Yesterday the Denver Post's Karen Crummy pulled back the curtain on the hefty amount of public sector union political spending in the great swing state of Colorado. It's a real eye-opener for the majority who aren't tuned in so closely. The rest of us? Not so much (though even I was taken aback by Crummy's preceding piece that chronicled a 150-to-1 advantage for Democrats in 2010 super PAC spending). Not that anyone questions the right of government employees to band together in their private lives to speak freely and influence elections. It's the fact that their political fundraising machine depends on two privileged factors: 1) access to government payroll systems and 2) automatic dues collections that in many cases employees have a very difficult time getting out of.
Looking at those 2010 political spending numbers, allow us at the Independence Institute a moment to say: "We told you so." Just two years earlier we educated Coloradans about the widely-endorsed Ethical Standards ballot initiative, Amendment 49, which would have kept political funds from being channeled through government payroll systems. Those funds benefit elected officials and influence them to give priority to the rent-seeking requests of special interest groups over the needs of those who fund, and are served by, the system. And when I say "special interest groups," of course it is government unions overwhelmingly (though not exclusively) who thrive off this perk.
The amendment lost handily, of course. Without directly referencing 49 by name, or a separate unsuccessful right-to-work measure, Crummy noted in her article: "Unions exhibited their financial prowess in 2008 when labor-related ballot initiatives resulted in both private- and public-sector unions contributing $26 million. Nearly a third came from teachers unions, The Post found."
(For those of you who might be thinking, "This isn't our state, what does it have to do with us?", consider for a moment the Colorado Model and how the union political machine can tie in so easily with the massive giving of liberal billionaires.)
The Post story notes that in 2010 the state's largest teachers union, the Colorado Education Association (CEA), poured in a more modest $1.1 million into the 527 political committee pot -- an amount comparable to the SEIU's giving but outpacing the donations made by AFSCME. My own monitoring of Colorado's campaign finance disclosures long ago identified that the same year CEA chipped in an additional $356,000 directly to Democratic candidates and party organizations, with a token $3,000 tossed to Republican groups. Taken together with CEA's little sister teachers union, AFT-Colorado, 99.9 percent of their combined reported political giving benefited Democrats.
Helpfully, Crummy did capture a key part of union officials' response to the investigation and reporting of their massive campaign spending:
Kudos to Karen Crummy and the Post for some spot-on reporting. Besides putting the lie to the Left's oft-repeated claim that corporate money dominates campaigns, it also helps to remind us of the priorities that govern the politics.
The amendment lost handily, of course. Without directly referencing 49 by name, or a separate unsuccessful right-to-work measure, Crummy noted in her article: "Unions exhibited their financial prowess in 2008 when labor-related ballot initiatives resulted in both private- and public-sector unions contributing $26 million. Nearly a third came from teachers unions, The Post found."
(For those of you who might be thinking, "This isn't our state, what does it have to do with us?", consider for a moment the Colorado Model and how the union political machine can tie in so easily with the massive giving of liberal billionaires.)
The Post story notes that in 2010 the state's largest teachers union, the Colorado Education Association (CEA), poured in a more modest $1.1 million into the 527 political committee pot -- an amount comparable to the SEIU's giving but outpacing the donations made by AFSCME. My own monitoring of Colorado's campaign finance disclosures long ago identified that the same year CEA chipped in an additional $356,000 directly to Democratic candidates and party organizations, with a token $3,000 tossed to Republican groups. Taken together with CEA's little sister teachers union, AFT-Colorado, 99.9 percent of their combined reported political giving benefited Democrats.
Helpfully, Crummy did capture a key part of union officials' response to the investigation and reporting of their massive campaign spending:
CEA spokesman Mike Wetzel said in a statement that the group "participates in the political process because there is nothing more important to the future of Colorado than public education."To me, "public education" first and foremost represents our society's shared vision and goal of an educated citizenry through equitable public funding universally available to support students' and families' chosen means and modes of learning. When Mr. Wetzel and his colleagues catty-corner from the State Capitol say "public education," they primarily refer to government-subsidized and -dominated complex of powerful institutions and the adults who benefit from them. I don't know... sort of like Public Sector, Inc. Vive la difference!
Kudos to Karen Crummy and the Post for some spot-on reporting. Besides putting the lie to the Left's oft-repeated claim that corporate money dominates campaigns, it also helps to remind us of the priorities that govern the politics.
Join the conversation