Two years ahead of the 2012 presidential election of Barak Obama, the NEA leadership called for a no-strings endorsement of him for a second term.
I had no expectation that the NEA would not eventually endorse a sitting Democratic president.
As a delegate to the NEA RA I voted to oppose an early no-strings endorsement.
I had hoped that there would be some political demands made before the deal was done. After all, this had not been an administration that had been very friendly to public education and teacher unions in the first term.
Two words: Arne Duncan.
Why the rush to endorse for the second term?
Naïve of me, perhaps. Or of them?
Rumor has it that NEA President Lily Eskelsen Garcia will follow the lead of her friend, AFT President Randi Weingarten, and move an NEA early endorsement of Hillary the first week in October.
I have to wonder who is being naïve now?
Considering it only from a pragmatic perspective, why on earth would the largest union in the country move to endorse Hillary at the moment she is in political free fall?
As in the case of Obama, what are we demanding for public schools from a third Clinton administration?
Might it include a break from her Wall Street hedge fund pals in Democrats for Education Reform and other corporate reform groups?
Could luck with that.
Fred Klonsky 
She loves the hedge fund guys, its not just the $, she wants “friends for life” .
I think whoever is considering themselves to be a viable candidate for President of the United States should lay there cards on the table early in the game. He or she should let the teacher’s unions know who they intend to have as their Secretary of Education should they get elected. If I had known that Barack was going to appoint Arne Duncan as Secretary of Education, I probably would have reconsidered giving him my vote in the primary election.
Line 2 should be a “their cards” instead of “there cards”. Sorry.
This is premature and very disappointing…feels more like an insider fiat than an endorsement. Membership input needs to be solicited more on this decision. Not to mention the timing: HRC is still in the process of clearing up her “technology troubles”.
Very poor judgment to endorse so early. What are they worried about? A little debate with new ideas?
I think it’s the over 50 women thing. Identity politics that follow the “it’s our turn” for women rather than really thinking about teachers or policy at all. Makes me sick to my stomach. But, it’s a factor of UNDEMOCRATIC thinking, and that’s the legacy of all these union endorsements. This is going to be followed by Mary Kay Henry finishing touch, to prove that it’s “girl power” in the unions. And so what? The women in teaching will benefit not a whit
It’s the “girl-power” factor. They think they can be power brokers just like men, replacing the smoke-filled room with their own brand of ellitism, and there isn’t a whit of concern for teachers at all in this. Mother Jones always felt that women suffrage brokers would leave behind their working class sisters in order to gain their own personal power base in the parties. Seems that’s what we’ve seen here in this political power-brokering. It’s the end-result of the Saul Alinksy-style of power brokering that is at work in unions these days.
To endorse someone who can’t even commit to $15 is clear evidence that Lily and Mary Kay Henry don’t really care about those working class women at the bottom who do the work of education. And that they revel in the un-democratic structures of their power, just as the men did. Nothing much happen’ here.
I may be naive, but how do you endorse as the NEA or AFT without a vote of membership–or was that done?
The endorsement process is never “by a vote of the membership.” Local recommendations are through local political action commmittees. For example, we vote recommendations of state reps and senators and governor at meetings in which locals’ votes are weighted based on political action committee contributions. At the national level, presidential endorsements are made by votes of delegates to the Representative Assembly after a recommendation by NEA leadership or by a vote of the board of directors.