Realtors oppose mandatory fee for candidates

That award makes news that she resigned from the association and from her position as treasurer of the board June 15 all the more surprising. Realtors At the heart of the matter is a January 2010 ruling by the U. Federal Election Commission allowing trade associations, unions, corporations, and non-profit groups to spend unlimited funds advocating for and against politicians. The RPAC raises about $18 million annually to support Advertisementcandidates but the dues increase will raise $40 million nationally to advocate for policy issues and to a lesser degree individual candidates, Phipps said. However, it takes away Realtors freedom to choose their own candidates and causes, Richard said. The initiative moves the trade association closer to being a union or political party, Richard said. Richard cites a blog written by Matthew Ferrara, who teaches for the National Association of Realtors, as support for her argument. In one recent blog, Ferrara would not say the initiative is bad for NAR but said some members can object to having their money spent on politics, especially if they do not like either party. Some members may not support the NAR's political objectives even if they support its trade association activities such as education, professional standards and marketing, Ferrara wrote. Association of Realtors, which is an arm of the state and national associations, will resign when their annual dues expire at the end of December. Alpha Real Estate will remain in business as an independent office and will continue to have access to the Multiple Listing Service, she said. She has been a Realtor 20 years and agrees with the national association's stance on many issues but plans to let her membership expire. You can't tell me you are taking away my right to choose," Brooks said. For anyone demanding I put my money somewhere, whether its a nickel or $5,000, they have no right to tell me what stance to take. Other real estate agents are supporting the new mandatory fee to protect property owners' rights but agree with Richard that the new initiative was introduced poorly.