NEA, AFL-CIO have say, veto power in Democratic party plans
An Associated Press story printed nationwide today confirms what the Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF) has asserted for some time: labor unions, including the National Education Association (NEA), not only support the Democratic Party but actually help run it.
AP reported that "while labor’s support of Democrats is well known, [Federal Election Commission] documents show labor leaders had veto power over Democratic Party plans in 1996 by virtue of their large donations and seats on the steering committees in each state."
"It is common knowledge that the NEA and other labor unions support the Democrat party," said Bob Williams, EFF’s president. "What comes as a shock to many is that the unions not only support Democrats, they actually have a controlling role in the direction of the party."
EFF has been investigating union political spending, particularly by the National Education Association and its Washington state affiliate, since 1996 when a group of teachers approached the Olympia-based policy research organization asking for help protecting their free speech rights from forced contributions to union politics through mandatory dues.
EFF’s investigation has uncovered extensive political coordination in Washington state elections between the NEA, its state affiliate, other labor organizations, and the Democrat Coordinated Campaign.
"Workers are diverse in their opinions and convictions and it is clear that union officials do not respect that," said Bob Williams, EFF’s president. "It is even more clear when you see just how closely affiliated unions are with one political party – to the point of actually running it."
Recent internal polls taken by the NEA show a wide disparity in members’ political affiliation. 48% call themselves Democrat, while 24% say they’re Republican and 28% identify as Independents. Despite this diversity, NEA officials direct more than 95% of the union’s political contributions and in-kind spending to Democrats.
"The alarming part of this is that a political party must raise funds from voluntary sources, while unions just take it from workers’ paychecks as a condition of employment," said Williams. "If using unauthorized funds to run a political party isn’t a blatant violation of free speech, I don’t know what is."
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]?"