Evening star., 1947-08-13

Is 10 De applauQeo.
For the last several weeks an
impression has been broadcast to
the effect that union members or
leaders cannot participate in poll
tical campaigns or support the
candidates Of their choice. This
impression has been disseminated
primarily by those who are hostile
to the whole law and wish to pre-
vent its effective operation.
Mr.. Murray Is absolutely right
when he says there is nothing in
the law to prevent unions from
raising funds and using them in
the elections. But the method Of
raising and the manner of expend-
iture must be according to the ac-
cepted rules which have been in
effect In the past in connection
with election expenses.
Clearly Set Forth.
From the time of the first Cor
rupt Practices Act and continuing
through wartime, when the Smith
Connally Act was passed with some
provisions governing election con-
tributions, it has always been
clearly set forth that any group
Of citizens can organize q political
committee and make any contribu-
tions and incur any expenses that
their funds will permit. Nor is 1t
necessary for these separate "politi-
cal committees" to be connected with
or tied to the Republican or Demo-
cratic National or State committees.
Thus, in the 1914 campaign the
CIO set up national political action
committee to which union members
contributed funds. This particular
Political Action Committee" came
within the provisions of the exist
ing laws which require that record
be kept of contributions and ex-
penditures and that these be filed
with the proper authorities as has
always been provided by the laws
governing elections.
AS q matter of fact, there is no law
to prevent political committee to-
day from collecting hundreds Of
millions of dollars from labor union
members provided the process of
collection conforms to the methods
prescribed by law.
Thus, the Federal laws governing
elections have stipulated that "po-
litical committees" must keep an
accurate accounting of what they
do and register the names of their
contributors with the clerk of the
House of Representatives. Also, un-
der the new law, they must keep an
account of what expenditures are
made.
The only new thing that the
Taft Hartley Law prohibits is the
direct expenditure" of union funds
or corporation funds in connection
with Federal elections.
Mr.. Murray is right when he says
that separate treasures can be set
up for this purpose through sepa-
rate committees. It would be q
violation of law for union officers to
spend their time collecting CAM
paign contributions when they are
being paid salaries for regular union
activities. But q separate system of
collection, with canvassers paid for
by the political committee" can be
set UP.
What the Law Does.
II Is q violation Of law to take
union funds which are collected
from members for the specific pur-
poses Of union organization or union
maintenance and to use those funds
by contributing them to political
committees.
The emphasis is on the word "vol-
untary." Consent must be given by
the individual union member for
the use Of his money for a political
purpose.
Thus the Taft Hartley Law pro-
tects the union member who does
not believe in a particular party and
yet may be forced by union locals
to join that political party or con-
tribute to its success. When the
worker contributes his regular dues
to q union, he does so with the
understanding that the money is to
be used for the union and not for
some purposes which the officers
may decide might be desirable, espe-
cially in the matter of politics.
Workers in this country divide
according to their political beliefs or
affiliations. All that the Taft-Hart-
ley Law does, in prohibiting corpo-
ration or union expenditures" Is
to prevent the abuse of labor union
leaders of the right of the individual
worker to contribute to whatever
political party he desires.