by Erika Sanzi
Teachers’ union boss Randi Weingarten publicly resigned from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) this weekend and the overwhelming response seems to be one of surprise that she was on the committee at all. How is it that education reporters and the media at large rarely, if ever, mentioned that she served as an at-large member of the DNC for 23 years and held a seat on its Rules and Bylaws Committee from 2009-2022? She has also been a delegate to each of the Democratic conventions since 1992.
Seems like more than an oversight.
As president of the 1.8-million-member strong American Federation of Teachers (AFT), Randi holds a powerful position in American education and politics. The more than two decades she spent with a formal role within one of our two major political parties adds another layer of significance to her influence. That role isn't just symbolic—DNC members help shape party platforms, set rules, and exert tremendous influence over elected officials in the party, including the president of the United States.
News media stories about Weingarten since the 1990s have framed her solely as a union leader or advocate for teachers. In recent years, they frequently mentioned her clashes with Republicans or the outsized role she played during COVID-era school closures, but they never noted her formal position within the DNC. That pattern of omission painted her as more of a public-sector labor representative than a partisan political operative.
One must wonder why there was a near blackout on this significant detail about a teachers’ union boss, and how that blackout continued during the coverage of the extended school closures and mask mandates that she lobbied for during COVID? It is well documented that she had a significant influence on CDC guidance for schools, but nobody thought to mention her role within the DNC?
Was it journalistic malpractice? Perhaps many journalists and editors sympathize or align with Randi’s positions and see no need to disclose her formal ties to the party.
Was it incompetence? Maybe education beat reporters and tv producers didn’t know she had a formal role with the DNC, or didn't realize the significance of her DNC role.
Was it narrative control? Maybe reporters, editors, and producers felt that pretending she was an impartial advocate “for teachers” was simpler and more palatable than acknowledging she was also a highly influential party insider.
My sense is that all three explanations apply.
It is understandable that the AFT deliberately avoided emphasizing or drawing attention to their leader’s DNC status. Doing so would have undermined their claim to represent all members regardless of political affiliation and strengthened the argument that public sector unions are way too entangled with party politics.
If the AFT hid Randi’s DNC role from its members, that’s bad and reveals a lack of transparency to the people who pay their bills. But, unlike the press, the union doesn’t have an obligation to inform the larger public about its boss’s dual roles. On the other hand, education reporters and the media do have that obligation, and yet failed so consistently for more than two decades that it took Weingarten’s resignation from the DNC for us to learn that she had a formal role within the DNC.
There is no excuse for that.
While we’re on the topic —I bet you didn't know that Becky Pringle, the president of the National Education Association (NEA), the largest teachers union in the country, is also a member of the DNC. She hasn't resigned.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.