Biden Schmoozes the NEA and Comes Away with Support for Obama and $32 M

The same week (early July) Biden spoke to the AFL/CIO, saying if you vote Republican, "you're on your own, jack!", he was also schmoozing teachers at the NEA conference held in Chicago.  Biden warned the teachers that the GOP doesn't believe in public education like the Dems do.  Here's the story from Politico (emphasis added):

GOP maligns teachers, Biden says

CHICAGO — Vice President Joe Biden says the “new Republican Party” fundamentally doesn’t believe in public education the way Democrats do.

“There is an organized effort to place blame for budget shortfalls on educators and other public workers. It is one of the biggest scams in modern American history,” he was quoted as saying by the Chicago Tribune.

The Democrat spoke Sunday before thousands of educators at the National Education Association’s annual convention in Chicago. The association bills itself as the largest labor union nationwide.

The speech came a day before the union’s vote on whether to endorse President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign.

Biden says Republicans in states like Wisconsin and Ohio would once have negotiated better with teachers and labor unions. But he says there’s now an organized effort to place blame for budget shortfalls on their shoulders.

Biden’s speech largely praised teachers, but he drew applause when he briefly acknowledged there’s widespread unhappiness among them for the Obama administration’s education policies.

And what are those questionable education policies that are causing "widespread unhappiness" among teachers?   Could one be school vouchers that Obama has supported since the days of his bid for the Presidency?  (See this for the discussion back in February 2008.)

But, the NEA will continue to blind itself to that and continue to push for more money from its members to support Obana's re-election:.  From Education Week:

The approval triggers the flow of NEA PAC dollars toward Obama's re-election campaign.

And that's not all: 70.1 percent of the body, or 5,258 delegates, approved the amendment to the bylaws that authorize the $10-per-member annual assessment, 60 percent of which will be used primarily to support the Ballot Initiative/Legislative Crisis fund, and the other 40 percent for national and state media efforts. These funds can't support political campaigns but can support messaging and action against things like anti-collective bargaining legislation.

You should take a moment to read some of the members' comments that follow the article.  One makes a particularly valid point: Why would the NEA vote to endorse Obama before learning who the GOP candidate will be?  That really does point to the Dem-DNA of the NEA.

Labor Union Report calculates the resulting funds the NEA can expect to gain from the NEA PAC money:

With more than 3.2 million members, the actual delegates voting for the dues increase represent 0.0016 of the union’s total membership. Despite this, the majority of delegates voting decided that the NEA will now amass a $32 million war chest to use in political advertising and election-related actions—mostly to benefit Democrats.

"Mostly to benefit Democrats?" -- Why what does that mean, you ask?  2006 marked the 30th anniversary of the NEA entering the playing field of politics.  The result?  Here's how John Berthoud summarizes it at Human Events via BNET (emphasis added):

Over these past three decades, the NEA has carpet-bombed the political landscape with money. In just the one-year period from September 2004 through August 2005, the NEA spent $25 million on political activities and lobbying, and another $65.5 million on contributions, gifts and grants. 

From 1990 through 2002, the NEA was the nation's second biggest political giver. (Unions comprised six of the 10 top political contributors.)

The NEA's political support goes almost exclusively to the Democratic Party. Between 1990 and 2002, 95% of NEA candidate and party donations went to Democrats. After the 1976 Carter endorsement, they've been strong backers of every subsequent Democratic presidential nominee. As University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato once observed, "It's fair to say that the Democrats would be nowhere without them."

Let's not forget this lovely 2009 speech about money and power from NEA's then General Counsel Bob Chanin  --