As I begin to write this, let me start by saying that I don’t have a problem with unions, per se. I do think that most unions have long outlived their usefulness and that whether they want to admit it or not, unions as a group are getting smaller in the private sector, partly because potential union members don’t want to pay dues to support causes they don’t agree with. But, unions have exploded in the public sector and unions are ecstatic about this development, partly because it is easier to negotiate with government entities since government doesn’t have to concern itself with profit motives during negotiations. This has some interesting effects on the political landscape as reflected in campaign contributions and lobbying efforts. But if workers want to unionize in the private sector (manufacturing and trades) I don’t have an issue with it.
My problem is public unions, defined as those unions that are comprised of, and represent government employees either at the Federal, State, Local or Municipal level. Why do I oppose public unions? You ask. I will tell you, because I am paying for the union with my Tax dollars.
Let me give you an example. According to the website UnionFacts .com The National Education Association (NEA) is the largest labor union in the United States, representing most of the country's teachers along with other school personnel. The NEA has 2.7 million members and has an annual operating budget of around $150 million. Additionally, the NEA has assets worth $186,244,257 and political funds of $3,645,395. According to OpenSecrets.com, in 2008 teachers unions (not just the NEA) contributed over $5 million to Democrat candidates and just over $261,000 to Republicans; a ratio of 95% to Democrats and 5% to Republicans. In 2010 teachers unions contributed $4.78 million to Democrats and $134,220 to Republicans, a ratio of 97% to 3%.
Why does this matter. Well, the sad fact of the matter is that all teachers and administrators in the public school system who belong to unions are employed by local governments. The government pays their salaries through taxes, your taxes. So the taxpayer is subsidizing the union agenda and by extension Democrat Party policy. You are a Democrat contributor whether or not you would like to be. You money is being used against you, particularly if you are a Republican. This is true for all public sector unions.
Here is a quick breakdown for some other public sector unions for the 2010 election cycle:
American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees: $2,194,450 to Democrats, $10,000 to Republicans.
American Federation of Teachers: $2,273,800 to Democrats, $8,000 to Republicans.
National Education Association: $1,800,200 to Democrats, $81,200 to Republicans.
National Association of Letter Carriers: $1,620,000 to Democrats, $54,000 to Republicans.
American Postal Workers Union: $1,311,500 to Democrats, $14,000 to Republicans.
International Association of Firefighters: $1,631,750 to Democrats, $318,000 to Republicans
Totals : $10,831,700 to Democrats, $485,200 to Republicans,
That is 10 million of your tax dollars. For those that agree with the unions’ agendas that is not a problem. For the rest of us, this is a serious issue. Why should my tax dollars be laundered into union coffers to support policies I am dead set against?
Some of the resolutions and policies that NEA advocates or supports: same sex marriage, repeal of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act; “…early childhood education programs in the public schools for children from birth through age eight”; “…believes that home schooling programs based on parental choice cannot provide the student with a comprehensive education experience.”; International Court of Justice. The Association urges participation by the United States in deliberations before the court; The Association opposes any federal legislation or mandate that would require school districts to schedule a moment of silence. Is this the kind of policy that you would support? Then why are you forced to pay taxes knowing that a percentage of that money will be funneled to unions which advocate these positions?
In a speech to NEA members, General Counsel Bob Chanin asks, “why are these conservative and right-wing bastards picking on NEA and its affiliates?” And, proceeds to answer the question himself by saying, “… and they (NEA and its affiliates) are the nation’s leading advocates for public education and the type of liberal, social and economic agenda that these groups find unacceptable.”
This all done with your taxpayer money, all this is subsidized by the American Taxpayer.
Let me be clear. I don’t have a problem with workers in the private sector unionizing. It is their right. But I do believe that those individuals who are in the public/government sector, at any level, should be prohibited from unionizing. This is not unprecedented. The military is prohibited from unionization and rightly so.
But the obvious fact is this: ALL THE DUES CONTRIBUTED BY GOVERNMENT WORKERS TO UNIONS IS TAXPAYER MONEY!! You, the taxpayer, are subsidizing all these unions whether you want to or not; whether you agree with the union or not.
The American Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize unions. All public sector unions should be decertified. If public workers think they are getting a bad deal, they should find a job in the private sector and unionize there. That is the open secret that public unions don’t want you to know.
