I think you overlooked some of the more interesting aspects of the recent AACTE vote on the its resolution calling for one accreditor.
The vote on the resolution was surprisingly close (158 to 151). This vote needs to put in the context that less than 50 AACTE members have elected TEAC, while 600 of them have elected NCATE. Clearly, and to their credit, a significant portion of the AACTE membership wants a choice and isn't ready to sign on to the idea that a single accreditation system or agent is necessary or even desirable.
The AACTE leadership put itself on the line throughout the meeting and before and relentlessly lobbied each constituent group to support the resolution. The vote counting was fairly inept and no one there could have confidence in the outcome with regard to the actual count. I think it is fair to say that the membership is evenly divided and that no mandate exists for a single accreditation agency.
Shortly before the AACTE vote, the Delegate Assembly of the Association of Teacher Educators (ATE), a rival to AACTE, unanimously passed the following resolution at its annual meeting:
"Whereas, ATE advocates for quality teacher preparation; Whereas, we live in a pluralistic society; Whereas, ATE values diversity, equity, and access; and Whereas, ATE supports the rights of states to determine accreditation and approval processes, Be it resolved that ATE supports multiple pathways to accreditation."
Finally, TEAC, while smaller than NCATE, is not quite as small as your note implies: TEAC has accredited 34 programs, not 27 as you (and the AACTE press release) stated, and has 117 institutions that have affiliated with it. Some of these, as you did note, are among the top ed schools in the country.
All the best,
Frank B. Murray, President Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC)