Congress Is Putting Politicized Union Spending Under the Microscope

Union bosses are prioritizing their own political and financial interests over those of their members, and Congress is now dead set on proving it. 

Federal law imposes a duty of fair representation on labor organizations. That’s far from what’s happening today, and the House Education and Workforce Committee, led by Republican Chairman Tim Walberg (MI-5) and Republican Subcommittee Chairman Rick Allen (GA-12), knows it.

On Aug. 6, the two Republicans sent letters demanding records of political expenditures, independent expenditures, PAC contributions, and lobbying disbursements from the UAW, the United Steelworkers, and three rail unions, looking for proof of just how much dues money is going to Democratic political causes despite a large percentage of its worker base not sharing those views. In their own words: workers “should not be compelled to subsidize political advocacy” that runs against their own beliefs.

From what’s already public, that's exactly what’s happening. 

The UAW endorsed progressive candidate Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan's Democrat primary and likely helped tip a closer-than-expected race. 

According to an American Accountability Foundation report, from 2017 to 2024, the UAW poured nearly $95 million into politics while giving Republican Party committees exactly $0, despite a meaningful share of its own membership backing the GOP. The United Steelworkers’ federal PAC sent roughly 90 percent of its campaign money to Democrats over the same stretch and helped finance “No Kings” protests against the administration. 

And that’s not all. That same watchdog research found nearly $146 million in UAW funds went toward hotels, conferences, travel, branded merchandise, food and beverages, and entertainment — spending that looks more like a slush fund for big-suit union representatives than it does a lifeline to vulnerable workers in need. The Steelworkers weren’t far behind, reportedly directing more than $79 million toward similar hotels, conferences, travel, branded merchandise, golf, and other entertainment over the same period. 

Meanwhile, UAW President Shawn Fain is currently the subject of a Justice Department grand jury investigation into whether he abused his position to secure benefits for his fiancée and her sister. This is par for the course: the UAW already settled with the federal government in 2020 after a sprawling corruption probe uncovered embezzlement and a cover-up inside its top ranks, a scandal that sent two former UAW presidents and other officials to prison and left the union under a court-appointed monitor that still oversees it today. 

Rank-and-file members — many of whom voted for the Trump administration, support its pro-manufacturing agenda, and oppose the very political causes their unions are pushing — have every reason to ask whether leadership’s political and institutional priorities match their own. This is especially true when leadership's self-serving interests put members' take-home pay at risk.

For example, last month, John Deere proposed extending the existing collective bargaining agreement through 2029. During this significant downturn across the farm economy, workers would be receiving protected pensions and 401(k) contributions, a $37,500 cash payout at retirement ($50,000 for those with 25-plus years of service), health benefits with no deductibles, and cost-of-living wage increases every quarter instead of once a year. This makes you wonder why UAW leadership is urging members to reject it. They don’t seem to care whether workers get a good deal or find themselves out of work for extended periods of time. They just want to squeeze for every penny they can get. 

The Steelworkers have run a similar play. When Nippon Steel offered $14.9 billion to acquire U.S. Steel in 2023 — a deal that came with $2.7 billion in committed capital investment, a 10-year pledge against cutting production capacity, $5,000 closing bonuses, and written commitments to honor existing contracts — national USW leadership fought it for nearly two years.  

Plenty of rank-and-file members didn’t follow along; workers said openly at the time that they didn’t care who signed their paycheck; they just wanted the investment and the job security. The union lost, and settled with Nippon, Cliffs, and U.S. Steel last September. 

The investment leadership fought so hard to block has only grown since. The original $1 billion Mon Valley commitment is now estimated between $2 billion and $2.5 billion, the $5,000 bonuses have already gone out, and even one of the deal’s loudest critics, Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), now praises the investment.

You’d think leadership would take the hint. Instead, when this year’s contract talks with U.S. Steel opened, the union let a chance to start bargaining early slip away, pushing formal negotiations to just 43 days before the Sept. 1 deadline. That’s even though U.S. Steel’s opening offer includes wage increases compounding to roughly 18.2 percent over five years, a $4,000 ratification bonus, and no cuts to pensions or profit-sharing. Once again, leadership’s instincts, not workers’ priorities, were prioritized.

Unions exist first and foremost to protect and advance the economic interests of their members. That is their legal and historical purpose under the National Labor Relations Act. They shouldn’t be reflexively Republican or Democratic. They should only be reflexively pro-worker.

Kudos to the House Education and Workforce Committee for making sure this still rings true today. 

It should continue following the money, demanding the records, and giving rank-and-file workers the answers they deserve.

Michael Busler, Ph.D., is a public policy analyst and a Professor of Finance at Stockton University

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Townhall’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical Left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.

Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.