SEIU Solicited Contributions from 'Foreign Nationals'

President Obama’s baseless attack on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce underscores the routine hyper-partisan attacks his administration has become known for. Obama’s allegation was that the Chamber has been using money from foreign members to influence this election.

Karl Rove, another target of the agitator/community-organizer-turned President of the United States, strongly refuted the accusations on Fox News Sunday yesterday.

If the president and the Center for American Progress, which initially leveled the “foreign money” charge, were serious, they’d investigate the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), a brass knuckles, take-no-prisoners pro-Obama union that admitted in 2008 that it had an avenue to accept funds from “foreign nationals,” allowing them to have a voice in the American political process.

During the 2008 campaign, SEIU, the Obama campaign and other left-wing organizations created a “Fight the Smears” website, from which the following was taken:

What about foreign nationals who want to be involved but can’t give to COPE [Committee on Political Education]?

There are a large number of fully lawful immigrant members of SEIU who wish to participate through their union in the critical policy debates going on in the country, yet cannot fund or participate in SEIU COPE because they are foreign nationals.

For those immigrant members, as a lawful alternative to participation in SEIU COPE, SEIU has established a program encouraging its immigrant members to participate in policy advocacy outside of the electoral realm on issues such as immigration reform.

As a further safeguard against unlawful electoral contributions, in SEIU workplaces in which there is a substantial immigrant membership, SEIU encourages its members to become active through this alternative program.

COPE is a PAC. While the “alternative program” is not identified by SEIU, clearly the union is admitting to an alternative stream of foreign money coming into the American political discourse. Perhaps not out-right advocacy for or against specific candidates, but “educating” the public about a candidate’s stand on issues. That’s permissible under the current law and dues dollars and contributions from foreign union members would be acceptable.

President Obama, if you’re concerned about anonymous foreign money being pumped into our political system, I’m sure you’ll agree attacking SEIU needs to be added to your stump speech. Otherwise, your attacks are as weak as your party’s poll numbers.