Will the NEA RA be nothing more than a Hillary pep rally?


Hillary Clinton and NEA President Lily Eskelsen Garcia.

I received the nominating form in the mail for Retired IEA delegate to the NEA national convention. I didn’t fill it out.

For the first time in decades I won’t be running for NEA Representative Assembly delegate or attending an RA.

For twenty years I represented my local and region. The last three years I represented retired Illinois Education Association members.

This July I won’t be in Washington, D.C.

It will be interesting to see the turnout for this election. Only 700 out of 13,000 IEA Retired members voted for Retired delegates to the state convention. That was one third the number of the votes cast last year.

At last year’s convention in Orlando the NEA delegates voted to target toxic testing and institutional racism as the main national campaigns for the year.

Instead it turned out that the main national campaign has been Hillary Clinton.

A New Business Item which I offered and was supported by the Illinois delegation calling for the NEA to support efforts to removed the Confederate flag from public places was passed after a two hour debate.

It has never heard from again.

Common Core? PARCC?

Dead silence.

Institutional racism?


Over at the AFT, where President Randi Weingarten once tweeted about education issues, now she is all-Hillary all the time.

And NEA President Lily Eskelsen Garcia is not much different.

Between the NEA Retired Conference followed by the NEA RA, that would be ten days in D.C.

I fear it will be nothing more than a very long Hillary pep rally.

7 Replies to “Will the NEA RA be nothing more than a Hillary pep rally?”

  1. NEA,IEA are figure heads. Sat back while politicians on both sides refused to fund public schools, raided pensions, and formulated charter schools. I am sorry I ever contributed a nickel. If the CTU was smart they would cease funding to both groups.

  2. “A little cold has never stopped educators from hitting the doors in Iowa to talk to voters about @HillaryClinton!”

    Thanks for the diet aid, Fred. I was just about to head to lunch. I think I need to visit the porcelain god instead.

  3. You not wanting to attend this summer’s RA Fred is another reason why NEA should never endorse a presidential candidate. NEA needs all the progressive teacher voices possible at this R.A. whether or not the coronation noise makes it hard to hear. I hope that you reconsider and attend. And, I hope the NEA leadership reconsiders any future presidential endorsements.

    1. Wouldn’t bet the farm on your last sentence, jim2812. Not only should have endorsement not have been made (by either Lily OR Randi), but it was wat too early. Additionally, lesson should have been learned with Dennis’ 2012 convention endorsement of Obama–“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has and it never will.”–Frederick Douglass.
      Yep, no NEA demands made, and not only nothing given, but Obama/Arne
      (& now POTUS picks the toxic John King, a final stab in the back to public education) have nearly obliterated our public schools, giving us NCLB on steroids (Race to the Top).
      So, Lily & Randi, what’s Hilary going to do for us?

      1. I’m lobbying for wisdom in a policy of the NEA to return to its original policy of not endorsing a presidential candidate/ a policy that had been in place up to Jimmie Carter being endorsed by the NEA. President Johnson, an ex-classroom school teacher, had prior to President Carter won office against the Conservative Senator Goldwater without the endorsement of NEA. President Obama won office with the help of teachers but that help would have been available with or without NEA endorsement. So what is the down side to not endorsing an NEA presidential candidate? I feel attention to endorsement of a candidate distracts from hearing from the rank and file membership during an election year as to what issues are impacting teacher working conditions.

  4. Turning to Republicans and Bernie for a moment… You don’t suppose that even Republicans are getting the Bern? (Just joking) At the rate they’re going, they may be getting Berned anyway. I get the impression they may be creating a case of “be careful of what you wish for because you may get it.” Forgive me for citing Ann Coulter who stated on one of Bill Maher’s shows last year that “Republicans fear Bernie more than they do Hillary.” She seemed serious but it could have been a Republican ruse. The polls (God bless them!) indicate that Bernie would do better against Trump than Hillary.

    What are the leaderships of the NEA and AFT missing beyond the strong likelihood that Hillary will continue the Obama/Duncan education horror? A suggestion for a bit of self-reflection for Lily and Randi: read Thomas Frank’s “What’s the Matter With Kansas” as a lesson in what happens when people vote against their interests.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s