In the wake of a recent state Supreme Court ruling, each of Washington’s 296 school districts is being notified this week of its legal responsibility to protect teachers’ wages from unauthorized union political activity.
The May 18 court decision states that any employer who "has notice" that a labor union is using its members’ dues for political contributions without permission may be held liable for a fine of up to $10,000 per violation.
The notices are being sent by the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, a policy research organization based in Olympia. Each notice includes information about the court decision and documentation showing that officials of the Washington Education Association, the state’s only teachers’ union, are currently using regular dues for political contributions in the 2000 election season without member authorization as the law requires.
Among other evidence is the September 1999 issue of the WEA’s Action Newsletter in which officials state that "regular monthly dues of WEA’s card-carrying members do cover activities in the political arena such as lobbying...and opposing anti-public-education initiatives like vouchers."
"It’s unfortunate that the high court has excused the WEA from any liability," said EFF president Bob Williams. "We certainly sympathize with the precarious position this places school district employers in. But someone must protect teachers from compelled political speech at the hands of their own union officials. Perhaps it’s time the WEA began collecting money for its political war-chest the old-fashioned way–by asking for it."
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]?"