And they say there is no bias in education. The NEA is a political group which is brainwashing our children. They must be stopped at all costs.

The NEA gave $65 million in its members' dues to left-liberal groups last year.

Tuesday, January 3, 2006 12:01 a.m. EST

If we told you that an organization gave away more than $65 million last year to Jesse Jackson's Rainbow PUSH Coalition, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, Amnesty International, AIDS Walk Washington and dozens of other such advocacy groups, you'd probably assume we were describing a liberal philanthropy. In fact, those expenditures have all turned up on the financial disclosure report of the National Education Association, the country's largest teachers union.

.....

Many of the organization's disbursements--$30,000 to the Central Intercollegiate Athletic Association, $122,000 to the Center for Teaching Quality--at least target groups that ostensibly have a direct educational mission. But many others are a stretch, to say the least. The NEA gave $15,000 to the Human Rights Campaign, which lobbies for "lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equal rights." The National Women's Law Center, whose Web site currently features a "pocket guide" to opposing Supreme Court nominee Sam Alito, received $5,000. And something called the Fund to Protect Social Security got $400,000, presumably to defeat personal investment accounts.

.....

There's been a lot in the news recently about published opinion that parallels donor politics. Well, last year the NEA gave $45,000 to the Economic Policy Institute, which regularly issues reports that claim education is underfunded and teachers are underpaid. The partisans at People for the American Way got a $51,000 NEA contribution; PFAW happens to be vehemently anti-voucher.

The extent to which the NEA sends money to states for political agitation is also revealing. For example, Protect Our Public Schools, an anti-charter-school group backed by the NEA's Washington state affiliate, received $500,000 toward its efforts to block school choice for underprivileged children. (Never mind that charter schools are public schools.) And the Floridians for All Committee, which focuses on "the construction of a permanent progressive infrastructure that will help redirect Florida politics in a more progressive, Democratic direction," received a $249,000 donation from NEA headquarters.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007761

what else is new. In the end I'm sure they're doing this for the 'good of the community' and the prospect of more power and money didn't influence their decision at all.

From your article:
The good news is that for the first time members can find out how their union chieftains did their political thinking for them, by going to www.union-reports.dol.gov, where the Labor Department has posted the details.
I checked out that link, and the information this article refers to is nowhere to be found. Can you find a more specific link?

Note: I also did a Google News search and found that all of the articles which mention this cite the Wall Street Journal (instead of a primary source). Republican echo chamber?

But I'll keep an open mind - where's the data at, ruby soho?

what else is new. In the end I'm sure they're doing this for the 'good of the community' and the prospect of more power and money didn't influence their decision at all.
Translation: "what i read in this article fits my worldview so i won't verify its substance."

Translation: "what i read in this article fits my worldview so i won't verify its substance."my worldview = reality

At this DOL Payer/Payee search site:
http://erds.dol-esa.gov/query/getPayerPayeeQry.do

Set the search field to "payee" and type in the name one of the organizations listed in the article in the original post. Not all of the names cited in the article work, due to acronyms and words that are rammed together in the report, but they are there. For example, "Rainbow Push Coalition."

On the next page, under the Fiscal Year Field there is are links to the 2005 reports that were filed for the organizations that gave the Rainbow Push Coalition contributions, in this case, it was the NEA, with $5,000 and the AFL-CIO with an equal amount. Click on the NEA's 2005 Report.

The next page takes a while to load completely. The area of the report that the article in the original post seems to be citing is "SCHEDULE 17 - CONTRIBUTIONS, GIFTS & GRANTS."

Oh, my. A worker's union is leftist?

That's so traditional, it's practically conservative!

I wonder....could this be used as yet another excuse to not pay teachers what they are worth?

... no because Teachers rarely BENEFIT from the Union's doings! And students SURE don't benefit at all!

And I cannot stress enough how bad the Teacher's unions are for the community and the kids.

The teachers don't make a livable wage as it is.
Granted, the teachers union has problems. But, without collective bargaining power, I doubt the teachers would make more than they do today.
If they were paid a reasonable salary, then it might be reasonable to abolish their collective bargaining power too.

From your article:

Note: I also did a Google News search and found that all of the articles which mention this cite the Wall Street Journal (instead of a primary source). Republican echo chamber?


