Prop. 32 would curb union dominance

Prop. 32 would curb union dominance

Oct. 15, 2012

By Katy Grimes

Long ago it became evident that a passion for teaching in California schools was overshadowed by union membership. Far too many teachers became flag-waving union members, choosing union activism over student achievement.

Proposition 32, the “Paycheck Protection” ballot initiative, would not only be a positive change for union employees,but  schools would also benefit because union dominance over the classroom would end.

Prop. 32 would prohibit corporations and employee unions from making direct contributions to political campaigns. It would ban automatic payroll deductions by corporations and unions of employees’ wages to be used for politics.  And Prop. 32 would prohibit government contractors from contributing money to the politicians who will award contracts.

Many people agree that payroll deductions for political purposes without the voluntary consent of the employee is unscrupulous and corrupt. But employees remain silent about this corruption in order to keep their jobs.

The bottom line is that Prop. 32 would greatly diminish unions’ ability to take campaign funds from public employees through payroll deduction.

The fuel feeding the California Democratic machine, through the paychecks of California workers, would be cut off.


California’s educational tailspin is undeniable. In the 1950’s and 1960’s, California’s high-quality education system  was the envy of the nation. California now ranks near the bottom of the country’s education rankings.

We have Jerry Brown to thank for this.

It was then-Gov. Jerry Brown who first approved collective bargaining for state and local government employees. In 1975, he signed the Rodda Act for teachers’ unions. And in in 1978, he signed the Dills Act for other unions. Since then, public employee unions have become the most organized and powerful political force in California. And they dominate all Democrats in the Legislature, as well as Brown.

Teachers turned into union members and began fighting for themselves instead of the students.

The California Teachers Association became one of the most powerful unions in the country, well-fueled by mandatory union dues from its 325,000 teacher members. According to the California Fair Political Practices Commission, the CTA is number one on the “Billion Dollar Club,” a list of the top spenders in California politics.

Tax-free unions

Union income is tax-exempt. Labor unions are registered as nonprofit organizations. Unions don’t pay state or federal income taxes on member dues or donations, nor do they pay property taxes on much of their real estate, a little known gem, according to FOX Business news.

Imagine if Gov. Brown instead had a ballot measure to tax union income rather than increasing taxes on Californians who already pay high taxes. It’s ironic that unions lobby very hard to increase taxes on everyone else, while quietly enjoying tax-free riches.

Holding kids hostage

In 1998, the CTA convinced voters to pass Proposition 98, which amended the California state constitution to create mandatory school spending. Prop. 98 requires that the state spend 43 percent of all state revenues on public K-14 education.

With power, money and the rapt attention of career politicians, the CTA pushed through the smaller class size campaign. But this has backfired greatly. What should have improved test scores and graduation rates, if you believed the campaign ads, has instead provided worse educational results.

To fill all of the new classrooms of reduced-size classes, more teachers were needed. This was the true purpose of the CTA all along; more teachers meant more mandatory dues, which meant more money and power.

But the hastily hired teachers were ill-prepared, and kids suffered. The union grew and prospered.

Parental choice

As the CTA grew in size and power, they were able to quell every attempted ballot initiative supportive of parental choice or school vouchers. And the CTA killed the attempt to eliminate bilingual education programs from California’s schools, forever ascribing English learners to the English as a Second Language classes.

As the CTA grew, bad teachers could not be eliminated.

A report by State Auditor Elaine Howell found that the State Commission on Teacher Credentialing is one of the worst run agencies in the state.

Howell reported, “As of the summer of 2009, according to the commission’s management, the commission’s Division of Professional Practices had accumulated a backlog of 12,600 unprocessed reports of arrest and prosecution (RAP sheets)—almost three times a typical annual workload.”

Bad teachers were not fired, and even criminal teachers were merely hidden away, still receiving full pay, thanks only to the CTA.

“Specifically, we found that in some instances significant periods of time elapsed between critical steps in the division’s process of reviewing reported misconduct,” Howell reported. “The division’s delays in investigating reported misconduct potentially allowed educators of questionable character to retain a credential.”

That’s the power of the California teachers union.



The CTA “has killed or hijacked nearly every reform bill that has popped up in the legislature,” former Democratic state Sen. Gloria Romero told the Wall Street Journal.  CTA officials “walk around the capitol like they’re God.”

Romero is supporting Prop. 32 and has vowed to help voters take California back from special interests. Romero heads the California chapter of Democrats for Education Reform, whose goal is to improve accountability in public schools.

“Ms. Romero believes the only way to bring down the public unions—and ‘they will be brought down, they must be brought down’—is to go after ‘what feeds the beast.’ In other words: payroll deductions,” the Wall Street Journal wrote.

Romero even says in this Prop. 32 ad targeting the CTA that lawmakers seem too afraid to vote to end teachers’ union and other special interest money.

With California laboring under record budget deficits, rampant public employee abuses, five-star public pensions and bad public employees that voters can’t get rid of, Proposition 32 appears to be just what the doctor ordered for a broken state.


Write a comment
  1. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 15 October, 2012, 09:01

    Im with Gloria!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply this comment
  2. us citizen
    us citizen 15 October, 2012, 10:05

    Yes, yes, yesssssssss

    Reply this comment
  3. Ted Steele, The Decider
    Ted Steele, The Decider 15 October, 2012, 10:55

    Funny how the Lincoln Club Clowns ™ are all about freedom of speech and association in re the Cit united debacle they created but when the same cases are applied to working people vis prop 32 they want to curtail freedom. LOL.

