National union engaged in illegal political activity in Washington state
OLYMPIA, WA – The Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF) today filed a complaint with the Washington State Attorney General against the National Education Association (NEA), charging the mammoth teachers’ union with violating Washington state campaign finance laws.
EFF, a long-time advocate of free speech and fair elections, alleges the NEA is operating an illegal, unregistered political action committee and illegally spending money taken from non-member (agency fee payer) teachers on politics without getting their authorization.
The complaint gives Attorney General Christine Gregoire 45 days to take action or allow EFF and teachers to file a lawsuit against the national union on behalf of the state.
EFF’s action comes after the NEA’s state affiliate (WEA) was sued by Gregoire for the second time in a period of four years due to EFF investigations and complaints. The recent lawsuit resulted in penalties against the union of $770,000 and a permanent court injunction requiring WEA to give thousands of Washington teachers a refund of 8% of their annual union dues for illegally spent fees.
The NEA was not a party to the lawsuit, but also refunded Washington teachers 8% of its annual $126 (per teacher) dues. Teachers in Washington pay an average of $683 each year in dues for all four levels of the union.
EFF’s investigations suggest the NEA’s refund should be much higher.
Bob Williams, EFF’s president and a former CPA and government auditor, has personally reviewed more than 40,000 internal union documents.
"The NEA should refund nearly 100% of the dues it collects from teachers," said Williams. "NEA officials admit they do not provide direct services to teachers. The NEA’s activity is primarily political."
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]?"