Tuesday, August 02, 2005


Speaking of campaign finance reform and disclosure, once again, Eureka's very own Rob Arkley makes the news again today. This time, it's an article in the Sacramento Bee where he's listed as on of the eight major donors contributing to the campaign to pass Prop. 75, the one that requires unions to get written consent of members before they can use their money for political purposes. They say he tossed $100,000 into the pot. What a guy! As naive as Rob Arkley comes off to me politically, it's good to see him sending his money in the right direction, at least this time.

I'm ambivalent about Prop 75, although I'll probably vote for it, assuming the special election is held. I certainly wouldn't hold anything against someone for supporting it financially, though. Don't know that I could say the same for someone opposing the initiative.

BTW: Here's a web site you can go to to see who's giving what money to what candidate. The site I linked to is for the 2004 campaign season and I haven't checked to see if they've updated it to more recent campaigns. I can't believe there's so few people listed. Must be because they only report donations over a certain amount, probably over $200, as that's when people are required to report who they are and what they're occupation is (I think). And, yes, you'll find the Arkleys listed here if you do a search of the 95501 zip code.


At 1:06 PM, Blogger Jeff said...

Does Mr. Arkley have to ask permission of anyone to spend $100,000 to influence public opinion? Large, wealthy employers can smear the union and thus have greater influence over the political process. Passing this bill makes the divide and conquer strategy easier for employers who wish to maximize profit by paying low wages, provide unsafe working conditions, require long shifts, and generally disregard the humanity of the working class. Requiring unions to build consensus to afford to participate in the political process gives an unfair advantage to guys like Mr. Arkley. Unions definitely create problems, but as a working class stiff, I prefer the problems of the union to the problems of no union.


Post a Comment

<< Home