Letter: GOP-backed initiative is definition of ‘Big Brother’

Thursday, Feb. 12, 1998 | 11:12 a.m.

I'm a reasonably intelligent "worker" in Nevada. I live in a right-to-work state and can choose to join or not join a union (unlike Washington, which is an agency-fee state). I elect representatives through a democratic process who represent me at various decision-making levels. I can attend any meeting held within my union.

So why is the Republican Party all of a sudden so concerned about protecting my paycheck and my rights? Could it be that collectively, union PACs (political action committees) have begun to raise a little money? Realize, of course, that no matter how much the Democrats spend, the Republicans outspend them 10 to 1. I send $1 a month to my state PAC, unlike the CEOs of corporations who write individual multithousand-dollar checks at a clip. If the Republican Party is so concerned about campaign reform, why is it that a Republican-controlled House and Senate can't agree on a package?

Realizing that the Republican Party has lost sight of the word "choice" doesn't preclude my ability to choose how I spend my wages. It is the height of Big Brotherism to put in the constitution of a state how a wage earner can spend his or her money. Shall we tell all those to contribute to United Way through payroll deduction which charity they cannot donate to? I know that sounds ridiculous, but then this entire issue goes beyond the ridiculous to the sublime. If this is the highest priority in the Republican Party, which they are willing to spend thousands of dollars on, then the party is in serious trouble. Let me end my statement with another parable: What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Elaine Lancaster, president of Nevada State Education Association