Sentences with phrase «aft spent»

While a full - time member's dues money can be used to finance the $ 37.6 million that AFT spent on lobbying and other political activities in 2015, an agency fee payer's dues cover representational operation costs, which cost the union $ 73.8 million.

When a fast - growing splinter group pushed unions to militantly oppose reform, the AFT spent millions on a «national day of action» to that end.

To show how one - sided its political spending is, according to the Center for Responsive politics, in 2011 - 2012, the AFT spent $ 768,194 on Democrat candidates for office and $ 0 on Republicans.

But much of the $ 27 million that AFT spent went to politics and non-education related causes.

For 2012 - 2013, the AFT spent $ 32 million on political lobbying activities and contributions...; this, by the way, doesn't include politically - driven spending that can often find its way under so - called «representational activities».

Then in 2010, a year after Schwarzenegger and the Democrat - controlled state legislature took advantage of the leverage given to them by the federal Race to the Top initiative and passed a series reforms (including the nation's first Parent Trigger law and requiring the state's teacher database to be tied to its student data system in order to allow for the use of student data in evaluating teachers), the NEA and AFT spent big to back once - and - future governor Jerry Brown's return to the top office, and successfully back traditionalist Tom Torlakson as state schools superintendent (while defeating longstanding Gloria Romero, the former state senate honcho who worked with Schwarzenegger to pass the reforms).

Courtesy of Dropout Nation's RiShawn Biddle, we learn that in 2011 - 2012, AFT spent $ 27 million to «preserve its influence.»

Weingarten declined to comment on the sum the AFT spent, but the consultant said that most of the money went to unlimited and unregulated communication with union members, intense outreach to the union's more than 2,000 members in the district and to the between 30,000 and 40,000 AFL - CIO members in Washington, D.C.. Each group received three mailings and several live calls; the union also did its own polling on the race.

In Florida the NEA and AFT spent $ 1,209,262 million dollars between 2007 and 2008.

This has been borne out by Dropout Nation in five years of reports on NEA and AFT spending: Often times, the two unions and their affiliates list what often turns out to be political spending under the category of «representational activities».

Not exact matches

And legislative and campaign spending is not the only thing teachers unions are spending their money on; both NEA and AFT send additional millions to advocacy groups, community organizations, and charities.

The AFT report states that charter schools do spend less money than other public schools.

The AFT claims that the average public school teacher actually spends 8 hours and 15 minutes in school daily.

The AFT was careful not to say anything against the standards themselves, and spent time before and after the convention making sure that its external partners, funders and nonprofits, knew the nuances behind its statements.

Meanwhile, CommUNITY's biggest backer, the AFT, has spent some $ 600,000 on the race.

For instance, the AFT acknowledges, after some hemming and hawing, that most charter schools spend less public money than most district schools.

Further on, the AFT reports that charter schools spend more on administration and less on instruction than traditional schools.

Cambridge, MA — A first - ever national analysis of state spending per teacher on political advocacy by the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) released today found that the national teachers unions and their state affiliates spent more than $ 100 per teacher in five states, with Oregon at the top of the list at $ 360 per teacher during the 2007 - 08 election cycle.

How Much Teacher Unions Spend in Your State By Paul E. Peterson 1/19/2010 Map showing campaign contributions of the NEA and AFT: Amount spent per teacher in recipient state (2008 - 2009)

The American Federation of Teachers (AFT), the smaller of the two national professional education unions, ranked 25th in campaign spending, with almost $ 12 million, while NEA / AFT collaborative campaigns spent an additional $ 3.4 million, enough to earn the rank of 123rd.

And can any reformer look at the coming Janus Supreme Court case and not smile at the prospect of the NEA and AFT having dramatically less money to spend on politicians who put the interests of adults over the needs of kids?

Even as outfits such as the Alliance for Quality Education and New York Communities for Change spend their time (and donations from the AFT) targeting reformers who threaten the union's influence such as Campbell Brown and her Partnership for Educational Justice, union president Randi Weingarten and her traditionalist allies always proclaim the spending is really geared toward helping the poor.

Reticence on AFT's part is understandable; it may be a bit tapped out, having just spent $ 6 million on advocacy groups in 2011 - 2012.

When it comes to the money that is key to political influence, there is no doubt: The NEA and AFT together spend roughly $ 700 million per year, consistently, on a broad spectrum of political communication activities opposed to reform.

Thanks to a series of deals Philadelphia struck with the AFT local, along with increases in pension contributions, led to a 53 percent increase in spending on teachers» benefits between 2002 - 2002 and 2011 - 2012, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau; benefits accounted for 27 cents of every dollar spent on teacher salaries in 2012, versus 21 cents a decade earlier.

As Dropout Nation detailed in this week's review of the AFT's finances (as well as in analysis of the NEA's spending), another way that nonpolitical dollars become political is when unions pass along millions in taxpayer - funded dues to organizations, from civil rights groups to feminist groups, so as to enlist future loyalty.

And AFT is even more one - sided: it spends zero on right of center candidates.

When it comes to political spending, AFT doesn't skimp.

Another huge chunk of AFT political spending is on issues that have nothing to do with education.

Meanwhile in Pennsylvania, the AFT has worked with its Keystone State affiliate to challenge school reform efforts as well as take on moves by Gov. Tom Corbett to reduce education spending.

AFT comes in at # 12, spending $ 37,039,075 during the same 25 year period.

«The AFT has spent the past few years putting out the idea that it's more reform - minded than its sister union the NEA,» he says.

In addition to early presidential endorsements by both the AFT and NEA, the largest teachers unions in the nation spent a whopping combined total of $ 32.2 million dollars during in the 2016 election cycle as of the September 30th FEC reporting period.

Particularly in Massachusetts, reformers were never able to beat back opposition from NEA's and AFT's state affiliates, which spent $ 13.4 million on opposing the initiative as well as financed allies such as Save Our Public Schools (which collected $ 100,000 from AFT's Bay State affiliate in 2015 - 2016).

Its smaller union rival, the AFT (American Federation of Teachers), spent an additional $ 350,000.

Is it possible that he is not aware that the two national teachers unions, NEA and AFT, spend more on politics than