EFF's Election Report ·
Gonzales Letter ·
Welfare Reform ·
Boeing Contract ·
Budget & Taxes ·
Business Climate ·
K-12 Fact Sheet ·
EFF Health Study ·
Paycheck Protection ·
Transportation ·
Unemployment Ins. ·
Receive Updates ·
Bookmark EFF ·
Contribute ·
EFF in the News ·
How Can I Help? ·
Join EFF ·
Media Center ·
PRESS RELEASE
 March 11, 2003
Contact: Marsha Richards,
Communications Director It's final: WEA doesn't have to report election influence OLYMPIA—The Washington State Supreme Court declined last week to hear an appeal of a 1997 lawsuit filed by public school teachers and the Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF) against the Washington Education Association (WEA). The Foundation joined Teachers for a Responsible Union (TRU) to file a suit aimed at upholding the state's Public Disclosure Act after investigations revealed the WEA failed to properly collect and report money for election-affecting activities in the 1996 election cycle. A Superior Court judge ruled in 1999 the WEA did not have to comply with reporting requirements that govern political action committees because the $700,000 union officials admitted spending to influence elections wasn't "meaningful" in relation to the union's $24 million annual budget. The lower court ruling was upheld by the state Court of Appeals. "Boeing could have used the judge's reasoning to pour $52 million dollars into the elections-the same ratio to its overall budget in 1997," said Lynn Harsh, EFF's executive director. "This 'ratio' ruling discriminates against small organizations and results in unequal enforcement of the law." EFF's continued investigations of the WEA's illegal political activity have prompted the state Attorney General (AG) to file two lawsuits against the union, resulting in nearly $1.3 million in penalties. The AG is currently suing the WEA's parent organization, the National Education Association, for illegally spending teachers' money to influence Washington elections. "We are very disappointed the State Supreme Court decided not to hear our appeal," said Harsh. "Our state has been a pioneer in protecting free and fair elections, and this decision undermines efforts to have a truly transparent government. It also undermines the right of teachers to know how union officials are spending their mandatory dues."
|
1 Part Honesty; 2 Parts Arrogance 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]?" - Rep. Jim McIntire (D - 46) Despite the arrogance of some state officials, Washington's constitution is clear: "All political power is inherent in the people..." |
