NEA Promotes a Single Party with Dues
The_Carpathia
that have, apparently, chosen to reject the opinions of those 1
million and support a single political party. In the NEA Today
publication that I got in the mail, today, there is a full page ad
that compares the positions of the Presidential candidates with the
positions of "NEA," (as if the entire NEA membership agrees with that
position). However, the issues that they use for comparison are
handpicked liberal issues (support for raising the minimum wage,
support for universal health care, etc). So, the NEA dues-paid
comparison was designed to suggest NEA members would vote Democrat (in
spite of the 1/3 GOP membership). Further, the issues that were used
for comparison had nothing to do with teaching or education, despite
the name of the organization or the publication.
So, 1/3 of the NEA membership should be greatly upset right now (since
their dues were used to promote the opposing party), and it shows the
flaws in having politically-oriented unions involved in Teacher
negotiation. Personally, I think there should be a ban on any teacher
union (or organization) promoting anything other than education
issues. Ideally, I would rather there be no politics in schools at
all, so we could focus on the job of teaching children knowledge and
developing skills, but that seems impossible with the 1st amendment.
However, even if no such bans are enforceable, teachers need to beware
their unions and question the needs to raise teacher dues
(since...apparently...they have extra money with which to campaign for
non-education issues).
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
(The Carpathia comes from the ship that rescued hundreds from the
prideful fall of the Titanic. May we be ready to rescue millions more
from their fall of pride.)
Bob LeChevalier
>The NEA, who includes as many as 1 million GOP members, has leaders
>that have, apparently, chosen to reject the opinions of those 1
>million and support a single political party.
Your evidence is lacking.
>In the NEA Today
>publication that I got in the mail, today, there is a full page ad
>that compares the positions of the Presidential candidates with the
>positions of "NEA," (as if the entire NEA membership agrees with that
>position).
No "as if" about it. The position of the organization is independent
of the position of its members. Do all Republicans agree with every
positions of John McCain?
>However, the issues that they use for comparison are
>handpicked liberal issues (support for raising the minimum wage,
>support for universal health care, etc).
Probably because they are issues relevant to the labor union movement;
i.e. wages and benefits.
>So, the NEA dues-paid
>comparison was designed to suggest NEA members would vote Democrat (in
>spite of the 1/3 GOP membership).
Did the ad use the word "Democrat"?
>Further, the issues that were used
>for comparison had nothing to do with teaching or education, despite
>the name of the organization or the publication.
Wages and health benefits have a lot to do with any kind of
employment.
>So, 1/3 of the NEA membership should be greatly upset right now (since
>their dues were used to promote the opposing party),
You said it was an ad. You have provided no evidence that the ad was
paid for with NEA member dues. In fact, it probably was not an ad,
but this article.
http://www.nea.org/neatoday/0805/candidate-comparison.html
and the vast majority of the issues had a lot to do with education,
and some of them (private school vouchers, charter schools,
privatizing social security) are not "liberal issues" (except for the
fact that a lot of liberals oppose them).
The issues used for comparison were not, by the way "support for
raising the minimum wage" and "support for universal health care".
"Support" or "oppose" is a possible position on the issues, but are
not the issues themselves.
The article seems to honestly present the candidates opinions on the
several issues listed. It gives the NEA position on those issues, but
of course just as NEA doesn't have to represent the positions of all
of its members, its members do not have to vote on the basis of NEA
positions.
Meanwhile, doing a quick check of the NEA Today website
http://blogs.nea.org/ednotes/2008/04/calling-all-nea-republicans-want-to-go.html
and there is no corresponding article on the Democratic convention, so
arguably the NEA was more overtly supporting Republicans than
Democrats.
Their "All-Stars" include two Democrats and two Republicans, and one
unaffiliated whose sister is a Republican.
http://www.nea.org/neatoday/0805/getinthegame.html
>and it shows the flaws in having politically-oriented unions involved in Teacher
>negotiation.
If there were such a thing as a non-"politically-oriented union",
there would probably be no such thing as a union.
>Personally, I think there should be a ban on any teacher
>union (or organization) promoting anything other than education
>issues.
Unfortunately, there is something called freedom of speech.
Organizations have such freedom (though of course they have to follow
the tax laws for their particular kind of organization if they want to
keep that tax status).
>Ideally, I would rather there be no politics in schools at all,
Where there are human beings, there is politics.
Meanwhile, you should be the last to complain about this, since you
post all sorts of non-education-related political and religious crap
to an education newsgroup.
Hypocrisy, thy name is Kennie.
lojbab
The_Carpathia
> >Ideally, I would rather there be no politics in schools at all,
>
> Where there are human beings, there is politics.
>
> Meanwhile, you should be the last to complain about this, since you
> post all sorts of non-education-related political and religious crap
> to an education newsgroup.
>
> Hypocrisy, thy name is Kennie.
>
> lojbab
Take your pick. I shouldn't be posting non-Education related stuff
(and there should be no politics in school), or both are welcome.
Which is it?
Bob LeChevalier
>On Apr 28, 8:34 pm, Bob LeChevalier <loj...@lojban.org> wrote:
>
>> >Ideally, I would rather there be no politics in schools at all,
>>
>> Where there are human beings, there is politics.
>>
>> Meanwhile, you should be the last to complain about this, since you
>> post all sorts of non-education-related political and religious crap
>> to an education newsgroup.
>>
>> Hypocrisy, thy name is Kennie.
>
>Take your pick. I shouldn't be posting non-Education related stuff
>(and there should be no politics in school), or both are welcome.
The former.
But teachers have perfect right to be political outside of school.
And you can be a public idiot in the political newsgroups, if you
wish.
lojbab