Bob Schmetzer – 10/7/12

This page was last updated on October 8, 2012.

Limit corporate contributions; Bob Schmetzer; Beaver County Times; October 7, 2012.

I critiqued 15 previous Schmetzer letters and they are usually broken records. Mr. Schmetzer’s last letter was entitled “Protections lost.” You can find more Schmetzer letters in the archives (2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2004).

Mr. Schmetzer is a flamethrower when he thinks he’s “preaching to the choir.” For example, in reference to Pennsylvania House Bill 1077 (2011-2012 session) (“Women’s Right-to-Know Act”), Mr. Schmetzer bashed Catholic priests on his Facebook wall (February 24, 2012) when he wrote, “70 year old virgin men who wear dresses to work are telling the pa legislature what laws to pass for women to live by. The supreme court said through settled law that womens rights were violated. When is this harrassment going to stop. Take their tax deduction away if they want to be a political lobby or profit agency.” In fairness, it appears Mr. Schmetzer lifted the “70 year old virgin men …” comment from Bill Maher. You may recall a previous Schmetzer letter was nearly word-for-word plagiarism of an op-ed piece written by one of Mr. Schmetzer’s fellow leftists.

On another website, Mr. Schmetzer wrote (February 29, 2012) of Rick Santorum, “DUMPRICK should be the campaign motto in this election. Pittsburghs real pollution comes out of Santorums mouth to where the EPA should shut him down. He does not represent catholics, but a radical group Opis Dei.They wrap themselves in barbed wire. Now he is drinking frack water. Plays with dead babys. Home schools his kids in Virginia and billed the Pa school districts. Did not live in Pa while US Senator. Hates women and wants to return to the past where women were legally designated NON-PERSONS. Life begings at orgasim. Supports protecting priest who break the law to keep the church from prosecution. This guy needs to go back to catacism, confession, do severe penance, and become a human being.”

The BC Democrats website used to list Robert Schmetzer as the local town chair for South Heights, but that page no longer exists as of this writing. Mr. Schmetzer is also “vice-president of PA 12th CD Chapter of Progressive Democrats of America.” The PDA-PA12 website is Beaver County Reds. Why doesn’t the BCT mention these associations in an editor’s note when it publishes Mr. Schmetzer’s letters?

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“Stop the corporate takeover of our democracy in its tracks. We are returning to the era of the robber barons.

“Democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. We must stand strong in our vigorous refusal to tolerate the subversion of democracy.”

[RWC] This is a perfect, though I’m sure unintentional, example of leftist ideology. The government (“democratic state”) must be stronger than “We the People.” This is how a representative republic can turn into something totalitarian. Thank you, Mr. Schmetzer.

“A recent survey by the Associated Press and the National Constitution Center shows that 83 percent of Americans think there should be limits on how much money corporations can give to outside groups that run so many of the dirty campaign ads polluting our airwaves. And 85 percent of Democrats, 81 percent of Republicans and 78 percent of Independents support limiting corporate influence in elections. The decision of ‘Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission’ must be overturned.”

[RWC] By Mr. Schmetzer’s standards (See above.), this letter is pretty tame.

I get a kick out of one side or the other complaining about “dirty campaign ads polluting our airwaves.” Mr. Schmetzer is probably referring to the campaign ad that accused Mitt Romney of being responsible for a woman’s death from cancer.

Citizens United v. FEC was about the ability of anyone (including groups of people) to take out their own ads, commercials, etc. expressing their position regarding candidates and issues. Sounds like a free-speech issue to me. As groups of people, the ruling applies to both corporations and labor union management. Direct contributions to federal candidates remain illegal for corporations and labor unions. You probably noticed Mr. Schmetzer didn’t mention “limiting [labor union management] influence in elections.”

The primary business of today’s labor unions is advocacy for leftist politicians and lobbying for leftist policies/programs. According to their Department of Labor LM-2 forms, USW management spent over $6 million in 2010 on “Political Activities and Lobbying” and AFL-CIO management spent over $29.6 million in 2010 on “Political Activities and Lobbying.” Representing employees is simply a fund-raising chore labor union management must endure to provide funds for its lobbying and political activities. Heck, AFL-CIO CEO Richard Trumka conceded as much when he said, “I got into the labor movement not because I wanted to negotiate wages. I got into the labor movement because I saw it as a vehicle to do massive social change to improve the lots of people.”

Since at least 1998, only twice (2004 at 86% and 2006 at 87%) did less than 90% of labor union federal campaign contributions go to Democrat candidates. In 2010, 94% of labor union management PAC contributions to federal candidates (about $70 million) went to Democrat candidates. In 2008, that figure was 92% ($68.8 million out of $74.9 million). I’ll go out on a limb and guess a similar trend at the state level.