Released
in late June, an important poll commissioned by the Teacher Freedom Project revealed that 77 percent of teachers have never even
heard of the Janus decision, now a year old, and 52 percent don’t
know that they are no longer required to pay a union to keep their teaching
job. The survey also shows that a sizable number of teachers are uninformed
about the source of many of their professional benefits. Almost a third think
that they would not be covered by their union’s collective bargaining unit
contract should they quit. Almost a quarter think they’d lose their tenure
protections, and 18 percent think they’d lose their health insurance – all
untrue.
All in all, the teachers unions are in
pretty good shape one year out. While the fee payers – those teachers who had
quit the union but were still forced to pay dues – are gone, few others have
left the union fold. According to Mike Antonucci, the National Education
Association has actually had a one percent increase in
membership in calendar 2018.
Part of the reason for this is that, suspecting the Supreme Court would decide
for worker freedom, the unions made a concerted effort to hang on to members by
trying to get them to “recommit” prior to the Janus decision.
But
the unions shouldn’t get too cocky, as
Janus is just a year old. While Michigan became a right-to-work
state in 2012, the law didn’t go into effect until the end of 2013; there was
no rush to the exits there either, but rather a steady membership loss over
time. In fact, in the ensuing years, the Michigan Education Association has
experienced a 28 percent decline in
membership.
In
California, to make sure that all teachers are aware of their options, the California
Policy Center, the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, the Freedom Foundation, TeacherFreedom.org,
For Kids and
Country, MyJanusRights.org, the California
Teachers Empowerment Network, et al. are working diligently to get
the facts to teachers about union membership.
As Colin Sharkey, executive
director of the Association of American
Educators, notes, “Until
every educator in the country knows their rights and options, we cannot know
the full impact of Janus v. AFSCME. For now, we must keep working to
provide as many educators as possible with clear and straightforward
information about their newly restored rights.”
To see all the results of the Teacher
Freedom Project poll, go here.
The yearly NEA Representative Assembly gathering wrapped up
a week and a half ago, and it was the typical rah-rah affair, with all the
usual suspects lined up for union vitriol. NEA president Lily Eskelsen GarcĂa
went off on Trump, DeVos, the Kochs, the Waltons, billionaires, privatization,
etc.
The Koch Brothers will never take their case to the
public because the public’s not stupid. They have to hide their agenda. Because
their agenda is profoundly un-democratic; and un-American.
They want a permanent and institutionalized system
where mega-wealth and mega-corporations rule. Donald Trump was not their
favorite candidate four years ago, but he is now. He’s delivered their tax
cuts; he’s accepted their preferred list of corporate-friendly judges; and he’s
placed their cronies in key government positions expressly to sabotage agencies
that were set up to protect consumers, the environment, health care, workers,
and, of course, education.
(In reality, Trump is anything but the libertarian Kochs’
“favorite candidate.” They have said that they will give the president no
support in 2020. More here.)
To read all of the NEA president’s comments, go here.
Additionally, many of the Democratic presidential
candidates were on hand, competing to get the union’s endorsement. The Q&A,
all available online, went on for over two hours.
And
speaking of the NEA RA, it has been just 10 years since Bob Chanin, 41-year general counsel for the
National Education Association, gave a legendary talk announcing his
retirement. For the first part of his 25-minute speech, Chanin was pleasant
enough, recalling with fondness his time as NEA’s top lawyer. But at 15:30
“Uncle Bob” switched gears and started lobbing grenades at perceived NEA
enemies, referring to them as “conservative and right-wing bastards.”
To watch the video, go here.
On the school choice front, there has been some positive
movement. After a bloody battle with the state’s teachers unions, the West
Virginia legislature finally agreed to allow charter schools in the Mountain
State, albeit slowly and carefully. The law, signed by Governor Jim Justice in late
June, allows for three charter schools initially, then three more in 2023, then
three more every three years.
While this legislation contains some
provisions that educators and parents would support, those positive elements
were needlessly lumped together with a measure to create charter schools in a
politically-motivated and cynical attempt to force lawmakers to vote against
the will of their constituents.
To learn more about the West Virginia legislation, go here.
Also
concerning school choice, the Supreme Court has announced it will take up the Espinoza
vs. Montana Department of Revenue case which centers on educational
choice tax credits in Montana. The case could establish that religious schools
cannot be excluded from school choice programs per anti-Catholic “Blaine
Amendments,” which were established in 37 states beginning in the 19th
century.
The case
is being litigated by the Institute for Justice which states,
Blaine
Amendments are controversial state constitutional provisions rooted in 19th
century anti-Catholic bigotry. Their purpose was to prevent the government from
funding Catholic schools. Today, opponents of educational choice employ Blaine
Amendments—found in 37 state constitutions—as blunt weapons with which they
attempt to block modern educational choice programs. However, IJ is pursuing a
legal strategy to eliminate these obstacles to educational freedom. This
opportunity arises from the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last summer in
Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer. In that case, the Court
stated that excluding qualified institutions—like schools—from public benefit
programs solely because of their religious affiliation is “odious to our
Constitution . . . and cannot stand.” IJ believes this opinion is a death
sentence to Blaine Amendments, which have been invoked by teachers’ unions and
their allies for decades to try and prevent choice programs from spreading and
generating widespread reform. IJ’s cases in Montana, Maine, and Washington
State are designed to drive our arguments up to the U.S. Supreme Court and to
vindicate the right of all parents to access meaningful educational options.
A
new study shows that school choice programs reduce crime. In the Washington
Examiner, the Reason Foundation’s Corey DeAngelis writes, “Researchers
found that entering a charter school in North Carolina in 9th grade reduced the
rate at which students were convicted of felonies by 36% and the rate at which
they were convicted of misdemeanors as adults by 38%, compared to their peers
in traditional public schools.”
As DeAngelis notes, the results of the study are similar
to five other studies on the subject and reasons,
Traditional public schools hold significant monopoly
power because of residential assignment and funding through property taxes.
Families upset with the quality of their public school only have three limited
options: They can purchase an expensive new house that is assigned to a better
public school, pay for a private school out of pocket while still paying for
the public school through property taxes, or complain to the school leaders and
hope things change.
Because these options are expensive and inefficient,
there is not a lot of pressure for residentially-assigned public schools to
provide the best character education possible. In contrast, private and charter
schools must cater to the needs of families if they wish to remain open.
School choice puts power into the hands of families.
And families usually know what’s best for their own kids.
To read more, go here.
To
be fully informed about the new Sex Education Framework in California, a great
one-stop-shop is a set of five very brief videos made by southern California
school teacher and school board member Brenda Lebsack. Among other things, one
video includes curricular samples and another explains what parents and
community members must do to fight back if they are not happy with how their
local schools are dealing with the subject.
And finally, as you well know,
data and solid information are very useful in scoring political points and
making cases for various causes. To that end, CTEN has a fact sheet on our
website which has been updated – all with original sources. To see it, go here.
If you have information that
counters what’s there or would like to see something added, please let us know.
As always, thanks for your
continuing interest and support.
Sincerely,
Larry Sand
CTEN President