Nancy Churchill explains how dependency on federal dollars is killing local control — and our future
Nancy Churchill
Dangerous Rhetoric
What if you were offered 19 cents to give up your town’s liberty — would you take it?
That’s the question Catherine Austin Fitts wants Americans to consider. In a May 2025 interview with Tucker Carlson, the former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development explained what she calls the “19-cent problem” — a hidden but devastating trade-off between federal funding and local freedom.
For every dollar sent to Washington D.C. in taxes, communities often receive $1.19 in return. On paper, it looks like a deal. But Fitts warns: That extra 19 cents is bait. Federal money comes with federal strings — mandates, compliance rules, and ideological conditions that slowly dissolve local decision-making. Over time, this dynamic hollows out constitutional governance and replaces it with soft tyranny.
Of course, in Washington state, we can observe the same problem from accepting state Department of Commerce grants for our health districts, housing authorities, schools, and other state-supported services. There’s no such thing as a “free lunch”; there are always strings attached.
The 19-cent trap
Catherine Austin Fitts describes this trap as part of a “financial coup” that began in the 1990s. Instead of sending tanks or troops, the federal government uses grants and subsidies to impose top-down control. Communities don’t need to be conquered—they’re simply bought. And once they’re bought, they comply.
This financial leverage is paving the way for even greater control mechanisms — like Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) — that could be used to monitor and even restrict financial behavior. What looks like support is actually surveillance. What feels like assistance is actually a leash.
Carlson asked the right question: Why are we letting this happen? The answer is chilling in its simplicity — because we’ve been trained to chase money instead of defending liberty.
Job Corps: A case study in federal failure
The dangers of federal dependency are not theoretical. They’re visible in programs like Job Corps, a federal program created to serve low-income youth through residential job training. In practice, it became a cautionary tale.
A 2017 report from the Government Accountability Office revealed the truth: Job Corps centers were plagued by violence, drug abuse, and unsafe conditions. Of all violent incidents—including assaults and sexual assaults — 72% of the victims were students themselves. Despite its high cost per graduate, the program delivered poor outcomes and failed to protect the vulnerable population it was designed to serve.
Recognizing this, the Trump administration proposed eliminating Job Corps entirely, describing it as a failed experiment. This decision wasn’t just about dollars and cents—it was about acknowledging the rot that sets in when programs grow too large, too distant, and too disconnected from local accountability.
Federal programs rarely shrink. They metastasize. And once a community becomes dependent, cutting the cord — no matter how toxic the program — becomes politically dangerous.
Washington state has three Job Corp Civilian Conservation Centers. They are Columbia Basin in Moses Lake, Fort Simcoe in White Swan and the Curlew Job Corp in Ferry County. Curlew Job Corps is one of Ferry County’s best employers with a significant number of high-paying government jobs. The Curlew students provide over $1.2 million in benefit to our county from firefighting and other services.
Our small, rural community will take a large and painful financial hit when (or if) this program is cut. It won’t just impact the employees and students; it will impact the entire community.
Suddenly the idea of budget cuts becomes very personal. How big of a sacrifice are you willing to make to help cut the federal budget deficit? How big of a sacrifice will the local community have to make?
Rural America’s quiet surrender
Small towns and counties with limited tax bases often rely on state and federal grants for basic needs: roads, hospitals, public safety, and schools. But this money doesn’t come without baggage. It brings mandates — DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) policies, gender ideology requirements, environmental restrictions, and more.
Local leaders face impossible choices: Accept the funding and compromise their community’s values, or reject the funds and risk financial collapse. In most cases, they accept the funds — and the strings.
This creates a cycle of silent submission. Residents may never see the fine print, but they feel the results: Their rural towns start looking more like Seattle than the communities they grew up in. School boards are forced to adopt policies they don’t agree with. Local governments promote programs they didn’t ask for. And opposition becomes too expensive to maintain.
This isn’t conspiracy — it’s bureaucracy weaponized.
What liberty costs — and what it’s worth
So what is liberty worth?
Because liberty is not free — and it certainly isn’t valued correctly when communities sell it for 19 cents on the dollar. The American people didn’t lose their freedom in battle. We signed it away — one grant, one subsidy, one mandate at a time.
It’s time to reverse course. If liberty has a price, let’s stop selling it cheap.
Citizens must learn to place a higher value on local control, and less value on federal jobs and grants. We must speak up and let our politicians know that we value liberty.
Local governments must stop chasing easy money and start asking harder questions. Can private sector programs do a better job than a government-funded program? Can we get government regulators out of the way to make more private industry possible? Can we encourage private industry with tax incentives?
Which do you want more? Would you rather have “secure government jobs” from a government employer like Job Corps, or a real reduction in federal spending? It’s not a hypothetical problem in Ferry County; it’s a real and difficult choice.
How much are we willing to sacrifice to reclaim our liberty from big government? How much discomfort are we willing to endure to truly Make America Great Again?
These are tough questions — and I’d love to hear your honest answers. Because the truth is, cutting the federal budget will hurt. Just like trimming the family budget, it means short-term pain for long-term stability. But the stakes are higher than dollars and cents. This is about freedom. About self-governance. About leaving something better for our children.
The only question left is this: Are we tough enough to make the sacrifice?
If you’d like to weigh in on the issue of cutting the Job Corps program and specifically about the future of the Curlew Job Corps Campus, write to Congressman Michael Baumgartner using his website at baumgartner.house.gov/contact. He’d appreciate your input.
Nancy Churchill is a writer and educator in rural eastern Washington State, and Nancy Churchill is the chair of the Ferry County Republican Party. She may be reached at DangerousRhetoric@pm.me. The opinions expressed in Dangerous Rhetoric are her own. Dangerous Rhetoric is available on Substack, thinkspot, and Rumble.
Also read:
- Opinion: President Trump signs memorandum to protect the Snake River dams
Todd Myers argues that President Trump’s new memorandum rescinding Biden-era policies is a positive step toward protecting the Snake River dams, energy reliability, and salmon recovery. - Opinion: Why would C-TRAN Board members put the agency on the hook for $7.2 million annually if they don’t have to?Ken Vance questions why C-TRAN Board members would commit the agency to $7.2 million in annual light rail costs when the IBR administrator says alternative funding is possible.
- POLL: Is the IBR team listening to SW Washington?
A new poll invites Clark County residents to weigh in on whether local taxpayers should be responsible for the cost of light rail operations in the I-5 Bridge Replacement Program. - Opinion: How to use a two-way left turn laneDoug Dahl explains the legal and safety reasoning behind using two-way left turn lanes for both entering and exiting traffic.
- Opinion: Washington’s CO2 tax jumps 16% in just three months to about 46 cents per gallonIn an opinion column, Todd Myers of the Washington Policy Center argues that Washington’s carbon-tax price rose 16 percent last quarter to the equivalent of about 46 cents per gallon of gasoline, yet provides little measurable climate benefit.
