Posted on 10/02/2002 2:56:43 AM PDT by kattracks
CNSNews.com) - A new report indicates that Democrat candidates were the beneficiaries of about 95 percent of the political contributions generated by teachers' unions in the years 1996 to 2000.
The National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, plus their state chapters used their vast network of members and millions of dollars in political contributions to become one of the most powerful interest groups in the United States, the Education Intelligence Agency (EIA) concluded in its report.
Even though EIA's director, Mike Antonucci, said complicated disclosure laws prevented a complete and thorough analysis, the material he reviewed showed that the teachers' unions overwhelmingly and consistently supported Democrat candidates running for office.
In the 2000 election cycle, for example, the National Education Association (NEA) reportedly spent $6.1 million on political causes, while the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) spent $4.3 million. The unions ranked sixth and 12th, respectively, among the top spending political action committees, according to the report.
"The thing that struck me was not just the national figures, which are imposing by themselves, but if you go down through all the states and see where they stand in terms of donations, it's always near the top," he said. "You don't see that from any other interest group."
The New York State United Teachers (NYSUT), the AFT's largest affiliate with 480,000 members, outspent its parent organization in 1996 and 1998. The union's political contributions have gradually increased from $2.9 million in 1996 to $3.4 million in 1998 and $4 million in 2000, according to the report.
Carl Korn, NYSUT spokesman, said it was unfair to call teachers' unions the most powerful interest group when corporations spend far more money on political causes. He also said there is nothing wrong with union members expressing their political voice by donating money.
"It's not a secret in New York that NYSUT is involved in the political process," Korn said. "Our political donations are completely voluntary from about 200,000 members. It is our members' way of participating in the political process."
In addition, Korn said, unions do not always support Democratic candidates. For this year's state Assembly and Senate races, NYSUT endorsed 118 Democrats and 75 Republicans. Korn admitted, however, that the political climate varies from state to state, which could have an impact on another union's endorsements.
The NEA does not pressure any of its affiliates to align with specific political causes, spokeswoman Denise Cardinal said. When the national organization chooses to support candidates, she said, board members on its political action committee make the decision.
"Our goal is to elect pro-public education candidates," Cardinal said. "It's based on a series of interviews and past performance in elected office and their track record with public education. That's really how we make our decision."
Two conservative organizations, the Landmark Legal Foundation and Evergreen Freedom Foundation, claim unions have misled their members and the public about how they spend political contributions. Both organizations are involved in either legal action or have issued complaints with federal agencies about union activity.
"The NEA spends tens of millions of dollars every year in direct and indirect political activities to influence elections at the federal, state and local levels," said Mark R. Levin, president of the Landmark Legal Foundation.
Levin's group filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Labor in April, requesting an investigation into the NEA's compliance with a federal disclosure law. The Federal Elections Commission declined to look into a similar complaint last month, citing a lack of resources.
At the state level, the Evergreen Freedom Foundation is currently entangled in a lawsuit with the Washington Education Association. Jami Lund, who oversees the group's Paycheck Protection Project, said there are many loopholes that allow unions to conduct political activities.
"Everything that you can imagine a political party does, these unions do. But because it's all in the area of staff activity, it doesn't show up on the radar screen," said Lund, who claimed the union has the "most sophisticated voter list in the state."
Even when campaign finance changes take effect on Nov. 6, the day after the 2002 elections, Antonucci said few changes are likely to result.
"There will be ways to get around the provisions so that the end result is the same," he said. "You get media campaigns, campaign literature, people going door-to-door, but the payment method is different. I don't see any change in the activity."
E-mail a news tip to Robert B. Bluey.
Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.
McBride/McAuliffe Seeks to Block Funding Probe, Sept. 25, Miami Herald.
Elections commission may subpoena McBride over adsSept. 27, AP.
McBride Campaign Entwines With Teachers Union (FEA).
My best friend was a sincere born-again Christian who taught in the public schools. The only demonrat she couldn't vote for was Geoffrey Fieger for Governor of MI.
The teache's union is second to none in brainwashing.
I say too darn bad that teachers have to use out-of-pocket funds for necessary items for the students, this is the outcome of what they are politically supporting and paying for aren't they?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.