Teacher unions dedicate money to political activism, lobbying

Todd Loeffler, a California elementary public school teacher for over 25 years, said the cost of joining the union and some of their political tactics turned him off.

“Knowing that our union dues were primarily going to Democratic candidates, it was very difficult," he told The Center Square.  

Another issue was the cost. He initially declined to join his union when he began teaching because the dues were too expensive.

“When I was just hired as a new teacher, I was asked to join the union along with all the other new teachers,” Loeffler said. “We discussed joining the union, but we agreed it was too expensive, and our salary was very low.” 

Loeffler recalled that a seasoned teacher tapped him on the shoulder and said: “You better join the union.” But at the time, Loeffler said, membership was voluntary.

Closed shop

That changed the following year.

“Realizing that too many teachers were not joining the union, our school district teachers' union changed it to a closed shop union,” Loeffler said. “That made us join, and we did not like it.” 

States like California are non-right-to-work states, meaning they can require union participation and employees to pay agency fees or dues.

Right-to-work states like Texas offer union membership and dues as optional to workers.

For public school teachers throughout the U.S., that all changed in 2018 following the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, which prohibited school districts from requiring their employees to pay union fees as a condition of employment. The ruling allows teachers throughout the nation to opt out of unions.

Following the Supreme Court's 2018 ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, California enacted Senate Bill 866 in 2018 to prevent multiple members from leaving the union at once. The bill shifted the management of membership dues and any workers' requests directly to unions.   

Loeffler said he paid $1,200 in dues a year to the Association of Classroom Teachers, a chapter affiliated with the California Teachers Association, the state's largest teachers' union.

Loeffler said his concerns went beyond the cost of dues. He objected to what he believed was the union’s political spending, particularly its support for Democratic candidates.

Loeffler also questioned how much of his dues actually went toward political activity and how much went toward representing teachers.

Teachers were told union membership could provide legal protection if they were sued by a parent or student, he said.

“It was a scare tactic,” Loeffler said. “I don’t know of any teacher who had to use the union to manage a legal battle.”

The National Education Association and American Federation of Teachers represent millions of educators nationwide and are among the most politically active labor organizations in the country. The NEA has about 3 million members, while the AFT represents roughly 1.8 million.

In 2025, the NEA received almost $400 million in membership dues, and the AFT got over $270 million in dues.

Taxpayer-funded dues 

Union members pay membership dues via payroll deduction from taxpayer-funded salaries. Many critics of teacher unions argue these dues are critical taxpayer dollars.

For example, for the California Teacher Association, which is under the NEA, dues are split into CTA dues of $899 annually per member for the 2026-27 year and NEA dues of $234.  

In 2025, the NEA spent a total of $448,171,192, according to Union Facts, a nonprofit that focuses on transparency and accountability. AFT spent a total of $278,261,430.  

The NEA spent more than $51 million on political activities and lobbying in 2025, and the AFT spent more than $41 million, according to Union Facts. 

In comparison, the national average salary for a public school teacher is $74,000, according to the NEA.

Depending on the state and school district, a good portion of local budgets is allocated to teacher pay and benefits. For example, the Los Angeles Unified School District, the nation's second-largest school district, allocated 93% of its budget to employee salaries, with 40% of the budget going to teacher pay and benefits. 

Advocate for 'members, not kids'

Aaron Garth Smith, director of education reform at the Reason Foundation, told The Center Square that unions' influence extends well beyond contract negotiations.

“Teacher union influence goes well beyond money, especially at the local level with school board races,” Smith said. “Ultimately, the job of teachers’ unions is to advocate for their members, not kids. Sometimes these interests align, but often they don’t.”

The NEA has taken public positions such as criticism of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The NEA provided $1.7 million in funding to a May Day 2026 training toolkit that includes anti-ICE messaging, The Center Square previously reported.

Rusty Brown, director of special projects at the Freedom Foundation, which advocates against public-sector unions, told The Center Square that unions give money to what they align with.

“I see them not really giving money to people that are not gonna be perfectly aligned with them,” Brown told The Center Square. “It's to push either a radical agenda or to help their own bottom line.”

In January, The Center Square attended a virtual conference hosted by Sunrise Movement, a political action organization, titled "Roadmap to Political Revolution," where U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-California, and NEA President Rebecca Pringle talked about the controversy surrounding U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Minnesota and across the country.  

“It is no surprise that the NEA is this administration's top target. Dictators always come for educators because we teach the children how to think for themselves … [T]his administration is using ICE to bring fear and trauma into our schools,” Pringle said during the conference.  

Impeachment and ICE

The AFT has also taken political stances on various issues. 

Its 2026 policy handbook includes positions addressing the separation of church and state in education, cuts to the military budget and the Trump administration. 

One resolution calls for the impeachment, conviction and removal of the president.

“WHEREAS, Donald Trump’s fascist takeover of American democracy is real — including the threat to the right to public education — but the mass movement to defend democracy and stop the rise of fascism is real too," the resolution reads.

“RESOLVED, that the AFT will call for the impeachment, conviction and removal of Donald Trump from the U.S. presidency as soon as possible.” 

“RESOLVED, that the AFT will fight back against the chaos that the Trump administration is creating, and the AFT will fight forward by building a movement with the members, students, other workers, and our communities to fight for a stronger democracy and build a better future for all.”

Critics say such positions go beyond traditional union responsibilities.

"The job of a union used to be and should be to represent the interests of its members as they relate to the workplace,” Mika Hackner, research director at the North American Values Institute, told The Center Square. 

Hackner said the NEA and AFT have embraced what she described as “social justice unionism,” arguing that the approach assumes members share the same political views.

“It is a wholly inappropriate use of union resources and a dereliction of the union's duty,” Hackner added.

Cliff Smith, government affairs director at the North American Values Institute, said unions have a legitimate role in education policy but risk losing credibility when they move into issues far removed from their core mission.

“It's perfectly appropriate for unions to have opinions on issues closely related to education,” Smith told The Center Square. “But when a union, or any other entity, steps wildly outside its area of expertise, not only does it promote ideas that it shouldn't, but it creates distrust when they speak out on issues they truly are experts on.”

The Center Square reached out to the NEA, CTA and AFT multiple times for comments but did not receive a response.