A PERSONAL DECLARATION OF WAR ON THE SWAMP
Why I’m Using US Workers Alliance to Go After the Swamp — Starting with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Who I Am
My name is Randell Hynes. I’m 63 years old. I’m a U.S. Army veteran. I spent 33 years in the tech industry, starting at AT&T when the National Labor Relations Act was already fifty years old and hadn’t changed a word. I managed political campaigns in Nevada — got Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the ballot twice as his state campaign manager. I fought for taxi drivers who couldn’t advocate for themselves. I fought for solar electricians who needed training and licensing but had no union to back them up. I lobbied, I organized, I knocked on doors.
And then one day, my employer handed me a new assignment: train my replacement. A foreign worker. Brought in on a visa from a company whose entire business model is replacing Americans like me with cheaper labor from overseas. I was 63. Thirteen years of showing up, doing the work, building systems that companies depended on. And they looked me in the eye and said, “Teach this person how to do your job, and then get out.”
I didn’t get mad. I got to work.
I founded the US Workers Alliance — a 501(c)(4) organized as Buildup Cooperative — because I realized the problem wasn’t just my employer. It wasn’t just one company. It was the entire system. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce lobbies for visa policies that allow companies to replace workers like me. Foreign corporations sit on the Chamber’s board and pay dues into the same fund the Chamber uses to elect the politicians who keep the system rigged. The National Labor Relations Act, written in 1935 when most Americans worked in factories, has never been updated to protect the 170 million workers in today’s distributed and gig economy. The whole thing is designed to break us.
I’m not a lawyer. I’m not a billionaire. I’m not a lobbyist. I’m a veteran and a 33-year tech worker from Las Vegas who got screwed by the system and decided to fight back — not just for myself, but for every American worker who’s been told to shut up, train their replacement, and be grateful they had a job at all.
So now you know who’s behind this. It’s not a dark money group. It’s not a political party. It’s not a hedge fund or a K Street operation. It’s one guy with a laptop, a stack of FEC regulations, and the conviction that what the Chamber of Commerce is doing is illegal.
Why I’m Scared
I’m scared.
I want to say that right up front, because if I don’t say it now, you’ll wonder later whether I ever felt it. I feel it. Every day. I feel it when I read about what the Chamber of Commerce has done to American workers over the past 50 years. I feel it when I see the names on their board — executives from Wipro and Cognizant, companies whose entire business model is to replace Americans with foreign workers, sitting in the same boardroom that decides how to spend millions to influence our elections. I feel it when I realize that I’m about to file a federal complaint against the most powerful lobbying organization in the history of the United States.
I’m sticking my neck out. I know that. The Chamber has more lawyers than most countries have judges. They have lobbyists on speed dial with every committee chair in Congress. They spent $72 million on lobbying last year alone — more than the GDP of some small nations — and they’ve been doing it for decades. They have the resources to bury a person. To bury an organization. To make you wish you’d never said a word.
So why am I doing this?
Because someone has to. And because right now, for the first time in fifteen years, the legal ground is ready.
What We’re Doing
The US Workers Alliance is filing a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for violating 52 U.S.C. Section 30121 — the federal law that prohibits foreign nationals from contributing, directly or indirectly, to American elections — and 11 CFR Section 110.20(i), which prohibits foreign nationals from participating in the decision-making process of any organization with regard to election-related activities.
This is not a press release. This is not a petition. This is not a tweet. This is a federal enforcement action, backed by specific legal theories, specific evidence, and specific regulatory provisions. It is the first step in a legal campaign to hold the Chamber accountable for what it has done to American workers — and to expose the foreign money pipeline that has been corrupting our democracy in plain sight.
Here’s the core of what we’ve found:
Five foreign nationals sit on the Chamber’s Board of Directors. They represent corporations headquartered in India, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and France. These board members participate in governance decisions that encompass the Chamber’s political spending, which has totaled hundreds of millions of dollars since Citizens United. The Chamber funds this spending from its general treasury, which includes dues from foreign corporations. There is no segregated fund. There is no accounting method to separate foreign money from domestic money. There is no committee of exclusively American citizens making the election-spending decisions.
Every element of this structure violates federal law. And until now, no one has put all the pieces together into a formal complaint.
Why It’s Different This Time
In 2010, this fight was tried — and it failed. I need to be honest about that, because if I’m not honest about why it failed, I can’t explain why this time will be different.
Here’s what happened in 2010:
In October of that year, a few weeks before the midterm elections, ThinkProgress published a report alleging that the Chamber accepted foreign dues and used the same general fund for political spending. President Obama picked it up. The DNC ran ads saying the Chamber was “stealing our democracy.” MoveOn.org launched a petition drive urging a Justice Department investigation. Senator Al Franken wrote a letter to the FEC.
And then it all collapsed.
