Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation Sues Administration

I am posting an op-ed by Mark Mix in the Washington Examiner. It was sent to me by Mr Mix's organization, the Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. I feel it deserves the widest dissemination possible.
===================================================================

"President Obama swept into office promising a new era of openness and transparency. But he forgot to mention his union loophole.

Obama's Department of Labor has ignored a series of disclosure requests that would let the American people know more about the close connections forged this year between the Department of Labor and Big Labor officials.

Last April, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation filed a Freedom of Information Act request seeking documents on the activities of Big Labor insiders at the Department of Labor. The foundation's concerns about possible conflicts of interest start right at the top with Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, who held a leadership post at American Rights at Work, a group funded by the AFL-CIO and the powerful Service Employees International Union.

The foundation is also seeking information on the role of former AFL-CIO lawyer Deborah Greenfield, now a high-ranking Department of Labor official. Before the election, Greenfield filed suit on Big Labor's behalf to stop the implementation of some modest disclosure requirements for union officials. Now she's in charge of gutting those same reporting guidelines.

In his first full day in office, Obama pledged that his appointees "will not for a period of two years ... participate in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to their former employer." Yet Labor Secretary Solis was given a free pass, even though she helped oversee ARAW's intense lobbying program while serving as a member of Congress (itself a congressional ethics problem).

Meanwhile, as a lawyer with the AFL-CIO, Greenfield sued the Department of Labor over the very regulations she is now rolling back.

Understandably concerned, the National Right to Work Foundation filed a FOIA request for more information seven months ago, only to be stonewalled by Labor bureaucrats. Other than a few cursory status updates, Obama's Department of Labor has ignored the statutory requirement to provide disclosure. In short, it may be hiding information about whether Solis and Greenfield are coordinating their activities with union operatives.

Organized labor spent more $1 billion to elect Obama and his allies in Congress, but aside from the recent revelation that SEIU boss Andy Stern is the White House's most frequent visitor, there has been virtually no disclosure of the extensive and ongoing political ties between union bosses and the administration.

Starting on day one, the Obama administration set about to dismantle union disclosure regulations, impose coercive unionization on unwilling federal contractors and limit employee access to information about their rights in the workplace. Because this has all been accomplished through a series of under-the-radar executive orders, the media have not scrutinized Big Labor's influence in Washington.

After months of waiting for a response from the Department of Labor, Right to Work Foundation lawyers filed a federal lawsuit in U.S. District Court to force the Obama administration to fulfill its obligations under the Freedom of Information Act. Hopefully, this complaint will spur the Department of Labor toward greater disclosure.

The public at least deserves to know the extent to which union operatives are rewriting laws and regulations put in place to ensure minimal standards of union transparency and accountability."

Mark Mix is President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation
===============================================================================

Fousesquawk comment: While working for DEA, I was very aware of the Freedom of Information Act, which imposes a requirement that the government respond to such requests. Regardless of the nature of the request, the concerned agency has a legal requirement to respond to each request. Somebody apparently never advised the Obama administration of that fact.