The Tennessee Conservative Staff –
Huge outside PAC money influenced the August 1st primary elections with endorsements and spending also coming from RINO leadership to oppose true conservative candidates.
With few true conservatives as incumbents, the vast majority in both the Tennessee Senate and House of Representatives are in dire need of replacement and many real Tennessee conservative candidates stepped up to challenge these establishment Republicans.
While conservatives saw some wins, those who had reservations about Governor Bill Lee’s legacy project, his voucher plan for Tennessee K-12 education, found themselves targeted by big money coming from a handful of PACs tied to the following groups: Americans for Prosperity (AFP), American Federation for Children (AFC), and Club for Growth.
These groups attacked true conservatives over a single issue, even going so far as to threaten any Republican who questions vouchers with the loss of their next primary.
Many conservatives have expressed legitimate concerns about the hastily crafted “school choice” bills presented during the last session of the General Assembly that were secretly assembled without public input, and eventually crammed into a convoluted omnibus package with other items unrelated to school choice.
The PACs tied to these groups – Americans for Prosperity Action (AFP), AFC Victory Fund (AFC), and School Freedom Fund (Club for Growth) spent a little over $1.5 million in an effort to influence Tennessee elections in the lead up to the August 1st primaries.
Governor Lee welcomed the donations of these outside PACs to specific candidates as long as those candidates supported his universal school voucher plan.
Lee had endorsed State House candidates Lee Reeves for District 65 and Aron Maberry for District 68. Both won their primaries and both received financial support from at least two of the three PACs.
According to online finance records, Americans for Prosperity Action spent nearly $41 thousand on Reeves, and nearly $29 thousand on Maberry in 2024 but have receipts for over $400 thousand in various expenses in support of candidates, both incumbents and challengers in the most recent primary, who they believe will vote for vouchers next year.
AFP is a national libertarian group founded and funded by billionaires Charles and (the late) David Koch of Koch Industries. The political advocacy group has supported Lee’s school voucher plan essentially from day one.
The group was active at the Capitol during this year’s legislative session, bringing hundreds of school choice advocates to lobby lawmakers. Before two education committee votes earlier this year, Michael Lotfi, Deputy Director of the Tennessee chapter, sent a memo to the members of the Tennessee General Assembly to inform them of the fate of Texas Republicans who did not vote for school choice policies.
AFC Victory Fund has spent a total of $42,384.15 on a combination of mailers and research for Tennessee candidates in 2024 so far. When AFC launched their PAC last year, they boasted that they would spend $10 million in races around the country to defeat state legislators opposed to school choice.
AFC was founded by former U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. Their related PAC is funded in large part by contributions from DeVos, husband Dick DeVos, and billionaire Jeff Yass. Notable Tennessee donors include Lee Beaman, the auto magnate, and attorney Lee Barfield.
The group has a few connections with Governor Lee.
Gillum Ferguson, one-time press secretary for Lee during the pandemic, serves as the political strategist for the group.
Former executive director, John Patton, now works at Christ Presbyterian Academy where First Lady Maria Lee used to teach. The Academy does not have any students enrolled using the current Education Savings Accounts program, but should a universal voucher program become law, that could change. Patton also serves as a founding board member of King’s Academy Nashville, an independent Christian School, which is currently an approved ESA institution.
Additionally, Palmer Williams, wife of Joseph Williams who is Lee’s chief of staff, is also on the King’s Academy Nashville board.
By far, the heaviest hitter in terms of spending has been the School Freedom Fund who has spent over a million dollars on Tennessee candidates.
The PAC spent $400,065.57 on Maberry, $482,589.11 on Reeves, $219,354.28 on Tom Hatcher in the Senate primary for District 2 against conservative Bryan Richey, and $265,716.88 on Jessie Seal in the Senate primary against Senator Frank Niceley in District 8.
The PAC also spent significant money in opposition to Richey ($276,269.32) and Niceley ($231,719.88) on expenses that included texting campaigns, digital and TV ads and mailers.
One of the biggest donors of two of these PACs is Jeff Yass, who owns a significant stake – worth billions of dollars – in ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok that is based in China. Niceley believed that a bill he sponsored preventing China, among other countries, from buying land in Tennessee may have put him on Yass’ radar.
Yass has given $8.7 million to AFC Victory Fund, and $5.2 million to the School Freedom Fund this year.
