of the Disclose Act that failed to pass Congress. Federal contractors must already provide information about donations to politicians, now they would need to provide details about donations to independent groups. Federal employee unions – of course – would be exempt from this requirement.

What do you think? Open thread again … within reason … in the comments section below.

For companies working as contractors for the federal government, it’s a requirement they have been dealing with for years – tell the feds all about donations to politicians so they can ensure the system is free from political favoritism. Yeah right. Anyway…

With the explosion of independent groups that collect donations from individuals in support of everything from gay marriage to searching for President Obama’s birth certificate, the Obama White House wants details about who is donating to those groups and how much they are donating … if they want to do business with the federal government.

That’s the rub. “Oh, you want to do business with the federal government? Well, we’ll just need you to provide the following information…”

Oh, you donated to a TEA party?

Let’s say you run a small business with a few dozen employees who work in the space industry and have a contract with the federal government. At what point does the commander and chief sit down and write a letter to all of the contractors and ask they not only support a single payer health care system, but actively support it by putting up messages of support on their company website?

You’re looking to land that federal contract aren’t you? And by the way, if you don’t choose to put one of our banner ads on your website, we’ll assume you’re fine with old people dying in the street.

Scott Hinderaker at Powerline calls it Gangster Government and points to the original story by Hans A. von Spakovsky over at Pajamas Media. Von Spakovsky provided a draft of the executive order (PDF, 1.4MB) and hits on pay-dirt … the rule applies only to companies bidding for government work, not for federal employee unions who negotiate with the federal government.

[N]ote that these disclosure requirements will only apply to companies that make bids on government contracts. Federal employee unions that negotiate contracts for their members worth many times the value of some government contracts are not affected by this order. Neither are the recipients of hundreds of millions of dollars of federal grants.

Still scratching your head? In an opinion piece this morning, the Wall Street Journal points out the following, with my emphasis in bold.

Federal contracts are supposed to go to the lowest bidder, so it’s hard to see how disclosure of political contributions would help contract decisions. Mandatory disclosure would impose politics on federal procurement choices as never before.

A National Review Online editorial this morning notes…

Upon what constitutional authority might the president issue a directive abridging Americans’ First Amendment rights, recently reconfirmed by the Supreme Court? We wonder, too, and suspect that President Obama is getting a little big for his constitutional britches.


21 replies
  1. Shared Sacrifice
    Shared Sacrifice says:

    Well, he did promise the most open and transparent administration- ever!? I’d like to see his college records and thesis…

  2. Jeff S
    Jeff S says:

    Chicago style politics have made it’s way to the Potomac.? He’s not even trying to appear neutral in the favortism towards unions.??

  3. BEA
    BEA says:

    Since everyone before me said it?more succintly and perfectly than I ever could I’ll just rant.
    Good grief!! It’s not even worth the relief to have?a few days off from the news…just when I start to recover from my head spinning Linda Blair style?I come back to it and I’m hit even harder by the craziness of it all. How are these guys getting away with this insanity? Or am I the one who has lost her marbles? I mean O did go to Columbia and Harvard. I swear there is a horror movie in here somewhere!!

  4. Eric
    Eric says:

    Why doesn’t our Congress push back on this political thuggery that our Organizer In Chief seems to be so good at. Obama is nothing but a cheap suit! I’d like to know who’s water he’s carrying.

    • PatRiot
      PatRiot says:

      The reason for that is: we are being duped by our own parties.? Bachman and other Repubs cried “Unconstitutional” about Obama care but they never persued it.? Same with getting involved with Libya – even DEMS cried “Unconstitutional” – but no one took action.? Pseudo-Americans, every one of them.
      Congress can’t or won’t, therefore it is up to us real Americans.? And from what I can tell, we almost have enough frustration built up to really get to fixing this mess.

    • GdavidH
      GdavidH says:

      That’s the $64,000 question.
      I’m guessing Glenn?Beck is right on this one?….SOROS. His money is all over the leftosphere.

  5. PatRiot
    PatRiot says:

    Is this any different than card check?
    Keeping federal employee unions exempt builds an underclass of ruling elite.? What these union members do not realize is?that this ‘freedom’ comes at a price: loyalty in the form of a brown shirt.
    My hope is that ALL?political contributions?drop off precipitously.? When we Americans see the power of holding on to our money, we will use it?to our advantage in many other ways.?

  6. winnie888
    winnie888 says:

    Why am I not surprised?? That’s the truly disappointing thing:? nothing Obama does to butcher the constitution even causes me to blink an eye anymore.? I think I’ve become desensitized and often dissociate because there’s not a thing any of us can do until the next presidential election.? This is one of those days when getting offended by his un-presidential behavior just feels like an exercise in futility.? How do we stop him during his presidency?? He’s a bull in a china shop, with a herd of democrats wholeheartedly supporting him, spinning madly and leaving nothing but destruction in his wake.
    One thing I can say with certainty:? He has to go.

  7. Mild Bill
    Mild Bill says:

    If it comes to pass, they will find?fewer and fewer?companies with virtue and commitment to excellence, willing to work for them.? Freemen and slaves have differing work ethics. That’s how a tax cheat gets to be Secretary of the Treasury or blatant leftist judges appointed to the Supreme Court.

    • Steve M
      Steve M says:

      My Palin post in no way suggested she was “my” candidate or who we should be looking to. It was a thought exercise to ask why people thought her unelectable.

  8. Lynn
    Lynn says:

    Oh, That’s interesting, I did think she was “your” candidate. Just goes to show I shouldn’t jump to conclusions. President Obama has me at my wits end. He is smarmy, thuggish and a hypocrite.? He is the “Music Man” all over. A smiling calm demeanor and inside a rabid egocentric maniac.? We need him to go back to community organizing, preferably in Afghanistan or Iran. And he doesn’t know anything about law, he slept through the classes.
    Oh and please keep up the thought exercises. That post was my favorite evah.

Comments are closed.