Background/Context: During the 2016 presidential election campaign, Hillary Clinton was "booed" while speaking at the National Education Association (NEA)'s annual representative assembly. The media suggested this evidenced a weakening of a powerful alliance. Since the NEA first endorsed Jimmy Carter in 1976, the claim that the Democratic party is "a wholly owned subsidiary of the NEA" has persisted. This characterization of the NEA and Democratic Party relationship has become so ubiquitous in political discourse that it is rarely questioned. As a result, the NEA is often portrayed as a powerful political player in national elections, while little evidence supports this conclusion. Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: This study uses archival evidence to identify the NEA's political influence during presidential election campaigns to provide scholars a more nuanced history as they seek to understand current political happenings. Research Design: The historical analysis used internal campaign and NEA documents located in 13 archives housed in six presidential libraries, four university libraries, two state historical societies, and one public policy institute as well as the NEA Collection at The George Washington University. Findings/Results: Two factors explain NEA's limited influence on presidential politics despite its significant donations to the Democratic Party. First, Republican candidates used the NEA to attack Democrats as beholden to radical special interest groups. Democrats evidenced the success of this Republican strategy by taking positions the NEA opposed in an attempt to convince voters of their independence. Second, many NEA members did not support the NEA's involvement in party politics because they believed political activism was inconsistent with teacher professionalism or they were conservatives unwilling to support a Democratic candidate. Conclusions/Recommendations: As they look to future presidential campaigns, scholars should remember: 1) Republican candidates' attacks on the NEA have been part of a strategy to convince voters that Democratic candidates were beholden to special interests. Policy differences between Republican candidates and the NEA served as later justification for this strategy rather that its cause. 2) Democratic candidates supporting policies the NEA opposes is not an act of political courage. They have long found the power of the NEA rests not in its endorsement but in the opportunity for voters to see them stand up to this special interest group. Given the NEA's commitment to endorsing a candidate and the Republican strategy, Democrats have been able to challenge the NEA without fearing that it will cost them an endorsement or campaign contributions.