26 Responses
These so-called RINO’s are really right-wing extremists, some of whom are even worse than those conservatives that the author of this article endorses. Tennessee’s real problem: too many right-wing law-makers and not enough left-wing law-makers.
The only thing that I can agree with the Tennessee Conservative Staff on is their opposition to vouchers. In fact, this is one of the few things that Progressives and Leftists can agree with these particular conservatives on, although not necessarily for the same reasons. So, if the conservative authors of this article want to call pro-voucher Republicans DINOs on this issue, that’s okay with me. Call them whatever you want. But the main thing is that I support retention of a robust public school system for Tennessee counties and cities–maybe the only thing that I agree with the authors of this article on.
There you go virulent anti-voucher conservatives, you are on the same side as leftists in the Government School Trust on this issue according to our resident leftist william delzell. CONGRATULATIONS, that’s some achievement.
Now perhaps you want to reexamine your position.
Andy Ogles was the director of the TN chapter of Americans for Prosperity – their chief lobbyist in TN for a number of years.
Some of his key staff come from Americans for Prosperity.
Both his campaign in both 2022 and 2024 was heavily backed by Americans for Prosperity, including donations, volunteers, leading his phone banking, etc.
Are we sure that Americans for Prosperity is a bad group? If so, then how is Andy Ogles background working for them, pushing their agenda, being backed by them financially, hiring key staff from them and their continual support and endorsement of him explained?
This wasn’t just in his past – they have been foundational to his run for congress in 2022 and 2024 as well as his time in congress.
How much has Americans for Prosperity donated to his run for Maury Co Mayor? To his 2 congressional campaigns? In cash and in services (such as directing/coordinating phone banking)?
What is his involvement and what support has he received from the other 2 groups? How much in total donations from the 3 in this past election?
Why do they support Andy Ogles? On what issues do they agree?
Is this why he did not vote to oust McCarthy when push came to shove? Is this why he voted to fully fund the FBI despite conservative’s concerns on FBI fair and balanced application of the law in their investigations? Is this why he voted in support of large government spending?
Should we conservatives be concerned about Andy Ogles due to his direct involvement in and his strong support by Americans for Prosperity?
if Americans for Prosperity is a bad organization when they support some candidates then are they not a bad organization when they support Andy Ogles? Or is their support of him ok and explainable because of some reason or the other?
I would vote for him over any Dem … but thinking of 2026 and thinking of those politicians and groups who have endorsed him despite knowing he was a lobbyist for Americans for Prosperity … gives me pause for thought …
Good questions, hopefully someone will answer.
Andy Ogles has been a PERFECT conservative congressman so far, as his 100% Heritage score will attests. Andy, however, shows signs of laziness and generates distractions that we don’t want in our first conservative governor in memory. With Reps. Green (96%), Rose (99%) and Burchett (94%) reportedly eyeing a run let’s keep Andy in the House.
Lazy?!
I wasn’t trying attack Andy Ogles. I was merely pointing out that too many conservatives have a double standard regarding these groups
Lazy – maybe those saying he didn’t attend & lead a significant number of county commission meetings when he was a county mayor were true?
Frankly CC I don’t know anything about his performance as County Mayor of Maury County. Rather, my suspicion that Andy is lazy stems from his two House campaigns. In both, Andy won comfortably but that wasn’t a foregone conclusion before and during the campaign. In both cases, however, I thought Andy was in a witness protection program because he did little campaigning and didn’t bestir himself to raise all that much money either. If we are so blessed as to finally elect a conservative governor in 2026, there will be much to be done and I have doubts that actually doing all that much, other than correctly voting “Aye” or “Nay”, is Andy’s strong point.
There were issues with the particular bill from last session that need to be addressed while continuing forward toward school choice/Universal School Choice in our state for our school children.
Those who oppose Universal School Choice are at odds with President Trump, the Republican Party Platform and the majority of parents. They are disguising their support of the leftist Public School Unions and big government with weak, but catchy, talking points.
Those who oppose Universal School Choice are catering to their district’s public school board members and employees as well as unions instead of to their district’s school children.
The obligation of our state government and elected officials is to the state’s children, not to the state’s educational bureaucracy!
Conservatives believe in small government and in subsidizing private business instead of the government being in/running business.
Please go watch the hearings. You need to hear what was said about vouchers in the hearings. The school voucher scam is an equity initiative. The E from DEI. It will bring the problems of public schools to the doorsteps of private without fixing public. Lees woke education commissioner Gonzalez has a DEI resume and said in committee hearings the public schools are fine and they want ample communication with private schools. Lib Lundberg said we have to have testing to retain vouchers which means teaching to tests. Choosing curriculum. Woke curriculum.
