Teachers to pay more than expected for WEA's law breaking
In a Thurston County Superior Court hearing today, the Washington Education Association (WEA) was ordered to pay $190,000 in legal fees to the Attorney General’s (AG) office for a lawsuit that resulted in a $400,000 fine against the union last July.
The Evergreen Freedom Foundation, an Olympia-based policy research organization and long-time advocate of free speech and fair elections, sparked the lawsuit with a complaint filed at the Public Disclosure Commission.
To date, the WEA has racked up more than $1 million in fines and penalties for its violations of state campaign finance laws. The AG has sued the union twice, and teachers currently have a class action lawsuit pending against WEA.
"This case proves yet again that WEA officials have no respect for the teachers they claim to represent," said Rebecca Haunschild, a Spokane area high school teacher. "Not only do they illegally fund their political agenda with teachers' money, they use our money to pay the penalties when they get caught."
In addition to the $590,000 in fines and legal costs, the judge ordered the WEA to send refunds totaling $180,000 to the 4,000 teachers whose fees were illegally spent on politics. Refund checks must be sent by January 15th.
The refunds will be sent to those teachers who are not members of the WEA, but must still pay fees for collective bargaining. Many opted out of the union because they object to the WEA’s forced politics.
"Is this the last time we’ll see this headline? Not likely," said Jami Lund, a project manager for EFF. "WEA officials have a long track record for illegal political activity. Legal trouble is just a cost of doing business for union officials."
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]?"