Archive

ShareThis Page
PSEA oops: Letters & the law | TribLIVE.com
Editorials

PSEA oops: Letters & the law

Tribune-Review
| Sunday, November 23, 2014 9:00 p.m

Members’ backlash has led the Pennsylvania State Education Association to avoid another mass mailing like the personalized, pro-Tom Wolf form letters it sent to their spouses before the Nov. 4 election. But whether those letters broke state law depends on the outcome of a complaint filed with the state Labor Relations Board.

Williamsport’s Mary Trometter, a PSEA member and registered Republican, took offense at the salutation naming her husband and the conclusion: “Please join Mary in voting for Tom Wolf for Governor on November 4th.” Her complaint to the board contends the letters violated state law’s ban on employee organizations giving money “directly or indirectly to any political party or organization or in support of any political candidate for public office.”

Representing her, Fairness Center general counsel David Osborne told The Washington Free Beacon that lax enforcement has encouraged unions to ignore that ban. The PSEA contends the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling upholding First Amendment rights protects union political communications with members and trumps state law.

Hopefully, Mrs. Trometter’s complaint — which might turn on whether the PSEA coordinated with the Wolf campaign, which another case forbids in Pennsylvania — will move the state closer to a strictly enforced ban on unions spending dues money in ways that their members oppose.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.