The Real solution is what OK is doing. Reform TN education. Flex the tenth. Cut out DOE. Fix public schools by taking back education away from Marxists. Not bringing regulatory burden to private.
There is Federal funding coming in to our state bringing radical leftist agendas! While the GOP runs cover and pretends these equity initiatives are conservative. They aren’t.
The government is supposed to protect equal rights, not provide equal things. School choice is claiming people are owed equal things. It’s akin to saying people deserve equal delivery services so the people over the post office takeover FedEx. Before long FedEx looks exactly like the Post office. That is like the healthcare monopoly of education. All healthcare and all education under government regulation. No private, all publicly funded and government controlled. That’s big government. That’s not limited government.
You want to help, give a tax credit like Reagan suggested was the only way to do it without getting the government involved.
These are leftist initiatives being disguised as Republican.
Well stated and as one from the homeschooling community, we don’t want any part of the “school choice” ideology, including the vouchers. It always comes down to he who pays makes the rules. If government or the real source of money-taxpayers, starts to offer vouchers to homeschoolers, then soon we will be required to submit curriculum for approval. The next step after that is government required curriculum plus. We saw it happen to Alaskan homeschoolers 25 years ago. Nope. We’ve made our choice, just leave us alone.
Good news Phyllis, no one will force you to take vouchers and I am sure everyone will fight for your right to homeschool your children while paying for the education of other children. Very generous of you too, I might add.
As for others who would prefer to simply have some of the money the state spends on educating their children for them to spend elsewhere as they choose, I suggest you join free-market conservatives in constructing the best voucher system possible initially, while improving the system over time.
If you don’t want vouchers/scholarships then don’t participate in the program
There are many who would like to homeschool and are already in public school to whom the Universal School Choice would be helpful – let each family choose for themselves
Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it shouldn’t exist as an option!
Subsidizing private business with tax dollars is not a conservative principle. It’s government extortion of the hard earned income of citizens to be spent on government initiatives. It will absolutely lead to the government being in and running private businesses and schools.
Bingo.
You are incorrect. To promote government run businesses over privately owned business is socialism (at best) and exactly what communists do. Period
Conservatives fight to reduce government at every turn and subsidize private ownership every time the choice is government run or private with government help
Example:
In socialist and full communist countries, the government owns and runs the farms.
In the US, we don’t want government run farms so we spend huge amounts of tax dollars to subsidize private farm businesses
How many who are fighting school choice in the legislature take government money for their farm businesses to subsidize it and yet claim to be against gov subsidies to private businesses?
Odd way of looking at it Anti-Federalist. The government is simply returning some of the money it is constitutionally required to spend to the people on whose behalf the government is making that expenditure and those people are then freely purchasing the constitutionally mandated service elsewhere and somehow you get a government subsidy of private business out of this arrangement.
If there is any “extortion” here it is government requiring the childless to pay for the education of someone else’s children. That is a constitutional issue in Tennessee, however, and has nothing to do with vouchers.
Well, single issue lobbyists are always scorched earth and it showed in this past election – they spent big money to successfully paint a number of conservatives as the devil incarnate. It is also why the results were a mix bag for Bill Lee and his ‘version’ of the school choice legislation. As a conservative, I am for choice when parents are picking a school for their child – after all they DO know whats best for their children. But, I do not think that our educational system is better off with a ‘captive’ audience…they should be forced to compete like most other entities in America! Where I differ with Lee’s School Choice, is on ‘funding’. I’m sure that parents of poor performing schools, and those of private and home schooled children deserve their tax dollars to use for the education that best fits their children (not the educrats!), but as a conservative, what I am VERY concerned about is the bureaucrats and leftists that Bill Lee appoints will be in CONTROL of the money, which ‘in turn’ leads to control the educational resources and required tests for graduation! This is the FOX IN THE HENHOUSE and unfortunately, I find myself agreeing with the educrats or ‘educational protectionists’ on this one.
But Victor, I saw nothing in the legislation providing vouchers under discussion that proposed to give the government control of the money after the voucher was received by the parents. Whatever the fevered dreams of some of education Nazis using vouchers to take over all education, in fact, those of us supporting vouchers simply want to make it as economically as feasible as possible to get as many children as possible out of the clutches of government schools. It is simply bizarre to think that we would countenance any voucher program that did just the opposite, i.e. using vouchers as a back-door means of making ALL schools government schools.
