Utah has become the premier stomping ground for high-spending, liberal organizations and with Election Day quickly approaching the National Education Association's campaign to buy out school choice is in full swing.

The passage of the "Parent Choice in Education Act" was a major victory for children and parents. The bill armed parents with education vouchers and the right to choose how their children are educated. But now powerful, extremely wealthy and vastly liberal "outsiders" like the NEA are attempting to take vouchers away.

The Utah Education Association journeyed to the NEA convention earlier this year to whip up support to fight against school choice. Soon after the convention, expense rumors began to swell in the media that the NEA would be sending $3 million or more on the UEA's campaign against vouchers.

With primary elections completed, the statewide school voucher referendum battle is starting to heat up. In mid-September, the NEA owned up to the earlier expense rumors when it reported spending $1.5 million on the UEA's anti-choice campaign. The money will likely target citizens with a giant gorilla media campaign infused with misleading statistics and propaganda against choice.

Victorious campaigns need to be financed heavily. Since approximately 95 percent of UEA members don't contribute to its political action committee, the UEA is unable to raise the big money it needs. Instead, the UEA must rely on its highly liberal parental organization to bail them out.

Most voters are oblivious to the NEA's deceptive accounting schemes and ability to garnish dues from teachers across America. Teachers in states without paycheck protection laws are fueling this political juggernaut and unknowingly supporting its campaign to stop vouchers.

Numerous campaigns against vouchers have been funded by the NEA.

¢ In September 2000, the NEA bombarded California with $4.5 million to oppose Proposition 38, which would have created vouchers.

¢ In September 2000 and again in January 2001, the NEA slipped $850,000 (for a total of $1.7 million) to its Michigan union in a successful campaign to oppose a voucher amendment.

¢ In October 2001, the NEA provided $500,000 to its New Jersey union to run a campaign that expanded and solidified the anti-voucher effort in the state.

¢ In December 2003, the NEA infused $469,000 into Colorado. The NEA's state unions anticipated a major legislative fight the next year and wanted to conduct a public relations campaign to build up political capital. In particular, the state unions were concerned about voucher legislation. The campaign helped the state unions defeat three voucher bills, including a special education bill.

¢ In February 2004, the NEA gave its Wisconsin union $300,000 to fund a grass-roots campaign to oppose legislation expanding charter schools, vouchers, tax credits, and other "choice schemes."

The "one size fits all" approach to public education doesn't work for every student because every child is unique. By implementing vouchers, parents, not the government, will be able to decide on an education that best fits each of their children's needs.

Rhetoric and demagoguery aside, vouchers will enhance education not hurt it. When private school numbers increase and more teachers are needed in the private sector, the NEA will lose membership, money and influence.

Public education is about protecting a mission, not an institution. Who really cares where children are educated, as long as they are educated. Vouchers provide numerous options for children and their families to receive excellent educational opportunities. The only reason the NEA fights this sensible reform is because teacher union bosses lose money and influence.

But isn't this supposed to be about the kidsfi

¢ Ryan Harriman is the coalitions manager and labor policy analyst for the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, a public policy research organization based in Olympia, Wash.