View this post on the web at [link removed]

The Power Imbalance at the Heart of Governance
Public employee unions consistently put their interests ahead of what serves the broader public, creating a dynamic fundamentally different from private-sector unions that must run within market constraints. These public unions essentially control both sides of the bargaining table, negotiating generous contracts with officials who often received union backing during their campaigns. According to research from the California Policy Center [ [link removed] ], California gives a stark example of this dynamic, where unions collect more than $1 billion in dues each year. Data from Transparent California [ [link removed] ] shows that by 2024, average public employee compensation had climbed past $100,000, even as private-sector wages remained essentially flat. Looking at the national picture, the Freedom Foundation [ [link removed] ] calculates that unions pull in approximately $6 billion in dues annually, which directly feeds their political influence machine.
A Historical Misstep with Lasting Consequences
The roots of California’s current predicament trace back to what many now recognize as a critical error in judgment: Governor Ronald Reagan’s 1968 decision to sign the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, which granted local government employees collective bargaining rights for the first time. The situation expanded during the 1970s when the Dill Act brought state workers under the same umbrella. The most consequential move came in 1999, when Governor Gray Davis signed Senate Bill 400 with support from both parties, dramatically enhancing pension benefits and introducing the notorious “3% at 50” formula for public safety personnel. This legislation has contributed to what experts now estimate as a $300 billion liability crisis. History offers unheeded warnings—Franklin D. Roosevelt cautioned in 1937 that public-sector collective bargaining would distort the fundamental operations of government, a concern that labor leader Samuel Gompers also expressed.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Letter to Luther C. Steward, August 16, 1937
“All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations… A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable.”
California’s Union-Driven Fiscal Time Bomb
Governor Gavin Newsom has shown a pattern of prioritizing union demands over long-term fiscal responsibility. A telling example emerged in 2021 when the California Correctional Peace Officers Association negotiated a 2.5% salary increase and $5,000 bonuses for their 26,000 members [ [link removed] ]. Shortly afterward, the union contributed $1.75 million to support Newsom during his recall election, as documented by The Sacramento Bee. No public employee union in California has spent more on politics than the influential California Teachers Association. They do not care too much about school kids, but they care a lot about making things cushy for their members. It does not take a rocket scientist [ [link removed] ] to figure out why Newsom was so quick to close public schools during COVID, and took so long to open them back up. This statewide pattern repeats locally, where public employee unions keep similarly powerful influence over municipal budgets, effectively blocking meaningful reform efforts. The contrast becomes even starker when examining broader economic trends: while private-sector workers faced widespread layoffs, public-sector compensation increased by 12% between 2020 and 2023. Meanwhile, the pension obligations saddle taxpayers with hundred of billions in unfunded future liabilities.
National Echoes of a California Problem
These challenges extend far beyond California’s borders, reflecting a nationwide phenomenon where public employee unions exercise outsized political influence. As Time magazine has reported, major cities have negotiated contracts that severely limit mayoral authority over essential services, particularly education. Research from the Freedom Foundation shows how union-driven spending patterns fuel pension crises across multiple states, including Illinois and New York, creating billions in taxpayer obligations. While the 2018 Supreme Court decision in Janus v. AFSCME provided some relief by ending forced union dues, pressure tactics persist.
Why Public Employee Unions Are Unique
The fundamental distinction lies in market accountability—private-sector unions must contend with competitive pressures that do not exist in government. Public employee unions spend enormous sums on political campaigns, effectively buying influence over the very officials who will sit across from them at the bargaining table. This allows them to secure lavish benefit packages using taxpayer money while facing zero accountability to market forces. Analysis from the Mackinac Center [ [link removed] ] reveals that public-sector compensation typically exceeds private-sector equivalents by 10 to 14 percent. California offers particularly egregious examples, with some firefighters and police officers earning more than $200,000 annually when overtime is included, according to Transparent California data. These inflated compensation levels contribute directly to the state’s mounting cost-of-living crisis, not to mention the enormous long-term obligations created by exceptionally generous retirement packages.
Concrete Steps to Reform Public Employee Unions
Meaningful reform requires bold action that directly addresses the source of union overreach. California and other affected states should consider several measures to restore proper governance balance. Following Wisconsin’s successful 2011 model that saved billions in taxpayer funds, ending collective bargaining rights for public employees entirely would be a huge step to break union control over government operations. Strengthening right-to-work protections would ensure government workers can decline union membership without coercion or penalties. Requiring voter approval for any pension benefit increases would give taxpayers direct control over future liabilities, as the California Policy Center has recommended. Prohibiting the use of public employee union dues for political campaign contributions would disrupt the cycle of union officials buying political influence. And aggressively pursuing constitutional challenges wherever it makes sense, limiting public union authority to prioritize member benefits over genuine public service.
Of course, most of these prescriptions call for our elected officials to wise up and realize that the voters' interests are divergent from those of the public employee unions that fund their campaigns.
So, Does It Matter?
The consequences of inaction paint a sobering picture for taxpayers and communities alike. Without meaningful reform, public employee unions will continue driving salaries and benefits to unsustainable levels, with government employment expanding unchecked across state, county, municipal, and school district operations. California faces particularly dire scenarios where unchecked spending growth could force massive tax increases—property, sales, and income taxes would need to rise dramatically to cover the massive unfunded pension liabilities alongside ever-increasing payroll costs. Essential services like schools, infrastructure maintenance and more would face severe funding cuts as union-driven expenses consume larger portions of government budgets. Local communities would confront impossible choices between raising taxes or cutting services like parks, libraries, and public safety programs. At the same time, state-level budgets would prioritize union contract obligations over genuine public needs. This trajectory [ [link removed] ] toward fiscal crisis threatens not only economic stability but also public confidence in democratic governance itself.

Unsubscribe [link removed]?