Court: Payroll deductions for political contributions illegal

The Republican-controlled Michigan Supreme Court late Thursday afternoon ruled that schools are breaking the Michigan Campaign Finance Act when they administer payroll deduction programs for unions, when part of that money goes to a political action committee.

The case is actually a reversal of a late December ruling by the Court, then controlled by Democrats, that the funding process was legal.

At the heart of the case is the Michigan Education Association contracts with several school districts. Under those agreements, MEA members who opt to participate in the political action committee can have their donations deducted from their payroll check. That deduction is administered by the school district and the money turned over to the MEA-PAC. The MEA-PAC, in turn, reimbursed the district for the costs associated with administering the deduction program.

But the Republican Court, in a majority opinion written by Justice Stephen Markman and joined by Justices Robert Young, Mary Beth Kelly and Brian Zahra, found that deduction agreement violated the state’s campaign finance laws. Justices Diane M. Hathaway, Michael F. Cavanagh and Marilyn Kelly dissented. Those laws prohibit the use of public money, including supplies and equipment, in political campaigns. The majority ruled that in this instance, the school district was using public money in political activities.

Speaker of the House Jase Bolger’s spokesperson Ari Adler said the speaker supported the court decision.

“Taxpayer resources should not be used to conduct partisan union business,” Adler said.

The ruling could upset union political activity funding all over the state, say progressive activists.

“This is just a blatant political power grab by a Republican court that is following the lead of a Republican legislature in attacking working people and their rights for collective bargaining,” said David Holtz, executive director of Progress Michigan.

Holtz says this ruling and Republican legislative moves are bent on “eliminating competition.”

“The first salvo was redistricting. This is the second salvo,” said Holtz. “We are marching towards one party government in Michigan and that is what we are facing.”

Doug Pratt, communications director for the Michigan Education Association, said his group has not had a chance to fully digest the ruling because they were “busy at the Capitol dealing with Republican attempts to weaken collective bargaining rights.”

“We are saddened to see that a change in the composition in the Supreme Court leads to a change in the laws of Michigan,” Pratt told Michigan Messenger in a phone interview. “In December, the Supreme Court says one thing, then one justice changes, and here we are six months later and the law means something different.”

Pratt concurred with Holtz that the ruling was part of a larger Republican move to shift the state’s politics.

“There is an all out assault on the middle class in general and it hard not to see this as part of that,” said Pratt. “This is about people who have said they want to give their money and express their First Amendment and Constitutional rights as part of the political process.”