That’s the theme of my column this morning, which also considers some recent activity in Wisconsin (you might have read about the collective bargainng flap there) and the UK (which has not gotten the same visibility). Here’s my conclusion:

Government employee unions come under increased scrutiny as budget shortfalls force cutbacks in public services. Public employee compensation — after health care the largest expenditure in most state budgets — becomes an obvious target.

The target grows larger when government workers insulate themselves from competition. There’s something about a monopoly that triggers resentment. Captive consumers control costs by capping revenues, cutting compensation. When customers have choices, we worry less about how much the provider is paid. Our focus shifts to the cost-benefit tradeoff.

(British Prime Minister David) Cameron says it well: “…the best way to raise quality and value for money is to allow different providers to offer services in an open and accountable way. Our public services desperately need an injection of openness, creativity and innovation.”

True there, true here. If government unions want to regain public confidence, they should embrace competitive contracting. Their monopoly assures continued discontent.

We look at how the state’s collective bargaining law constrains competitive contracting in this Thrive Washington report.

For more, see Cameron’s commentary in the Telegraph, this TNT editorial, and this roundup of Wisconsin-related stories/

Finally, the Seattle Times has an editorial today outlining some state budget reforms under consideration in Olympia. Several good ideas there.