Fine Print of WEA Settlement Gives Unions "Nod of Approval" to Violate State Law
In an out-of-court settlement with the WEA and its national affiliate announced last Friday, the state effectively gutted I-134, though under the cover of a seemingly muscular fine. The whole complex of serious violations, uncovered after the state's preliminary investigation, has been dismissed ("resolved").
Subpoenas that would have indicated the depth of the WEA / NEA's illegal money laundering activities were never enforced; the PDC dropped its investigation into "whether the WEA itself constitutes a political committee," and investigation into the illegal political expenditures by the union's regional and local affiliates—despite substantial evidence—was never pursued.
State shuts down investigation: "This agreement fully and finally resolves all issues raised or that could have been raised by the State with respect to the matter resolved herein, and all pending matters between the State and WEA and its affiliates," the settlement states. With remarkable speed, Thurston County Superior Court has already approved the settlement and dismissed the state's pending investigation and suit against the union.
"Open season" on employees' mandatory dues: More significantly, in the "guidelines" accompanying Friday's settlement, the state declared that union- mandated payroll deductions ("general treasure dues"), which nearly all 65,000 teachers must pay, may now "be expended as contributions to candidates and political committees, including affiliated political committees such as WEA-PAC . . . ." In other words, union leaders can now legally launder PAC money through the general fund supplied by members' mandatory dues. These new guidelines apply to all unions.
Cindy Omlin, Spokane school speech therapist who brought the violations to the PDC's attention in 1996 stated, "Teachers are justifiably outraged that this decision seems to turn justice on its head. Worse yet, the settlement initiates a new political ‘open season' on union dues which we are forced to pay."
These sentiments were echoed by Jim Johnson, a Kent band teacher. "It is unconscionable that our state campaign finance watchdog ignored the obvious intent of the people's law (I-134) and has left classroom teachers completely unprotected," Johnson said.
Gutting Initiative 134: Initiative 134, which Washington voters passed by more than 70 percent in 1992, says in part: "No employer or . . . entity responsible for the disbursement of funds in payment of wages . . . may withhold or divert a portion of an employee's wages . . . for use as political contributions except upon the written request of the employee" (emphasis added).
The WEA has consistently claimed that the paycheck protection provision of I-134 does not apply to unions or to employers deducting money from workers' pay on behalf of unions. The state, which earlier declared the WEA's position "absurd," reversed itself, basing its decision on the union's position.
The Penalty: In an attempt to put a tough face on the settlement for the public, the AG's office and the PDC are pointing to the $80,000 penalty, $20,000 in investigation costs, and the $5 per teacher refund ($330,000 total) the WEA will supposedly have to pay. The actual amounts spent from dues on politics without members' permission far exceed the $330,000. Furthermore, union officials responsible for breaking the law escaped with no penalty, including Karen Davis, a top WEA lobbyist who illegally laundered nearly a quarter of a million dollars through her lobbyist account.
Teachers, the victims of their union officials' political exploitation, will have to pay the fines, and will have to refund themselves.
EFF and Teachers for a Responsible Union vs. the WEA
The lawsuit filed by the Evergreen Freedom Foundation and concerned teachers is all that remains in the effort to bring the WEA in compliance with the law. This legal action should not be affected by the State's recent settlement, but due to the state shut-down of the investigation by state law enforcement agencies, the small public policy institute has a much harder fight on its hands.
On Friday, March 5th, Thurston County Superior Court will hear the WEA's arguments for essentially shutting down the EFF/TRU suit. The WEA has refused to turn over documents germane to the case, and will no doubt move to have the case dismissed, on the strength of the state's recent decision. The WEA is suing EFF and TRU, along with two of the teachers who filed the initial complaints, and has served the third teacher, Jeff Leer, with an intent to sue.
"If we do not restore some sense to the enforcement of the paycheck protection aspect of I-134, you can be sure the union elite will step up their political raid on workers' paychecks, and voters will have no way of knowing who paid for elections," stated Bob Williams, President of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation.
At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question:
"Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?"