Skip to main content

Are Your Union Dues Putting Your Own Life And Property At Risk?

It’s 3 a.m. You hear a window break, so you call 911. It rings several times.

An automated voice finally comes on the line: “Due to lost funding,” it informs you, “we are short-staffed. Please press 1 to wait on hold or press 2 if you would like to leave a detailed message about your emergency.”

Oh, and have a great day.



It’s a nightmare scenario, and one you might soon have to confront given the growing demands to defund law enforcement by even mainstream liberal politicians anxious to pander to their party’s extreme-Leftist base.

The question is, are you actually helping to pay for this madness?

If you’re a government employee handing over a portion of every paycheck to a union, the answer is almost certainly yes.

Among those currently funneling money to organizations openly demanding the defunding and abolition of local police, sheriff’s departments, and state patrol agencies are the:

  • Teamsters;
  • National Education Association (NEA);
  • Service Employees International Union (SEIU); and,
  • American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME).

Some unions go even further. The Teamsters actively supported the violent protests in Seattle, encouraging members to partake and walk with the crowd carrying signs saying “Defund SPD” (Seattle Police Department), “ACAB (All cops are bastards),” “Abolish police,” and worse.

Is this what you signed up for? Is this what you pay union dues for?

Unions purportedly exist to collectively bargain for higher wages, increased benefits, and a safe work environment.

If you work in law enforcement or live in an area being threatened to have the police defunded, will the union show up to assist you?

After receiving numerous angry phone calls and dozens of emails from Teamsters members specifically, the Freedom Foundation sent out an email and two mail pieces detailing union support and involvement in at least one plan to defund the police.

In response, we received bundles of opt-out forms every day for weeks.

Perhaps now that public employees have the right to opt-out of paying union dues, the free market will force unions to reconsider their role as heavy-handed political players and social policy activists.

As a result of one email and two mailings, we estimate the Teamsters’ actions have already cost it $40,000 a year in revenues. Forever.

A little truth goes a long way.


This was originally published by the Freedom Foundation:

Comments

Post a Comment

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...
1 comment
Read more

The National Guard Was Never Meant to Be a Federal Tool

By Matthew Hayward 7/13/2025 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. DoD rewrote the rules. But legal doesn’t mean constitutional. Gradualism doesn’t legitimize usurpation. You don’t get to trample foundational principles and call it progress. What’s happening now—federalizing state forces to deploy them in cities without gubernatorial consent—is blasphemous. It's an insult to the very spirit of the Constitution. The ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Could Today Be the Cheapest Price for Bitcoin Ever Again? Here’s Why

By: Matthew Hayward Current price  Nov 10, 2024 76.72K 80.43K Is Now the Time to Buy Bitcoin? Bitcoin has come a long way since its early days as a niche digital asset. Today, as we enter another phase in its established four-year cycle , Bitcoin may be at a historic high, but it could soon become the new baseline price. This cycle, which has repeatedly shown Bitcoin’s resilience and long-term growth potential, suggests that the current price might be the lowest we’ll see again. While recent political shifts, including Donald Trump’s landslide election victory, have added new momentum and support for Bitcoin, the timing within the cycle itself makes this an ideal moment to consider buying. A Political Shift: From Anti-Crypto to Pro-Crypto For years, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have faced an uphill battle against a U.S. government determined to restrict and control their growth. This opposition was largely led by Gary Gensler, who waged an outright war against crypto from hi...
Post a Comment
Read more