Association for Union Democracy
July Issue
Big Cash In IBT - Where's it From?
In a bizarre turnabout, all the actors, factors, and forces- -except the Teamsters for a Democratic union--- seem
to have combined to rescue the Teamster reform movement from the jaws of victory and
smoothed the path of those who had permitted the union to be heavily infiltrated by
racketeers.
Yesterday: After winning two remarkable election victories, the
new president, reform leader Ron Carey, led the union in an equally
remarkable strike victory over the United Parcel Service and seemed poised to continue the
drive to eradicate the racketeers. Revolution in the Teamster union
shifted the balance of power in the AFL-CIO and led to the triumph of John Sweeney as president.
Today: Within a few months, one court-appointed
election officer voided Carey's election and ordered a rerun, charging that Carey election
fund-raising had violated the rules and affected the election outcome. She ordered a
rerun. Then, a special investigator, concluding that Carey knew that his
campaign officials had laundered union moneys into his campaign funds, disqualified Carey
and barred him from the ballot in the rerun. And, finally, a new election
officer, looking into the 1996 campaign financing of Carey's enemy rival, James Hoffa,
validated Hoffa's candidacy in the coming election.
Even though he found substantial fund violations
committed by the Hoffa campaign, he decided they were not serious enough to disqualify
Hoffa. Besides, he expressed concern that if Hoffa was eliminated, the members' democratic
right to choose would be curtailed--- a consideration
that failed to save Carey.
With the election scheduled to begin on September 4, just a few
months away, the field has been tilted sharply toward the Hoffa old guard forces. His
campaign structure seems intact; their candidate remains at the helm,
continuing a campaign that began de facto in 1992 shortly after Carey first took office.
The reform forces, having lost their chief, have not, at this writing, united around a
substitute candidate. Ken Hall, their first choice,
citing ill health, has withdrawn from the race.
The last Teamster election
campaign, in l996, was awash in Big Money. With each side spending a reported amount of
about $4,000,000 each, it must have been the most expensive union race in American
history, probably world history. With that kind of money, you could try for the U. S.
Senate. The clumsy manipulators who ran the Carey campaign left a paper
trail of illicit transactions that any amateur detective could trace. Hoffa had that kind
of help. But where did all that Hoffa money come from?
Michael Cherkasky, the election officer, was able to find about
$250,000 in improper Hoffa money which he considered violations but not
serious enough to endanger Hoffa. Just as he estimated that these violations were de
minimis, the penalties he inflicted were even more minimally de minimis.
For example: the Hoffa campaign was fined $16,767 for receiving $167,675 worth of donated
services from a PR company. (The Carey campaign would surely be happy to
get away with returning 10% of their illegal money.)
Cherkasky explains how he dealt with one complaint against the
Hoffa campaign. Follow this one: The Local 710 pension fund sold bonds
through an advisory service which, for reasons unexplained, turned over
$1,000,000 of its profits to a Christopher Roach who had also unexplained "collective
bargaining" connections with Local 337, one of Hoffa's chief supporters. That million
dollars, plus an additional $500,000, was transferred out of the country to a Cayman
Island company. There the trail, and the money vanish. Finding no
evidence of any connection with the Hoffa campaign
Cherkasky dismisses the whole thing without even suggesting that further investigation
into these strange transactions might be appropriate.
The Hoffa campaign listed over $2,000,000 in small donations which
did not have to be reported in detail, presumably from
sales of shirts, buttons, and other trinkets. Where did the money come from? Cherkasky
reports that his investigators inspected piles of paper: receipts, deposit slips, and
whatnot; he found nothing wrong. And so,in boldface type he reports "Small
contributions to the Hoffa slate campaign came from lawful sources."
No hesitation, no qualification. But confidence in that positive assertion is undermined
by a not so-unqualified footnote: "...the Election
Officer could find evidence that would support a definitive answer of 'no' to the
questions that ask whether an identifiable contribution is from a lawful source. A
definitive answer of 'yes' however is not possible. The Election Officer cannot
definitively negate the possibility of some unitemized cash as having come
from an improper contributor."
You may not be able to figure it out, but what
he actually says is that, despite his boldface pronouncement, he can't tell for sure. Cash
transactions are suspect because they are almost impossible to trace. How much came in as
cash? In passing, without attributing any significance to it, Cherkasky
notes that there were "hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash deposited to state
campaign accounts." Hundreds of thousands? But how much exactly
That's a lot of money. In a report otherwise bulging with statistics, this one is missing.
Cherkasky concluded that he and his investigators did not find
sufficient hard evidence to bar Hoffa from the election
rerun. But even that finding or lack of one, right or wrong, hardly justifies the overall
tone of his report and the impression it leaves. At most, the precise facts as presented
by Cherkasky might conceivably have sustained a finding of "unproved." But he
goes further and provides the Hoffa forces with a clean bill of health,
not a total whitewash or complete vindication, but enough to supply them with campaign
ammunition.
A few years ago, the
Department of Justice moved in court to strengthen democracy in the Teamsters union as the best weapon for ousting organized crime. The man who helped lead the
fight against organized crime and helped begin the process of ousting racketeers, is now
disqualified from running for office. In the name of integrity. The man
supported by those who tolerated organized crime when the union's top officialdom was
installed by a tiny clique gets the green light to run, and on a nice soft track. In the
name of democracy. What twisted talents composed that scenario?
Union Democracy Reivew is published by the:
Association for Union Democracy
500 State Street, Brooklyn NY 11217
718 855-6650