U.S. Contractors declare to their employees, under threat of job losses, who they want on 6. November elections
Corporations allowed to vote since controversial ruling "Citizens United" not only invest millions in election campaigns. It allows them to exert political influence in other ways as well. The billionaire Koch brothers have now sent a letter to their employees. It is about the "right" election on 6. November.
Templates for anti-union laws, arch-conservative think tanks and millions of dollars for organizing the radical Tea Party movement: Infamous tycoons Charles and David Koch (Stealing and Carrying) have their own unique idea of how to protect the country from the influence of what they see as a liberal, regulation-minded Obama administration. Shortly before the landmark elections on 6. November, they therefore remind their employees which candidate allegedly threatens their jobs and who should take a seat in the White House as of January 2013.
Why look far away when the electoral potential is already working for you?? That’s what the two Koch brothers must have been thinking when, earlier this month, they offered tens of thousands of employees of their subsidiary Georgia-Pacific in the U.S. State of Oregon a "Election Information Package" sent home. Included: a series of proposals for candidates whose policies supported Koch Industries. After all, on November 6. November, not only will the next president of the USA be elected, but there will also be congressional elections. Naturally, Obama’s Republican challenger Mitt Romney was at the top of the wish list. Dave Robertson, president of the company, explained why this is so in the Info-Post cover letter obtained by the US magazine In These Times, which reported on the incident:
If we are to elect candidates who spend hundreds of billions of borrowed money on expensive subsidies that favor a few business friends, burden businesses with unprecedented regulations, prevent or delay new and important construction projects, and excessively impede free trade, then many of our over 50.000 employees and contractors to suffer the consequences.
There have been threats of higher gasoline prices, runaway inflation, and "other ubles". While Robertson writes that the choice of whom to vote for will, of course, be up to each individual, "based on the factors that are the most important for one" were. He did not mention, however, that the list of candidates had been drawn up at the "at the request of many employees" had been included. For a differentiated opinion formation Charles Koch contributed an anti-Obama editorial to the information sheet, David wrote a pro-Romney text. The intention behind this is clear: If you support Obama on 6. Obama on November 6 is risking his job. In times of recession, a leverage as effective as it is unscrupulous.
Companies were previously prohibited from expressing their political views to employees. But in the wake of "Citizens United"-ruling by the Supreme Court in 2010, this pillar of democracy was also torn down. Playing on workers’ existential angst is now legal and being used. Earlier this month, billionaire resident of the swing state of Florida David Siegel sent out an email to his 7.000 employees. The message was the same as that sent by the Koch brothers. Four more years under the Obama administration and he will have no choice but to cut jobs, Siegel threatened his employees. Murray Energy, one of the country’s largest coal mines, went one step further. According to a report in the progressive U.S. Magazine The New Republic, the company urged its employees to donate money to Republican candidates. In the end, however, it is Charles and David Koch who are uninhibited in pushing their political views.
Workers at the Koch subsidiary in Oregon therefore have a new guideline on how to use social networks. Even outside the workplace, it states, use must not have a negative impact on the company’s reputation. Since then, a culture of fear has developed among "culture of fear" writes In These Times. According to the report, some workers had recently had their picture taken with a Democratic congressman. When their employer’s election information package arrived at their home a few days later, they called their union representative in a panic. Fearing that pictures would appear on the Internet and they would lose their jobs.