What if I told you that your tax dollars fund political campaigns that you probably didn’t vote for? Unwittingly, taxpayers have been subsidizing the partisan politicking of a significantly strong lobbying force in Pennsylvania politics: unions.

New analysis shows that 2025 — which was supposed to be a quiet off-year election year — proved to be a boon for union political spending in Pennsylvania. Political action committees (PACs) operated by trade unions and government unions combined to spend $22.4 million on monetary and in-kind political activity in 2025.

Obviously, Pennsylvania’s judicial-retention race was the hub for political activity in 2025. Three Democrat-backed Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justices — Justices Kevin Dougherty, David Wecht, and Christine Donohue — faced potential removal, but a huge influx of out-of-state contributions helped the three justices retain their seats.

One estimate pegs the pro-retention side raising $14 million — $2.2 million, of which came from unions.

Interestingly, Justice Dougherty received $180,000 from two local offices of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), including one formerly led by his brother, John Dougherty. During his tenure at the helm of IBEW Local 98, “Johnny Doc” defrauded members, embezzled union funds, and bribed public officials. He is now serving a six-year federal prison sentence for public corruption and embezzlement.

The irony of this union executive bribing and currying favor with public officials–especially in the context of campaign contributions — shouldn’t be lost on anybody.

The judicial retention elections aside, some of the largest recipients of union money weren’t even on the ballot in 2025. Building up his gubernatorial war chest for 2026, Gov. Josh Shapiro procured more than $2.2 million in PAC contributions from both public- and private-sector unions. Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker, who won’t face reelection until 2027, received about $273,000 from unions. House Majority Leader Matt Bradford, up for reelection in 2026, received $212,500 from union PACs, including the largest government union donation of $35,000 from the Pennsylvania State Education Association.

Government unions were among the most influential political actors in 2025. Collectively, Pennsylvania’s largest public sector unions — specifically, the state-level affiliates of the National Education Association; American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; Service Employees International Union; American Federation of Teachers; and United Food and Commercial Workers–spent more than $5 million on electoral politics last year.

But this financial relationship between government unions and politicians is especially problematic. Unions representing government employees — people whose salaries, benefits, and work rules are ultimately set by politicians — are spending millions to decide which politicians hold office. In return, union executives receive special legal privileges, such as the right to use public workplaces for union political activity.

If that’s not a conflict of interest, I don’t know what is.

Even worse, taxpayers fund this impropriety. State law discourages lawmakers from using publicly funded resources to collect political contributions. Yet, state law also allows government unions to act as legally dubious intermediaries, using publicly funded mechanisms, such as public payrolls, to automatically deduct the membership dues they use to fund political campaigns.

There’s also a strong likelihood that taxpayers are unwittingly funding campaigns they don’t personally support. Pennsylvania is famous for its status as a swing state, with strong representation from both major political parties. Yet, 90 percent of government union donations went toward Democratic candidates, meaning a significant chunk of the commonwealth’s voters subsidized candidates whom they likely voted against.

With the growing concerns for the depletion of democratic norms, the case for reform has become more urgent than ever.

For example, a payroll protection law would prevent government unions from collecting PAC deductions through public payroll systems.

Other states have adopted similar protections. Ten states have banned government unions from directly deducting dues from certain public payrolls, and 13 prohibit the collection of political money.

Polling suggests that Pennsylvanians would support similar reforms. Nearly 90 percent of Pennsylvanians support a prohibition on government unions using taxpayer-funded payroll systems to collect campaign contributions.

Union executives have exerted undue influence in the Keystone State. And if 2025 is any indication, 2026 will likely be a record-breaking year for union political spending, given the upcoming midterm elections. Considering the number of elections — 17 U.S. representatives, the governorship, all 203 state House seats, and half of the state Senate — Pennsylvania will only witness more union-backed campaigns.

Pennsylvania has always been a battleground state. But when unions funnel millions through publicly funded payroll systems — often without the consent of taxpayers or their members — the fight becomes unfair. Reform won’t reverse the undue influence that unions have maintained in Pennsylvania politics, but it will certainly level the playing field.

David R. Osborne is the senior director of labor policy with the Commonwealth Foundation.