    I am no on 32— I am with the founders and patriots. Even if it passes, it will be struck down as unconstitutional.

    Trolls– discuss at once!

    Your Ted

    Reply this comment
  4. Hondo
    Hondo 15 October, 2012, 11:36

    It’s legally impossible to fire a molesting pedophile teacher in Kali, thanks to the unions stopping that bill. And they get to keep their pensions, too.
    In Denver, a little girl was taken, killed and dismembered last week (in what order they haven’t said). If this was committed by a Kalifornia school teacher, the union would go to court to make sure the monster kept his job and pension. That is written into the contracts.
    If she was drowning, the firemen would wait until the union gave the say so to rescue her.
    The disgust I have for public unions is off the scale.

    Reply this comment
  5. Dyspeptic
    Dyspeptic 15 October, 2012, 12:16

    Teddy Steal said – “I am with the founders and patriots”.

    Yea, sure you are Teddy. Did you mean the founders of The Soviet Union?

    Even the deified Democrat Party icon Franklin Roosevelt opposed collective bargaining for government workers. Was he unpatriotic?

    Once again you prattle on about free speech for filthy rich labor cartel puppet masters, which has nothing to do with Prop. 32. Did you actually read the article above? Apparently not. Prop. 32 reform requires opt-in for political dues only. Collective bargaining dues are unaffected.

    What do you have against VOLUNTARY political donations Comrade Steal? Why don’t you want union workers to have a choice? I thought you Regressives were all for choice. Guess not.

    The CTA are a bunch of tax deadbeats and parasites. They don’t give a damn about the kids. It’s all about the power, influence and money.


    Reply this comment
  6. Douglas
    Douglas 15 October, 2012, 12:21

    Franklin Roosevelt didn’t oppose collective bargaining for government workers. He only opposed striking or violent conduct by those unions.

    Reply this comment
  7. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 15 October, 2012, 14:56

    FDR OPPOSED collective bargaining in the public sector, not JUST striking or violent conduc, that is a FACT dougie/

    Reply this comment
  8. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 15 October, 2012, 14:58

    Ted Steele, The Decider says:

    I am no on 32— I am with the founders and patriots. Even if it passes, it will be struck down as unconstitutional.

    LOL..another FAILED prediction by Teddy Steals!

    There is nothing unconstitutional about banning people from not being forced to join a union or spend money on political issues they disagree with Perry Mason jr 😉

    Reply this comment
  9. roostir
    roostir 15 October, 2012, 15:55

    It seems like taking money involuntarily and applying it to initiatives employees may or may not believe in, would be unconstitutional. In other words, what seems to be happening now is not fair and infringes on the freedoms we all should have. It is fascinating that people would try to leverage the constitution for their argument about taking freedoms away in support of unions? Incredible.

    Reply this comment
  10. Ulysses Uhaul
    Ulysses Uhaul 15 October, 2012, 15:57

    In California if it is anti union….it ain’t constitutional! A payroll deduction is no big thing. if you don ‘ t want dues you don’ t get pay and benefit increases, job security and seniority…..

    Reply this comment
  11. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 15 October, 2012, 16:40

    In California if it is anti union….it ain’t constitutional! A payroll deduction is no big thing. if you don ‘ t want dues you don’ t get pay and benefit increases, job security and seniority…..
    Teddy, bring back Queeg.

    Reply this comment
  12. Ted Steele, The Decider
    Ted Steele, The Decider 15 October, 2012, 17:07

    LOL another famous poodle legal prediction!

    0 for 13 ™ so far !!!!!!!

    Reply this comment
  13. Ted Steele, The Decider
    Ted Steele, The Decider 15 October, 2012, 17:08


    I’m a communist?

    I have killed more communists than you’ll ever meet.

    Reply this comment
  14. barb
    barb 15 October, 2012, 19:25

    yes on prop 32 for sure!

    Reply this comment
  15. Ted Steele, The Decider
    Ted Steele, The Decider 15 October, 2012, 20:27

    Ya know what’s funny about 32 and the sheeple following it?

    The lincoln club clowns who wrote it AND were behind Cit United exempted themselves from its proscriptions!!!

    My god people are stupid.

    Reply this comment
  16. SkippingDog
    SkippingDog 15 October, 2012, 21:35

    The same Roosevelt letter you kooks keep referring to clearly states his support for the Federal Employees Association and identifies his primary concerns as a labor strike or other “radical behavior” by such groups, if they were to fully reflect the activities then occurring within private sector labor actions.

    Since you’ve probably never bothered to actually read the Roosevelt letter, here’s a link for you.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

Dogfight Over New 26th House District

  JAN. 8, 2012 By JOHN HRABE California’s 2012 redistricting already is shaking up state and even federal politics. The

Sacramento stabbings heighten populist and nationalist tensions

  A group tied to the neo-Nazi and white supremacist movements found itself at the center of a bloody political

Legislative fractured fairy tale

Dec. 4, 2012 By Katy Grimes The swearing-in of new legislators is usually a party atmosphere. Lawmakers feel celebratory after long