It collapsed because the attack was political, not legal. It was a campaign tactic deployed in the heat of an election cycle, not a carefully constructed enforcement action. The Democrats were trying to score points, not build a case. And when the Chamber said “we have accounting controls” and “foreign money isn’t used for ads,” the media — including FactCheck.org and the New York Times — sided with the Chamber. “Democrats peddle an unproven claim,” FactCheck wrote. David Axelrod went on Face the Nation, and when Bob Schieffer asked if he had evidence, the best he could say was: “Do you have any evidence that it’s not?”
That’s not a legal argument. That’s a desperate deflection. And it deserved to fail.
Here’s why this time is different — fundamentally, structurally different:
1. We have specific legal theories that they never identified.
In 2010, the entire argument was about commingling — foreign dues going into the same account as domestic dues. That’s our Violation Theory #2, and it’s the weakest of our three theories standing alone because the Chamber can claim (without proof) that it has internal accounting controls.
But nobody in 2010 identified 11 CFR Section 110.20(i) — the prohibition on foreign nationals participating in the decision-making process regarding election-related activities. This is our Violation Theory #1, and it’s the kill shot. It doesn’t matter whether the Chamber can account for every dollar. What matters is that foreign nationals are sitting on the board that governs election spending. That alone is a violation. The regulation is explicit. The Chamber has no defense.
Nobody in 2010 raised the substantial assistance theory (11 CFR Section 110.20(h))either —the argument that every American at the Chamber who knowingly maintains this structure is providing “substantial assistance” in making prohibited expenditures. That’s our Theory #3, and it extends liability to the individuals who run the Chamber, not just the organization.
2. The evidence is stronger — and the violations are worse.
In 2010, the foreign presence on the Chamber’s board was different. There were no Indian outsourcing company executives. No one from Wipro. No one from Cognizant. The board was overwhelmingly American, with a handful of directors tied to foreign companies, including traditional multinationals.
Today? Suzanne Dann of Wipro — an Indian corporation whose entire business model is replacing American workers with H-1B visa holders — sits on the board. Ravi Kumar of Cognizant — a company that was convicted in federal court in October 2024 of discriminating against American workers — sits on the board. Colette Hirstius of Shell, a Dutch/British oil company. Peter Levesque of CMA CGM, a French shipping conglomerate. Jason Girzadas of Deloitte, a subsidiary of a UK parent entity.
These aren’t just foreign nationals. Two of them are executives of companies that have been found guilty of or investigated for harming the very American workers whose elections the Chamber is spending millions to influence. The Cognizant conviction alone — Palmer v. Cognizant, a federal jury finding the company guilty of discriminating against non-Indian workers — makes this case impossible to ignore.
3. The FEC’s own commissioners have identified this vulnerability.
In September 2016, Commissioner Ellen Weintraub proposed a rulemaking to address exactly this issue — foreign nationals participating in domestic organizations’ election spending. She warned publicly that there is “no longer a consensus” to provide safe harbor for the political activities of entities with foreign nationals in governance. The vote was 3-3. The FEC deadlocked.
That deadlock is our opportunity. It means the FEC has never approved what the Chamber is doing. There is no advisory opinion, no safe harbor, no regulatory blessing for a 501(c)(6) trade association with foreign nationals on its board making independent expenditures from a commingled general fund. The Chamber is operating in a legal vacuum — and we’re about to fill it.
4. There’s now an enforcement precedent with teeth.
In 2019, the FEC imposed a $940,000 fine — the largest since Citizens United — against American Pacific International Capital (APIC), a Chinese-owned California corporation, and Right to Rise, a pro-Jeb Bush super PAC, for violating the foreign national ban. The violation? The president of the Chinese-owned corporation “directed” a $1.3 million contribution. One person. One contribution. One violation. $940,000.
The Chamber has five foreign nationals participating in years of governance decisions affecting hundreds of millions in election spending. If one foreign national directing one contribution is worth $940,000, what is this worth?
5. We’re not a political campaign. We’re a worker-led movement.
The Democrats in 2010 were trying to win an election. We’re trying to enforce the law. That’s a fundamentally different posture. We’re not asking anyone to take our word for it — we’re pointing to specific statutes, specific regulations, specific board members, specific companies, and specific dollars. We’ve built the evidentiary record that nobody built in 2010.
And we’re bipartisan. This isn’t about Democrats versus Republicans. This is about American workers versus foreign-funded corporate capture. The Chamber spends money on both sides of the aisle to maintain its power. We’re going after the structure, not the party.
6. Federal law gives us a backup plan.
If the FEC deadlocks again — which is possible, even likely — 52 U.S.C. Section 30109(a)(8) gives us the right to file a citizen suit in federal district court. The 2010 attackers never reached this stage because they did not file a formal complaint. We will. And if the FEC won’t act, we’ll take it to a judge.
What I Need
I’m not going to pretend this doesn’t require resources. The Chamber will fight this with everything they have. They will hire the best election law firms in Washington. They will file motions to dismiss. They will argue standing. They will argue mootness. They will argue that we lack evidence. They will argue that the FEC has exclusive jurisdiction. They will make this as expensive and as exhausting as possible, because that is what they do.
