By Maxford Nelson
Originally published at the Freedom Foundation
“Idaho’s public schools are under attack,” proclaimed the head of the Idaho teachers union in a video posted to X last week.
According to the Idaho Education Association’s (IEA) post, “The 2025 Idaho legislative session is on track to be one of the worst for public education in over a decade.”
Why?
The state legislature, made more conservative by last year’s elections, passed a $5,000 tax credit to help families cover educational expenses and took other steps to rein in progressive activism in public schools, reforms which IEA president Layne McInelly derided as “passing vouchers, banning books, stripping local control, and ignoring the voices of educators.”
Targeting conservative lawmakers with “May Matters”
The union’s proposed response is a campaign targeting incumbent conservatives in next year’s GOP primary elections. Dubbed “May Matters,” the IEA describes its new effort as a “campaign to reclaim Idaho’s public school[s] and the political landscape of Idaho through the ballot box during the May 2026 Primary Election.”
According to the IEA, it plans to “[join] forces with a wide variety of Idaho interest holders and election experts” to create “a statewide grassroots campaign to return sensible Idahoans to the Idaho Legislature and other elected offices…”
At some level, this should come as no surprise. The IEA has long believed that, “[teachers] work, from bell to bell, is political” and, therefore, “[e]ngaging in politics is essential.”
But why focus on the May primary election rather than the general election in November?
The IEA knows that, in heavily Republican Idaho, backing Democrats in the general election isn’t enough. So, in addition, the union will recruit and support candidates to run under the Republican banner in the primary elections who are either the lesser of two evils — at least in the union’s estimation — or who actively share the IEA’s worldview and political agenda.
Because, as McInelly rightly observes, “these critical races are often decided by just a handful of votes,” the primary elections offer the IEA an opportunity to guarantee wins for union-aligned candidates before many GOP voters are paying close attention.
IEA’s progressive advocacy
But while the IEA may be nonpartisan in the sense that it doesn’t care about party labels per se and will happily back candidates running as Republicans if they support the IEA, there’s no disputing that the union’s ideology places it on the far-left flank of Idaho politics.
As a Freedom Foundation analysis of the IEA’s political activity in 2024 previously documented:
“The IEA behaves exactly as one would expect of a far-left advocacy group in a conservative state. The union attempts to curry favor by endorsing Republicans running in safe elections when the outcome isn’t in doubt, though rarely do such endorsements come with meaningful financial support. In GOP primary elections, the IEA focuses its resources on defeating select ideological adversaries and, as soon as the general election rolls around, it switches gears to prioritize electing Democrats in competitive races. Overall, 93 percent of IEA-connected PAC spending in the 2024 general election supported Democrats.”
Also, as the Freedom Foundation reported last year, the IEA paid $25,000 in members’ dues to the Idaho Progressive Investor Network in the 2021-22 tax year. Founded by Boise Mayor Lauren McClean, the network functions as a hub for progressive donors to anonymously coordinate strategic giving to left-of-center advocacy groups seeking to influence policy and elections in Idaho.
IEA’s most recent tax return for 2022-23 disclosed another $25,000 payment to the Idaho Progressive Investor Network, describing it as an “annual membership payment.”
Additionally, last year the IEA supported Proposition 1, a failed ballot measure generally opposed by the GOP and supported by Democrats that would have instituted ranked choice voting and jungle primaries.
The Summer Institute
Beyond the political process, the IEA works to advance progressive ideology in public schools through programs like its Summer Institute, a four-day professional development conference for teachers.
The union’s 2024 Summer Institute featured:
1. A keynote presentation by Rep. Soñia Galaviz (D-Boise) in which she bemoaned the difficulty of being part of such a small minority in the legislature, criticized Idaho’s abortion laws, and specifically criticized Republican elected officials, including former Lt. Gov. Janice McGeachin and current legislators Reps. Jaron Crane (R-Nampa) and Ted Hill (R-Eagle).
2. A session entitled, “Creating Safe Spaces for LGBTQ+ Staff, Students, & Families.” The IEA offers a similar, seven-hour online course on a rolling basis.
3. A session entitled, “Sharing Our Voices and Expertise for Better Public Education Policy and Discussion,” presented by Heather Comstock, the government relations officer for the Boise Education Association. Comstock has previously compared conservative organizations and elected officials to the Taliban and accused them of using “[b]lame, anger, self-righteousness and us vs. them division” to generate “a false sense of purpose, security and strength.”
4. Classes as part of the National Education Association’s (NEA) “Leaders for a Just Society” program. According to the NEA, the three-year program is designed to train teachers to become activists dedicated to countering “attempts to whitewash and then rewrite the nation’s history and eliminate the contributions and lived experiences of Indigenous, Black, and other communities of color” and combating “the maligning and marginalization of LGBTQ+ students and educators.”
The program was launched following the NEA’s 2018 decision to “put racial and social justice at the forefront” of its work and is designed to “[eradicate] institutional racism and white privilege.”
A December 2023 article published on the NEA’s website reported that, at the time, there were “about 30 educators who are incorporating the LJS curriculum into learning experiences” in Idaho, including “through their districts and schools.”
It’s time for the government to stop subsidizing the IEA
Despite the incompatibility of Idaho’s conservative values and the IEA’s overtly progressive activism and politics, policymakers have struggled to adopt reforms ending the widespread practice of school district funds and resources being used to support the IEA and NEA at taxpayers’ expense.
While legislation to end government collection of union dues, prohibit the practice of school districts paying the salaries of union officers, and protect teachers from coercive union membership solicitation practices was passed by the House earlier this year, has broad support in the Senate, and is backed by a large majority of Idaho voters, the chairman of the Senate State Affairs Committee has yet to give HB 98 a hearing.
Although Idaho conservatives should be grateful for the victories secured in the 2025 legislature, protecting Idaho values and conservative policy achievements will be more difficult than it should be so long as the influence of the institutional progressive Left — led in Idaho by the IEA — continues to be amplified by government support and taxpayer dollars.
About Maxford Nelsen
Maxford Nelson is the Director of Research and Government Affairs for the Freedom Foundation. He lives with his wife and sons in Olympia, Washington.
