Solis’ only publicly available signed ethics pledge, as of November 19, 2009, fails to meet
the standards established by President Obama’s ethics Executive Order. In fact, several other
Obama DOL appointees’ pledges provide a similar “self-administered” one-year waiver. The
others are: Deputy Secretary Seth Harris, Assistant Secretary Phyllis Borzi, Assistant
Secretary T. Michael Kerr, and Assistant Secretary Jane Oates.

As the former treasurer for the Big Labor front group American Rights At Work (ARAW), Solis routinely deposited large checks from Big Labor bosses written on forced-dues-funded checking accounts. While Solis served on the ARAW board of directors, ARAW launched unrelenting attacks on Solis’ predecessor at DOL, Secretary Elaine Chao.

In Solis’ speech to the AFL-CIO convention as Secretary of Labor, Solis began by
congratulating “our President John Sweeney,” and ended with an inappropriate round of
cheerleading. Solis has said, “Let me say publicly and personally and without reservation
you [Big Labor Bosses at her swearing-in ceremony] are very, very important part of what I
will be doing in the next few years.”

The only available ethics pledge signed by Hilda Solis falls short of the pledge ordered by
President Obama’s Executive Order #13490 – his ethics order. It appears that Hilda Solis chose
to ignore the president’s order or, at the minimum, watered it down.

President Obama's administration came to Washington pledging transparency and accountability in
government. The White House has demanded strict new ethics requirements and signed pledges from
appointees to abide by the rules. The records don't seem to be available from single office, and
moreover the government insists on giving them out by request only.

As Secretary of Labor, there is no evidence that Solis recused herself from direct involvement
with regulations advocated by her former organization, American Rights At Work, and its
benefactors. Her available ethics pledge even fails to mention that she was an ARAW officer.

Solis wrote, “for a period of one year after resignation [from ARAW]; I will not participate
personally and substantially in any particular matter involving specific parties in which [ARAW]
is a party or represents a party.”

This language does not meet the “most ethical” standards that President Obama announced he would bring to Washington and ignores President Obama’s Executive Order #13490. Solis’ pledge is at least 365 days short of the two-year moratorium from the date of her appointment mandated by President Obama.

President Obama’s Executive Order requires all Appointees to “not for a period of 2 years from the date of their appointment participate in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to my former employer or former clients, including regulations and contracts.”

The President’s definition of former employer “is any person for whom the appointee has within
the 2 years prior to the date of his or her appointment served as an employee, officer, director,
trustee, or general partner.” Surely, as a former officer and board member of ARAW, Solis
should have to recuse herself from numerous paybacks to Big Labor. But, she has chosen to
brag about being Big Labor’s partner, rather than showing restraints as required by Obama’s
Executive Order.

President Obama appointed Hilda Solis Secretary of Labor where she oversees numerous Big Labor paybacks. To help Solis arrange her office upon arrival at the Labor Department was another Obama appointee, Big Labor lawyer and AFL-CIO insider Deborah Greenfield. Other Big Labor operatives, such as Mary Beth Maxwell from the forced-union dues funded and

A seemingly innocuous letter sent to the Clerk of the House of Representatives last Thursday by President Obama's Secretary of Labor Nominee Hilda Solis raises serious and troubling legal questions about her nomination and apparent violation of House ethics rules. Not only was she involved with a private organization that was lobbying her fellow legislators on a bill that she has cosponsored, but she apparently kept her involvement secret and failed to reveal a clear conflict of interest.

Solis was a co-sponsor in 2007 of the so-called "Employee Free Choice Act," the card check legislation that would effectively eliminate the secret ballot and destroy the ability of employees to make an anonymous decision (without fear of retribution) on whether they want to join a union. She was also a co-sponsor of the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, legislation that would force states to allow public safety officers to form unions. At the same time, however, Solis was a board member of a pro-union organization, American Rights at Work, that

has been lobbying Congress on both of these bills. According to a letter filed by Solis with the House Clerk on January 29, 2009, she was not just a director of the ARW, along with fellow travelers like David Bonior, Julian Bond, and John Sweeney, she was actually the treasurer. In other words, she is the official legally charged with the fiduciary duty of approving and signing off on all spending by the organization. And to make matters worse, she did not reveal to her colleagues in the House of Representatives that membership on her financial disclosure forms, which may constitute a separate ethical violation.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics and a review of the lobbying disclosure forms filed with Congress, ARW spent $110,000 in 2007 and $120,000 in 2008 on lobbying expenses. And what were the "[s]pecific lobbying issues" listed on the forms? They included the "Employee Free Choice Act (H.R. 800/S. 1041)" and the "Public Safety /Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2007 (H.R. 980)." As treasurer of ARW, Solis would have approved the spending by ARW on lobbying other members of Congress on both of these bills she was sponsoring for passage.

The Ethics Manual of the House of Representatives quite properly restricts the lobbying of members, stating on page 352 that they should not "take an active role in lobbying Congress on behalf of a private organization since that would conflict with a Member's general obligation to the public." That rule may be murky in some instances, but the role Solis played in ARW's lobbying efforts was not passive. In answering written follow-up questions from the Senate about ARW, Solis tries to cloud the real issue by arguing that members of Congress are allowed to serve without compensation on the boards of nonprofit organizations and that the lobbying prohibition only applies if she was "personally" supervising the lobbying.