A $40 million flameout in New Jersey's race for governor puts scrutiny on teachers union

Politico

29-06-2025

TRENTON, New Jersey — New Jersey's most politically influential union funneled more than $40 million into this year's race for governor — only to land with a fifth-place finish. Now, its political instincts are in question.
The New Jersey Education Association made its largest investment in a campaign to support its president, Sean Spiller, in his longshot bid for the governor's mansion. No other special interest group has ever spent as much in state history to promote a single candidate, a sign of an increase of big money in state races following the U.S. Supreme Court's Citizens United decision.
Spiller struggled to raise his own funds — so much so that he didn't qualify for debates in the Democratic primary. He largely offloaded his campaign infrastructure to a super PAC backing his candidacy, Working New Jersey, which was funded indirectly by the union. The super PAC's spending is among the most an independent expenditure group has dropped in a gubernatorial election nationwide.
Publicly, many lawmakers and union members are hesitant to speak out against the NJEA, which remains in a class of its own when it comes to political influence and has about 200,000 members across the state.
But in the aftermath of a multimillion-dollar debacle, some in Trenton are starting to question the union's political prowess. Democratic state Sen. Vin Gopal, chair of the Senate Education Committee, called the spending 'concerning' and said that he's 'talked to a lot of the teachers here in Monmouth [County] and they're pretty frustrated.'
'I think the strength of the NJEA will be questioned after these election results,' Gopal said. 'How does it not?'
The bet was that if union turnout was high, Spiller would be able to eke out a win. Spiller ended up earning 10 percent of the vote, a distant fifth behind Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D-N.J.), who won the nomination with 34 percent. But he earned close to 30,000 more votes than former state Senate President Steve Sweeney — a foe of the NJEA in a previous campaign.
It's not the first time the union has lost a pricey gamble. In 2017, the union spent around $5 million to oust Sweeney — which at the time was considered the most expensive state legislative race in American history. The effort was unsuccessful and Sweeney won by 17 points against his Republican opponent.
One former high-level NJEA official, granted anonymity to talk freely about their former employer, said that the millions spent 'didn't seem like a good investment' and could impact its ability to advocate for teachers in Trenton.
'The NJEA leadership's credibility I believe has been diminished as it relates to going into the Statehouse and fighting for issues for the association,' the person said, adding that local education associations' 'power remains the same.'
A more complete picture of the union's spending will not be available until June 30, when the latest campaign finance reports covering the final two weeks of the primary are due. But as of May 27, Working New Jersey received $40 million from Garden State Forward, a separate group funded exclusively by the NJEA. Working New Jersey spent $37 million of that as of last month. Garden State Forward also sent $8 million to another pro-Spiller group, Protecting Our Democracy, that was boosting him last year.
The NJEA's investment was the largest amount of spending by a single entity (excluding self-funded candidates and wealthy individuals) in a gubernatorial race from 2010 — when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Citizens United, which opened the floodgates for unlimited super PAC spending — through 2024, according to an analysis of state-level spending from American Promise, a nonprofit that advocates for a constitutional amendment to allow limits on political spending.
It's been more than a decade since the Citizens United ruling. Though it applied to federal political spending, it has also virtually eliminated state efforts imposing restrictions on super PACs.
'New Jersey didn't choose to have a campaign system like this,' said Jeff Clements, CEO of American Promise. 'It was imposed by lawyers in the Supreme Court. It only gets worse until we fix the constitutional problem the court created.'
Still, there are attempts to diminish super PACs' influence. New York City has increased its coordination rules, which cracks down on candidates' efforts to signal to these outside groups. Public financing systems are also intended to curb big campaign donors. But although New Jersey does have a public financing program for gubernatorial candidates, which was implemented prior to Citizens United, it still led to massive outside spending this year.
'After Citizens United, you saw sort of a gradual uptick in big money in federal elections, and the states have been sort of catching up,' said Ian Vandewalker, senior counsel and manager of the elections and government program at the Brennan Center for Justice. 'So I think we're seeing the kind of the new heights of big money in the states, and that's not going to go away.'
The NJEA's spending in the primary has even exceeded outside spending in congressional races, which are typically more expensive than state-level elections. The most spent by a single committee in independent expenditures for a primary was $19 million by Honor Pennsylvania, a super PAC that boosted now-Sen. Dave McCormick (R-Pa.) in the 2022 Senate primary, according to data compiled by OpenSecrets. Despite that heavy spending, McCormick lost in that primary.
'I think it was a very poorly calculated and piss-poor decision by the NJEA to blow that kind of money and the results prove that,' said John Napolitani, a local mayor and head of Asbury Park schools teachers' union. 'I don't even think the membership realized how much of their dollars were spent on this race, basically for a loss.'
The union has previously pushed back on criticism about its political spending — particularly from the Sunlight Policy Center, an organization devoted to researching and countering the NJEA — as 'anti-union propaganda.'
NJEA Secretary-Treasurer Petal Robertson in a statement to POLITICO condemned 'politicians who have gladly accepted significant financial support from NJEA members many times for their own campaigns' who have come out against the spending for Spiller.
