Skip to main content

Lincoln Leads the Way


An attempt was made to silence Lincoln, but the assignation attempt was foiled this time.

For years, a discussion has been brewing about increasing transparency
in government employee contract negotiations in Washington. Until recently, the unions have maintained their stranglehold on the process, forcing the meetings to be held in secret, hidden from the public's prying eyes.

A county commissioner once asked one of the unions he was to negotiate with what they thought about making employee contract negotiations public.

"The union will not agree to public negotiations...we
 have a contract with the County, not with the public... the public is not a party to the contract." Hannah Franks

Facing the promise of litigation and an aggressive, defensive letter
from the union outlining the “chilling effect and domination it would have on the members,” the county backed off.

Over the next couple of years,’ enough signatures were gathered in 4
cities to petition for a public vote to open contract negotiations to the public. The litigation proceeded and ultimately stopped a vote from ever taking place. The Unions argued such a policy is "legislative in nature," and the people don’t get to vote on such matters. Nor do the elected officials
if the union's bullying tactics are successful.

A breakthrough took place last week!

Facing difficult financial times and struggling to provide basic services,
Lincoln County Commissioners planned to put a tax increase proposal on the ballot. Understanding the conservative values of their constituents, and the overall lack of public trust in government, they decided to pass a resolution on Sep 6th, 2016, stating their intention of opening their employee collective bargaining negotiations to the public, the most expensive part of their budget.

The tax increase proposal passed, but the local Teamsters filed an unfair
labor practice after failing to bully the commissaries into rescinding their resolution and publicly admitting they violated the law.
A little more than two months later, the Teamster's frivolous complaint was dismissed after failing to show how transparent government is harmful. Probably because it's not.

In Lincoln County, transparency was helpful in justifying a tax increase,
and as a side benefit, the employees represented by the Teamsters were happy to get a chance to sit in on the proceedings for the first time.

The elephant in the room is that the state is engaging in closed-door meetings with unions to the tune of 8,000,000,000 dollars of taxpayer
money.

Lincoln County isn’t the problem that needed fixing, but it sets an excellent precedent. With its all-Republican board of commissioners, the relationship between Lincoln County and the union representing its employees was likely appropriately adversarial.
That’s often not the case in jurisdictions where elected Democrats ostensibly represent the public’s interest even though they may have accepted generous campaign contributions from the very unions with whom they must now negotiate.

A compelling case can be made that Governor Jay Inslee would never have become Washington’s governor in the first place without the $6 million in campaign donations he accepted from organized labor – including $3 million from unions with whom he and his surrogates would be writing a new multimillion-dollar contract for in just
 a few months.

Under the circumstances, can anyone seriously argue it’s not in the public interest to let taxpayers see whose side the governor is on? 

Union bosses understand that knowledge is power, and when people are
able to see behind the curtain, they may not be as easy to manipulate.
In a democratic republic like ours, transparency should be the rule,
not the exception. Rather than having to go to court to explain why it is not a good idea for the people to see how their hard-earned taxes are negotiated, the burden of proof should be on the unions and the politicians they control to explain how secrecy and back-room deals
could be a good thing.

Short answer: It isn’t, and the Lincoln County Commissioners deserve
a standing ovation for setting Washington back on the path toward open, responsible, accountable government.
The first domino has fallen; it's only a matter of time before the
next county opens its meetings to the public.

Without government unions electioneering and secret negotiations, without forced union dues, the long-held Democrat control over Washington will slip away into a purple and eventually a red state.

Lincoln Counties' war with the unions will lead to a more transparent and better representative government.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

When Government Demands Papers We Refuse

 By Matthew Hayward  9/19/2025  The Supreme Court just paused a lower court order that had limited federal immigration stops in Los Angeles. That stay lets federal agents resume roving patrols and interior operations that critics say rely on appearance, language, job, or neighborhood to pick people for questioning.  This matters because it normalizes a posture of suspicion. Checkpoints miles inland and roving patrols turn movement inside the country into a condition to be earned rather than a freedom to be enjoyed. The government already claims expanded authority inside the 100-mile border zone. That claim, plus an open green light for stops based on appearance, is a recipe for arbitrary enforcement.  Philosophy of resistance John Locke told us that the consent of the governed is the foundation of legitimate power. When rulers invade life, liberty, or property, or when they become arbitrary disposers of people’s lives and fortunes, the social compact is dissolve...

The National Guard Was Never Meant to Be a Federal Tool

By Matthew Hayward July 13, 2025 Let me say this clearly: The National Guard was created to defend the states, not to enforce the will of the federal government. It was meant to serve as a local militia, an armed extension of the people under the control of the state. The highest authority a Guard member was ever supposed to answer to is their elected governor, not a bureaucrat in Washington, not a federal agency, and certainly not a sitting president weaponizing military force on domestic soil. Yes, I know the laws have changed. I know the Montgomery Amendment, the National Defense Act, and the Supreme Court’s decision in Perpich v. Department of Defense rewrote the rules. But legal does not mean constitutional. Gradualism does not legitimize usurpation. You do not get to trample foundational principles and call it progress. What is happening now, federalizing state forces to deploy them in cities without gubernatorial consent, is blasphemous. It is an insult to the very spirit of th...

How the Drug War Killed Liberty

 By Matthew Hayward 10/25/2025 When the State Declares War on Behavior Earlier this month, President Trump ordered United States military strikes off the coast of Venezuela, killing alleged “narcoterrorists.” He later boasted, “ We’re just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. ” Those words should chill every American who believes in liberty. Fifty years after Nixon declared his war on drugs, it has evolved from domestic raids to international executions, all under the same failed philosophy that government violence can cure human vice. When the state declares war on human behavior, it always loses and takes the people down with it. Every prison cell, every overdose, every cartel bullet is a monument to the arrogance of government trying to legislate morality. Back in 1988, Ron Paul said it best on The Morton Downey Jr. Show: “You can’t legislate morality. You can’t force people to be better by passing laws. If you want to solve moral and social problems, y...