My editorial on the proposed NEA/AFT merger is scheduled for tomorrow's
Wall Street Journal.

The next EIA communiqué will be delivered from New Orleans, where I will be attending the NEA Representative Assembly. I will be accessible via e-mail during the entire convention. I encourage those of you who will also be attending the convention to contact me as soon as possible if you wish to meet.

The politicking for the merger vote has already begun. The latest new information is that the Texas delegation (14th largest) is leaning strongly against merger, while the Ohio delegation (5th largest) is leaning strongly in favor. There have been unverified reports that a recent NEA internal poll shows 62 percent support for merger — putting passage in sight. Since EIA is in contact with a number of delegates, and none has reported being polled by anyone, it's difficult to evaluate this information.

As regular communiqué readers know, EIA has been handicapping the merger vote for several months. Taking all the information at my disposal into account,
EIA estimates current merger support among delegates at 53.5 percent. The next
(admittedly unscientific) step is to estimate how much of the opposition is "soft," and liable to be turned by the very real pressure that will be brought to bear by the national leadership and by those within some of the state caucuses. EIA predicts an ultimate 60-40 vote in support of merger at the NEA Representative Assembly on July 5 — falling some 650 delegate votes short of the necessary two-thirds majority.
        
EIA will continue to monitor trends while in New Orleans and will report any
new information. 

Depending on whose estimates you believe, somewhere between $25 and $45
million was spent by both sides in the battle over California's Proposition 226, the paycheck protection initiative. The outcome was in doubt until Election Day, leading EIA to wonder what would have happened if 226 had passed. Now, thanks to documents provided by sources within the California Teachers Association, we have the answer.

CTA drafted two separate budgets for the 1998-99 fiscal year — one to be put
into effect if 226 lost, and the other if 226 won. The difference between the two budgets, or, more accurately, the lack of difference, indicates the union planned to circumvent the intent of the new law almost immediately.

First, since 226 would not have gone into effect until July 1, nearly a month after the election, CTA would have emptied the current contents of its Initiative Fund and PAC Fund. The destination of these funds is unknown, but it is safe to assume that most of the PAC money would have ended up as "soft money" donations to Democrat and (to a much lesser extent) Republican party committees. Some candidates might have found themselves with a huge direct infusion of CTA cash. The fate of the Initiative Fund cash is more problematic, since the union is not heavily involved in any of the proposed November initiatives. It is possible the money could have supported a new statewide school construction bond initiative.

In any event, the PAC and Initiative Funds would have begun the new fiscal year at zero — and would have remained that way. CTA was going to completely divest its budget of political expenditures, as defined by the provisions of 226. Therefore, CTA had no intentions of undergoing the so-called "bureaucratic nightmare" of collecting political spending permission slips from its members. Since there was to be no "political spending," there would be no need to get permission for it.

However, the two contingency budgets are exactly the same size. Dues would
not have been reduced by the amount previously spent on politics. In fact, both budgets include an increase in CTA dues of $9 per year — to $399. So where would that former political money have gone? According to the "226 wins" budget: "Funds previously budgeted in the CTA/ABC department and Initiative Fund are reallocated to the budget for Public Policy Center."

CTA would have formed a new $7 million center which, among other things, would have allowed the union "to engage in organizational outreach to other interested groups with common goals and objectives to obtain visibility and coordinated advocacy on educational issues." Clearly, the Public Policy Center, barred by state law from providing funds to candidates or initiatives, would have simply provided "outreach" money to other organizations. If these organizations deposited that money in their general funds, they would be free to do with it what they wanted thereafter — even form PACs or donate to candidates.

What's more, agency fee-payers, who currently are reimbursed the entire amount of their dues allocated to the Initiative and PAC Funds, probably would not have received the same amount back from the Public Policy Center. The amount of the Public Policy Center's expenditures devoted to politics (governed by a member's Beck rights, not the circumscribed provisions of 226) would be thrashed out in court or arbitration. In an irony that must have had CTA officials smirking, the passage of 226 could have forced fee-payers, some of the most ardent supporters of the measure, to pay more to the union.

In the weeks to come, EIA will provide details from the actual CTA budget.

The Idaho Falls School District granted a 3 percent pay hike for school employees this year, plus an additional 1 percent bonus for teachers. To pay for it, the district emptied the reserve fund, and is cutting the budget for classroom supplies, heat and electricity. "Our main concern is we wanted to give the teachers more," said board member Ernest Jensen. "We were really concerned."

A U.S. Justice Department investigation of the New Mexico School for the Visually Handicapped revealed the school failed to teach most of its students to read Braille or walk with a cane. When federal investigators visited the school last year, they found only a single part-time Braille teacher, and reported "many of the other classroom teachers appear to consider Braille too difficult for their students." The Alamogordo school spent $105,000 "per-pupil" last year, with a staff of 160 — of whom, according to the Justice Department, "only 21 provided education and habilitation services directly to students."

Quote of the Week: "It's not anti-public education to support the escape attempts of these frustrated parents. In fact, though, I would rather support the efforts of the public schools to be more successful. The problem is, so few of them seem to be making a consistent effort to improve. Is it because they don't know what to do?" — Syndicated columnist William Raspberry, on charters, vouchers and poor minority parents.

EIA's two 1998 reports — One Yard Below and Piles of Wealth — are available via U.S. Mail at no charge. Contact EIA at the numbers below or write EIA at PO Box 2047, Carmichael CA 95609.