Posted on 06/23/2004 6:35:36 AM PDT by rhema
School's out, but the nation's teacher unions will be working overtime this summer to help elect John Kerry president. The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) will host John Kerry at their convention next month, and the National Education Association (NEA) has launched a new ad campaign in several battleground states to attack President Bush's education record. The ads claim the president's No Child Left Behind Act "forces teachers to drill students for standardized tests," which, it contends, "hurts kids today and limits them in the future."
Teacher union members will be the biggest single contingent of delegates to the Democratic Convention in Boston later in July, just as they were in 2000, when more than 350 NEA members and 152 AFT members were Democratic delegates. In addition, teacher unions will donate millions to elect Democrats at all levels of government. Indeed, the NEA and AFT are two of the top 13 all-time donors to the Democratic Party since 1978, giving nearly $12.4 million to Democrats as of June 2003, according to the Center for Public Integrity.
But this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to teacher union political activism. Much of what goes on is hidden from view, even from teacher union members themselves.
Like most unions, the teacher unions not only collect voluntary contributions from their members to donate to political candidates — some 95 percent of which goes to Democrats — they also spend huge sums of their members' dues to register voters, run ads, print campaign leaflets, set up phone banks and turn out voters on Election Day. What's more, the NEA employs what Landmark Legal Foundation president Mark Levin calls "the largest army of campaign workers that any organization has" — the 1,800 NEA UniServ directors who are deployed in every Congressional District in the nation. The NEA, with its state affiliates, spent some $90 million to underwrite its UniServ program in 2003, according to documents Landmark Legal Foundation unearthed in its extensive court filings against the union.
These UniServ directors are responsible for all political activities within their geographic area, including raising funds for the NEA's political action committee (cynically named the Fund for Children and Public Education), managing NEA's delegates to the Democratic convention, giving campaign support for NEA-endorsed candidates and coordinating the union's lobbying efforts. Yet despite the obvious political nature of these union operatives' work and the huge sums of money to support it, the NEA claims it doesn't spend a dime of the dues it collects on politics, or at least that's what it tells the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Both the NEA and the AFT claim they spend zero dollars on politics when they file annual returns with the IRS. Why? Because as tax-exempt organizations, they would owe taxes on that portion of their revenues that they spend on politics. Other non-profit groups report their political and lobbying expenses — the Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, for example, reported almost $20 million in such spending in 1996 — but not the teacher unions. So, not only are the unions ripping off their own members, they are defrauding the government of millions of dollars in taxes. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
The teacher's lobby is running anti-GWBush ads here in Fla., under the guise of issue ads that relate to the "no child left behind" program. But they specifically name both GW and Jeb and criticize GW's education policy. I question whether that is legal. I thought soft money could not be candidate-oriented.
Rules and laws are not to be applied to Democrats, liberals, or unions. They were only put in place to limit Republicans, conservatives, and big business. Duh!
Teachers drill children for tests. Wow, what an outrage.
If we're testing important knowledge and skills, what's the beef?
The students sure as heck do not get A's unless it is given to them to prevent them from feeling bad. That union has ruined our school system.
Every time I see a FR post on teachers, teaching and the unions it does make me cringe.
I am a teacher, Libertarian, father and fan of GW. I vote conseratively all the time and the only thing I hate more than a liberal is two liberals. However, I am a member of a teacher union, and here is why.
As a teacher in a rural, agribusiness based community, we get all kinds. The majority of what I teach are migrants and low income kids. Most of them have plans either to sell drugs, drop out of school or do nothing but live on the largess of the government. According to the NCLB, this is unacceptable. I am required, by law, to educate these kids or I can loose my job. I really don't have an issue with my job being tied to how well my kids do. I teach the best I can with what I have, even in the face of budget cuts, increased class size and of course, higher standards.
Many businesses would not operate under the intense pressures of what a school must go through. If your operating budget and employee base were cut, but you were told to increase output by 50 percent, your business would close.
I joined a teacher organization for two reasons: 1.) the liabilty insurance coverage 2.) protection against loosing my job after I do all I can to insure my kids do the best they can.
And sometimes, but not often, the best you can means 'teach the test' Ethical: no. Necessary: depends. Do you want to eat, pay your bills, keep your kids in clothes, etc?
Anyway, my two cents, for what it is worth.
I recently had a conversation with a retired social studies teacher. I asked her why most teachers/NEA members vote for democrats. She said because "they are for the little guy and Republicans are just for rich capitalists." I asked her why then would she want someone in office like Kerry who is married to a wealthy capitalist? She said HE is still for the little guy. I had all I could do to keep from laughing in her face.
She also insisted that clintoon was not impeached. I said yes he was, she said no he wasn't. I said YES HE WAS. Someone else chimed in "YES HE WAS." She said NO HE WASN'T. How can one argue with these idiots?
I dreaded school and tests because of it.
It is beyond me that I have a master's and then some due to text anxiety.
It is propaganda, plain and simple.
"However, I am a member of a teacher union, and here is why. "
I am not a member of a teacher union and here is why!
I object to them taking my money and supporting political and SOCIAL causes with which I disagree. In my state (Wa) I have the option to be an agency fee payer. This means the teachers association has to refund the "political" portion of my dues. The most recent rebate was $320. With this refund I join an association which affords me MORE liability protection than the WEA gives and I can sleep at night knowing my money doesn't support the Dims.
When I look at the platform for the most recent NEA "get togethers" and finds that homosexuality is a major summer meeting topic it grinds me. Education should be the topic!!!
You should check out your options and quit supporting the NEA and it's anti-conservative causes. If more of us would then things would change. I am not anti association. Mine actually is very professional, non political and education focused.
I have a very favorable view of most of my fellow teachers. They are (at least in my building) professional, well prepared, and care a lot about the kids. However, I spend my lunch 1/2 hour ( yes I said 1/2) in my room reading FR and listening to radical right wing radio shows!!Ha!!
I can't stand to hear the "political daftness" of some of my fellow teachers.
There are ways to maintain membership in your local but quit the national...are you NEA or United Teachers?
Take unions out of schools (and business) and put your dues in savings. This will also lower costs to the "consumer" - the taxpayer. Being a member of a union just gives the Commie's in the Demoncrap party that much more power.
I don't live in a right-to-work state, so I have to pay what's inaptly termed a "fair share" payment to the union. I'm not anti-union; I support my local union and its bargaining efforts on my behalf. I do, however, dislike the state union (Democrat subsidiary), and I abhor the NEA (promulgator of every poisonous liberal idea you can imagine).
On principle, I bailed out of the NEA 12 years ago and joined the Association of American Educators, whose liability policy is better than that of the NEA. I've also been a member of the Christian Educators Association International, through which a teacher can also obtain good liability insurance.
I agree with you about the evils of unionism...I was responding to the poster's need for security and suggested that he could be a member of the local which often is neutral or conservative on issues and withhold his dues from the national outfits which are leftist run.
Your post was last in line, and no way were my comments directed to you, necessarily, just any union supporter. If unions choose to support any political candidate (their bias is shown by choosing democrap party candidate year after year) their charter should be revoked and should be deemed just another political organization.
As opposed to teaching them to make balloon rockets instead of teaching math and science? See Thomas Sowell's Fat in California's budget.
-PJ
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.