Introduction
This study illustrates and analyzes the political activity of the Top Union Political Action Committees (PACs) in the 1993-94, 1995-96 and 1997-98 election cycles. The study looks at four key area of Top Union PAC political activity:

(1) Political Disbursements

(2) Cash on Hand

(3) Political Receipts

(4) Direct Federal Candidate Contributions

The source of all information in this study is the Federal Election Commission, 999 E Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20463.

This study looks at Union PACs only. That means all this money is voluntarily contributed to the Union PACs. Mandatory Union dues taken from workers' paychecks are not directly reflected in this study. However, since most Union PACs have substantial overhead cost subsidized by their connected Union, mandatory union dues do aid Unions PACs in these political activities. The sums in this study, although large, are a small fraction of political activity, such as "soft money" and field workers, that is legally undertaken by the Unions directly -- without the strict PAC reporting requirements.

Purpose
With the growing national debate on Paycheck Protection and related matters and in light of the Teamsters money-laundering scandal, the purpose of this study is to:

(1) Call public, union member, policy-maker and media attention to Top Union PACs' political activity.

(2) See what impact the Teamsters money-laundering scandal has had on Top Union PACs' political activity.

Key Points Learned from this Study
(1) Top Unions PACs have more Cash on Hand at the onset of this election year than ever before. At the start of 1998, Top Union PACs have nearly $5 million more than they did at the start of 1996 (See Chart 2A).

(2) The Teamsters' PAC has been hurt by the Teamsters money-laundering scandal. The Teamsters' PAC's Cash on Hand at the start of 1998 is 56% lower than it was at the start of 1996 and 44% lower than 1994 (see Chart 2B). Political Receipts are dramatically off for the Teamsters PAC as well. Their PAC took in 16% less in 1997 than it did in 1995 and 14% less
than 1993. Only one other Top Union PAC, Laborers' International Union of North American (LIUNA) which has its own share of scandal and corruption, had a drop in Political Receipts from 1995 to 1997. Even more serious for the Teamsters' PAC, no other Top Union PAC raised less money in 1997 than it did in 1993 (See Chart 3C).

(3) Despite the slowdown in Teamsters PAC's Political Receipts, the Teamsters are projected to still have $9.4 million in Political Disbursements in the 1997-98 election cycle. That is $2 million more than the Teamsters 1998 rerun election is projected to cost U.S. Taxpayers. TheTeamsters are by far the richest Top Union PAC in terms of Political Disbursements. In the 1995-96 election cycle, the Teamsters' PAC's Political Disbursements totaled $9.9 Million. Next was NEA's PAC with $5.0 million and AFSCME's PAC with $4.3 Million (See Chart 1B).

About NLPC
This study is part of NLPC's Organized Labor Accountability Project which is investigating and exposing corruption in the Teamsters, LIUNA, AFL-CIO and other labor organizations. NLPC is a nonpartisan, nonprofit foundation promoting ethics and accountability in government through research, education and legal action. NLPC was a plaintiff in the lawsuit which succeeded in opening the records of Hillary Rodham Clinton's Health Care Task Force. For more information please contact NLPC at 703-847-3088 or www.nlpc.org.

1998 Study of Union PACs