The WALL STREET JOURNAL is a Republican echo chamber?

You can't blame the teachers union or the church of satan for that matter . It all falls back on the parents who refuse to pay attention to whats being programmed to their children . The very second that a parent found out that their innocent children were being recruited by immoral perverts under the false guise of ' TOLERENCE ' and didnt speak out is when the union got it's power .

bad men increase when good men do nothing !

When exactly did this become news? The workers unions of america, from teachers to janitors, support the democrats, due to the fact that the democrats work in the interests of the american people. The republicans get the support of Tobacco industries and Oil Industries.

When exactly did this become news? The workers unions of america, from teachers to janitors, support the democrats, due to the fact that the democrats work in the interests of the american people. The republicans get the support of Tobacco industries and Oil Industries.

A significant portion of every union is Republican. For union fat cats to so blatently support only democrats is a disservice to the membership. Unions therefore no more represent their membership than do the politicians who get the donations. They are simply another giant source of funding for the democrats. If they truly represented their members, you would see a much more even distribution of donations and support to various candidates, not this monolithic sellout to one party.

A significant portion of every union is Republican. For union fat cats to so blatently support only democrats is a disservice to the membership. Unions therefore no more represent their membership than do the politicians who get the donations. They are simply another giant source of funding for the democrats. If they truly represented their members, you would see a much more even distribution of donations and support to various candidates, not this monolithic sellout to one party.

And yet Iv never heard of members of the union complaining or leaving due to how poorly run and unfair the unions are, nor do you seem to consider the fact that unions vote on who represents them. Your claim is completly bogus, and hogwash.

And yet Iv never heard of members of the union complaining or leaving due to how poorly run and unfair the unions are, nor do you seem to consider the fact that unions vote on who represents them. Your claim is completly bogus, and hogwash.

To leave the union is to leave your job, and most likely your entire profession. Many people are not going to do that for political considerations. People do complain, but they want to continue working. Do you believe for an instant that union leadership elections are completely fair, open, and honest, and that the existing leadership has no influence on who is nominated? You may as well believe that just anyone can win the democrat or Republican nomination for president.

Unions are bad for AMerica.

Unions simply extort money from workers.

last year alone there was over 100 convictions against union bosses.

But lets focus on Walmart.

Im beginning to think you have little knowledge of how most of the labor unions your describing work.

You know what else is bad for America?
Allowing the government and corporations to just do whatever they want at the expense of the average American.
Sure, labor unions have problems. But, I don't see the critics of the unions offering up any solutions to replace them.
Individually the average worker has no power to affect wages or living conditions. Collectively, they do. Thus why unions exist.

The WALL STREET JOURNAL is a Republican echo chamber?
The editorial page is...

At this DOL Payer/Payee search site:
http://erds.dol-esa.gov/query/getPayerPayeeQry.do
The area of the report that the article in the original post seems to be citing is "SCHEDULE 17 - CONTRIBUTIONS, GIFTS & GRANTS."
Thanks for the link - this is exactly what I was looking for.
Many of the organization's disbursements--$30,000 to the Central Intercollegiate Athletic Association, $122,000 to the Center for Teaching Quality--at least target groups that ostensibly have a direct educational mission.
This is the key sentence in the article Rubycontra posted. Almost all of the money in this section (the "$65 Million to Leftist-liberal Groups") went to state affiliates which advocate on issues which line up with the NEA's nation-wide-positions, such as the Alabama Education Association (http://www.myaea.org/), or the Arizona Education Association (http://www.arizonaea.org/). And the grant money for Rainbow PUSH (a mere $5,000)? It went to an Educational Access initiative.

The editorial page is...

That the editorial page is center right doesn't mean the story is illegitimate.

That the editorial page is center right doesn't mean the story is illegitimate.
Not by itself, no. The fact that editors would choose to "report" this on the editorial page, made me skeptical. So, I did some quick research and used Google News to see where else this story was turning up. When I saw that the only other mentions of this issue cited the Wall Street Journal article, rather than the actual report, that's when my bullsh't detector started to go off. With Alberto Balsalm's help, I was able to go directly to the primary source the article was relying on. And as you can read from my previous post, the claims don't hold up.