I’m with Bill Lee I would rather have school choice if a candidate wants school choice then bring there ideals up and how it will be run I would rather trust Bill Lee then our federal government especially the way it is today it’s trash and our school children are suffering it needs a change and school choice is that change anything is better than what we have now
I am stunned and saddened to read this article and deeply disappointed in The Tennessee Conservative. To attack these three organizations is inappropriate. They simply chose to support a candidate that was more aligned with their top priorities, in this case educational freedom. We all have different top priorities/issues as “conservative” voters and organizations. For goodness sakes, the AFC primary focus IS improving education and educational freedom and it is a major leg of the other two organizations. What’s next? Are you going to attack Tennessee Right to Life when they choose a candidate they believe has a better record on life over your idea of a “true conservative candidate”? There are families desperate to provide a better future for their children by getting them out of the school that is failing them (for any number of reasons), yet they are trapped. Please, let us allow for a diversity of priorities as conservative voters and not start eating our own. I hope you will reconsider your position in this article.
Why is it people keep voting for the “SAME POLITICANS”, YEAR AFTER YEAR,
expection “BIG CHANGES” in Government by the “SAME POLITICIANS”
who have promised those “BIG CHANGES”, “YEAR AFTER YEAR”
for the last ” SIX THOUSAND YEARS”????
And what do they say about people who keep trying the same thing over and over expection different results,
Yep, that what I thought too, the problem is not with those “in office” but those “in the voting booths”.
John down at the Gas station and Bette the housewife would do more to solve our problems than these “Puppets on a String made of dollars”,
until then expect the same results.
The public schools are terminally infested with lucifer’s leftists, thus I’m all for options. However, it appears that there are inordinate financial interests in getting it done. It’d be interesting to know how much the left has spent to keep public schools as the only option.
As a conservative of all the organizations supporting the conservative movement in Tennessee the one I cherish the most is the Tennessee Conservative News. So I write this in love in an attempt to be constructive.
I have supported The Club For Growth all my working life. The bulk of my estate has been directed to the Club in my will. When most serious solid conservative candidates decide to run for Congress or governor, one of the first things they do is make application with The Club For Growth for support, then devote themselves to financially qualify, as well as prepare to fly to D.C. to interview in order to gain that support. There is no organization that has done more to support the elections of the most conservative candidates with any reasonable chance of winning than the Club especially in Republican primaries as well as the general elections. Ask Andy Ogles. For The Tennessee Conservative Staff to now call The Club For Growth one of the “fake conservatives” and call for its avoidance by conservatives is funny but also embarrassing at the same time.
It says > “AFP is a national libertarian group founded and funded by billionaires Charles and (the late) David Koch of Koch Industries. The political advocacy group has supported Lee’s school voucher plan essentially from day one.”
The Koch Brothers want Open Borders and oppose Trump. They are self-serving.
No David, THEY ARE LIBERTARIANS. To libertarians the free movement of goods and services not only within a country, but throughout the world, as part of a worldwide fee market economy is the way that leads to the most prosperity as well as individual rights.
Open borders and vouchers for parents to spend on educational services are a natural outgrowth of libertarian devotion to free market economics. As a basically libertarian conservative, I don’t believe in open borders, but I am enthusiastic about vouchers. It’s a matter of political philosophy and world view David, not self-interest.
AFP and Club for Growth are globalist organizations who believe in free trade in the worst and most extreme definition of that idea; open borders, no limit on manufacturing hopping from nation to nation, and importing foreign workers to lower wages. They are no friends of America First, or economic nationalism. Libertarianism is a utopian mental disorder that has no allegiance to any nation. Only to the idea that all things labelled “free trade” are automatically right and just. To quote Tucker Carlson, “Libertarian’s don’t care if a policy works in fact, as long as it works in theory”. Like other advocacy groups, AFP and CFG will begrudgingly support people they don’t agree with as either a way to maintain influence, or as the lesser of two evils. Their support does not automatically mean a cause or candidate is tainted. But make NO mistake, neither is conservative; and their motives are always to advance globalism in the name of “free trade”. Beware their influence in any cause or candidate whom they embrace. If they are all in on vouchers it is not simply an issue of providing better educational opportunity; their influence over potential curriculum must be scrutinized. As to commenter’s questions about whether Andy Ogles association with AFP has influenced some of his behaviour, of course it has. How could it not?