We need two things:
Advice
I need lawyers who understand FEC complaint procedures, who have practiced before the Commission, and who aren’t afraid of the Chamber of Commerce. I need people who have filed MURs before and know how the process works — the timelines, the responses, the conciliation process, and the citizen suit pathway under Section 30109(a)(8). I need constitutional law advisors who can anticipate the First Amendment defenses the Chamber will raise and be ready with answers.
If you are an election law attorney, a campaign finance expert, a former FEC staffer, or a constitutional litigator, and you believe that federal election law should be enforced, I need to hear from you.
Contact me directly: Randell Hynes, (702) 849-4881, or randell@hynes.com.
A War Chest
We’re up against an organization with a $200 million annual budget and the most expensive lobbyists in Washington. We’re a 501(c)(4) with a website and a cause. That’s a mismatch, and I know it.
But here’s what I also know: we don’t need $200 million. We need enough to file the complaint, respond to the Chamber’s legal arguments, and — if the FEC deadlocks — file a citizen suit in federal court. That’s a fraction of what the Chamber spends. And we have something the Chamber doesn’t: 170 million American workers who are sick of being sold out.
Every dollar you contribute goes directly to the legal fight. No overhead. No consultants. No $75,000 galas. Just lawyers, filings, and the relentless pursuit of enforcement.
You can donate at usworkersalliance.com — click the Donate link, or go directly to our contribution page.
Why I’m Doing It Anyway
I’m going to be honest with you in a way that most advocacy leaders aren’t. I don’t have a hedge fund behind me. I don’t have a billionaire patron. I don’t have a K Street law firm on retainer. I have a laptop, a stack of FEC regulations, and the conviction that what the Chamber of Commerce is doing is illegal and has been illegal for years.
I’m scared because the Chamber has destroyed people before. They’ve spent millions to defeat politicians who crossed them. They’ve used their lobbying apparatus to crush regulatory efforts that threatened their members. They’ve operated for decades with the comfortable assumption that nobody would challenge them — that their size and their money and their army of lawyers made them untouchable.
I’m sticking my neck out because I believe they’re wrong. I believe that the law is on our side. I believe that five foreign nationals sitting on a board that governs hundreds of millions in American election spending is not just a technical violation of an obscure regulation — it is a fundamental betrayal of the principle that American elections belong to American citizens.
I’m scared. But I’m more angry than I am scared. And I’m more certain than I am angry.
The Chamber has had fifty years of operating in the shadows. Fifty years of foreign money flowing into our political system. Fifty years of American workers losing their jobs while Chamber board members from Wipro and Cognizant and Shell sit in boardrooms deciding how to spend millions to elect the politicians who will keep the system rigged.
This ends now.
Not because I’m brave. Not because I’m powerful. Not because I have all the answers. But because I have the complaint, I have the evidence, I have the legal theories, and I have the law. And the law says what the Chamber is doing is illegal.
The first step is to file an FEC complaint. The next step depends on what they do. And the step after that depends on you.
The Ask
If you’ve read this far, you already know more about foreign money in American elections than 99% of the country. You know more than the reporters who dismissed this story in 2010. You know more than the politicians who tried to weaponize it without building the case. You know more than the Chamber’s own board members, most of whom probably have no idea that the structure they participate in violates federal law.
So here’s what I’m asking:
If you’re a lawyer — reach out. We need expertise in election law, constitutional litigation, and FEC procedure. Pro bono or reduced fee. This is the case of a career. Contact me: Randell Hynes, (702) 849-4881.
If you’re a worker, register at usworkeractions.com. Become a District Captain or find your District Captain. Start organizing locally and get to know each other. You don’t need to ask permission to do the right thing. Tell your friends. Join your local July 4th events. This fight is not abstract — the same Chamber that spends foreign-tainted money on elections also spends $72 million a year lobbying for the H-1B visa policies and the wage suppression and the deregulation that have stolen $30 trillion from American workers since 1973.
If you can contribute, donate at usworkersalliance.com. Every dollar goes to the legal fight. We need a war chest to take on the most powerful lobbying organization in the country. We don’t need their budget. We just need enough to be dangerous.
If you have a platform — share this. The Chamber’s power depends on obscurity. They depend on the fact that most Americans have no idea that foreign nationals sit on their board, that foreign corporate dues flow into their election spending, and that the FEC has never approved this structure. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and the Chamber has been operating in the dark for far too long.
This is not a left-wing cause. This is not a right-wing cause. This is an American cause. The law says foreign money doesn’t belong in our elections. The Chamber says it can do whatever it wants. One of us is wrong.
I know which side I’m on. And I know which side the law is on.
Now I need to know which side you’re on.
— Randell S. Hynes U.S. Army Veteran | 33-Year Tech Industry Veteran | Founder, US Workers Alliance A 501(c)(4) organized as Buildup Cooperative dba US Workers Alliance
usworkersalliance.com | usworkeractions.com | hynes.com @RandellHynes | @USWorkerActions
0 Comments