'They never question why our members choose to support them,' Robertson said. 'They do often ask why we don't give more, so they aren't concerned about NJEA members investing in electoral advocacy. The concern only seems to arise when that investment goes to someone outside of the established political power structure. We know the usual naysayers, and they can continue with the same tired attacks, but we know our power and we own it.'
At the Statehouse, some people see the investment in Spiller as business as usual. Democratic state Sen. Shirley Turner said that the union has long put its thumb on the scale in elections.
'You know, they do it all the time, it seems,' Turner, vice-chair of the Senate Education Committee, said in an interview. 'I don't know if this is any different than previously, they pick candidates, and they decide to support them in all ways, you know, including funding.'
The union famously fought with Republican former Gov. Chris Christie — who likened the group to the mafia — during his eight years in office. That feud between the union and the right in New Jersey may carry on — Republican Jack Ciattarelli, his party's nominee for governor, accused Sherrill of rushing to 'suck up to the NJEA and embrace the guy who just lit $40 million of [teachers'] dues money on fire these past few months' in a recent social media post.
'What an insult to New Jersey's hard-working educators,' Ciattarelli added.
Sherrill's campaign declined to comment when asked her thoughts on the NJEA's spending in the primary.
It's common for teachers unions around the country to engage in political spending, though rarely to the extent of the NJEA. Notably in 2023, the Chicago Teachers Union spent more than $2 million to get its member and organizer Brandon Johnson into the mayorship.
On the federal level, from 2023-2024, the National Education Association dropped $32 million on political spending (primarily to liberal groups), making it the top spender among teachers unions, according to OpenSecrets. The NJEA blew past that total in a state-level race in just a couple of months.
The NJEA had a Herculean task in uplifting Spiller, who struggled to solidify his lane in the six-person primary and faced controversy during his time as mayor of Montclair. Despite Spiller's second-to-last finish, election results suggest his message — and the union's big spending — resonated in pockets of the state. He unexpectedly won Camden — a major city in South Jersey — and won Cumberland County, a rural area that has been trending quickly towards Republicans.
But in Montclair, he finished in fifth. Bob Russo, a former mayor and member of the town council, said Spiller's tenure as mayor did not make him beloved by the town's rank-and-file Democrats.
'He's really not embraced by his hometown. That's your base,' he said. 'It's a shame he couldn't get more support, but it's because of [his] policies and the conduct as mayor.'
Spiller's tenure as president is up this August. He'll be succeeded by Steve Beatty, the union's current vice president. After Spiller's loss, Beatty and Robertson in a statement touted the 'unprecedented grassroots effort powered by thousands of member volunteers' and congratulated Sherrill.
Beatty acknowledged that 'in a six-way race with five other well-known and well-funded candidates … there were always going to be five candidates who came up short.' He also said that endorsing Spiller ensured that issues important to the union 'were part of the conversation in the primary.'
'We are proud that Sean was right there in the race alongside those candidates with deeper ties to New Jersey's political and financial elites,' he continued. 'It says a lot about how hard our members fought to change the narrative around who is qualified to step up and lead.'
Unions from different sectors also spent in the race in support of other candidates, though not as much as the NJEA. And while other Democrats did outraise Spiller, no other independent expenditure groups boosting his opponents had as many resources as Working New Jersey. As of the end of May, two groups supporting Rep. Josh Gottheimer spent more than $11 million, as did two groups backing Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop, and super PACs backing Sherrill and Sweeney spent around $4 million each.
Other union leaders stand by the multimillion-dollar decision.
'I do think it was worth it,' said Melissa Tomlinson, vice-president of the Atlantic County Council of Education Associations and a member of NJEA's state executive committee. 'We need our voices heard in decision-making spaces. It's not enough for us to just be lobbying.'
The NJEA counts around 200,000 members, and it's evident that not even half of them voted for their union president, who received less than 90,000 votes.
'If you were to ask [teachers] 'Is this how you want your monies used' — for a sitting president to spend millions of dollars to run for governor — they would say no,' the former high-level NJEA official said. 'And how do I think they would say no? The numbers that did not vote for him on Election Day is proof.'
The union has not yet determined how it will engage in the general election. Beatty said that 'NJEA members will consider who to support in November in all the races,' and both Ciattarelli and Sherrill will be invited to partake in the endorsement screening process.
In past elections, the NJEA has been a prominent spender post-primary. The union has consistently endorsed Democrats for governor, and it doesn't appear that will change anytime soon. Ciattarelli supports policies like school vouchers, which are a non-starter for the union.
When asked at a recent event if she would seek the NJEA's support, Sherrill told reporters that her 'door is open to everyone.'
Throughout the primary, Spiller pushed back on criticisms about the union's spending, asserting that he was not in charge of how that money was spent. He also often argued that the union represents working-class people, as opposed to big-dollar donors.
'It's never about me,' Spiller said during the primary. 'This is about, how do we change systems? How do we fight for somebody who's gonna fight for working class folks? And that never stops.'