Wisconsin public workers stand up to Republicans [Archive] - Page 2

hulugu

Mar 1, 2011, 10:58 PM

...
That it remains entirely hypothetical

Meanwhile, school districts across Wisconsin are currently paying, from taxpayer funds, higher premiums for health care insurance than they otherwise might if they weren't being strong armed by the Union into buying insurance plans from the Union owned insurance company, and that's a hypothetical???

Can you source this statement? Was the Wisconsin state government really 'strong armed' into buying an agreement that's above the average for either the state or the nation? The primary source I can find is the Education Action Group, which is a politically-oriented group, otherwise, it appears that the union and the state made a good-faith arrangement, which Walker is trying to alter because of the state's budget problems.

It's important to note, that while on the face of it, nearly any money that a teacher makes is from tax-payer funds, their compensation including their health care insurance is paid out of the teachers' salary. The teachers are paying their health care and have agreed to all the cuts that Walker has asked for.

hulugu

Mar 1, 2011, 11:04 PM

Actually I was thinking that they're both largely white middle class types responding to feeling their livelihood threatened. But yeah, it being Wisconsin works too.

I think that might be one of the interesting long-term issues. Many of the interviews for articles contain people whose problem with the union seems derived from "I don't have that, so why should they" arguments.

Both groups are responding to an economic crunch that won't be solved by breaking down the unions, but rather harder and much more complicated economic policy.
Walker isn't wasting a crisis.

Liquorpuki

Mar 1, 2011, 11:26 PM

Meanwhile, school districts across Wisconsin are currently paying, from taxpayer funds, higher premiums for health care insurance than they otherwise might if they weren't being strong armed by the Union into buying insurance plans from the Union owned insurance company, and that's a hypothetical???

Nobody was strong armed. Everything that exists including premium health care is in contract and was approved by whatever local or state government politicians was in charge of approving the contracts at the time. It's only now that the politicians spent themselves into a hole and need to reach deep into their ass to find money that they want to do stuff like screw the unions, cut essential services, freeze hiring in understaffed departments, and sell off public property.

Bold emphasis mine.

Whether or not the plants meet environmental guidelines doesn't make them less valuable as an asset. On top of that, if they didn't meet environmental guidelines they would've known by now because the EPA should've fined them.

As far as the idea the plants don't have value... they're selling the plants so of course they have value. They're also energy assets which means there's a monthly bill and a source of long term income, so add that to their value.

Personally, I think the bigger issue isn't that they're selling a public asset, during a real estate bottom lol, but that they're doing it no-bid. One of the things the bidding process does is gives taxpayers the best deal for their buck. I don't know how you can mention no-bid and fiscally responsible in the same sentence

CorvusCamenarum

Mar 2, 2011, 12:00 AM

I think that might be one of the interesting long-term issues. Many of the interviews for articles contain people whose problem with the union seems derived from "I don't have that, so why should they" arguments.

Both groups are responding to an economic crunch that won't be solved by breaking down the unions, but rather harder and much more complicated economic policy.
Walker isn't wasting a crisis.

I think one of the important differences between the two is that the Tea Party crowd has been watching the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed slowly evaporate in these last few years, mainly due to offshoring/outsourcing/globalization/whathaveyou. The union crowd, on the other hand, has been fairly well insulated from the aforementioned effects, up until now anyway. Since the money that writes the public sector's paychecks comes from the private sector, the chickens are now coming home to roost.

hulugu

Mar 2, 2011, 12:14 AM

I think one of the important differences between the two is that the Tea Party crowd has been watching the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed slowly evaporate in these last few years, mainly due to offshoring/outsourcing/globalization/whathaveyou. The union crowd, on the other hand, has been fairly well insulated from the aforementioned effects, up until now anyway. Since the money that writes the public sector's paychecks comes from the private sector, the chickens are now coming home to roost.

I disagree about the value judgement "chickens...coming home to roost." The evaporation of the Tea Party crowd's wages has little, if anything at all, to do with the wages of the union crowd. The union crowd has taken hits too, both in wage stagnation or pay-cuts—they're currently looking at a cross-the-board seven percent cut to satisfy Walker—and even if Walker's policies are implemented few economists think this will help the Tea Party crowd in the short or medium term. Moreover, large cuts might also stall the economy.

It's a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face, to use another cliche.

rdowns

Mar 2, 2011, 06:59 AM

Finally, we get the truth on the thugs and goons that are protesting in Wisconsin aka professional left-wingers. The violence and hateful rhetoric make me sick. See it here and look at the trees.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RClJ6vK9x_4

dsnort

Mar 2, 2011, 07:59 AM

Here's one for you.

67% Disapprove of Legislators Fleeing Wisconsin to Avoid Vote (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/february_2011/67_disapprove_of_legislators_fleeing_wisconsin_to_avoid_vote)

Can you source this statement?

Here's (http://www.publicschoolspending.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/WEATrustfinalreport1.pdf) a report on it, kind of a long read, but interesting.

And a couple (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703408604576164290717724956.html)more articles (http://neaexposed.com/weacexposed/weatrust.html), just for the hey (http://hotair.com/archives/2011/02/28/wapo-battle-on-between-govt-workers-and-taxpayers/).

Everything that exists including premium health care is in contract and was approved by whatever local or state government politicians was in charge of approving the contracts at the time.

You mean the "local or state government politicians" the union spent a lot of money to help elect? I honestly don't see how someone can look at that situation and not see a conflict of interest.

Whether or not the plants meet environmental guidelines doesn't make them less valuable as an asset.

Depends, could be they have value only as scrap metal. The comments by the democratic administrator for State Facilities seem to suggest that possibility.

Personally, I think the bigger issue isn't that they're selling a public asset, during a real estate bottom lol, but that they're doing it no-bid. One of the things the bidding process does is gives taxpayers the best deal for their buck. I don't know how you can mention no-bid and fiscally responsible in the same sentence

Actually, having worked with government bid processes before, there often can be quite valid and compelling reasons for no-bid. The bid process can be slow, unflexible, and often yields results that are sub-optimal.

I think one of the important differences between the two is that the Tea Party crowd has been watching the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed slowly evaporate in these last few years, mainly due to offshoring/outsourcing/globalization/whathaveyou. The union crowd, on the other hand, has been fairly well insulated from the aforementioned effects, up until now anyway. Since the money that writes the public sector's paychecks comes from the private sector, the chickens are now coming home to roost.

I'll disagree with you slightly there. While public sectors unions have enjoyed good growth over the last few decades, private sectors unions have been on the decline. It seems possible that a good many of these "outsourced" jobs have come at the expense of the private sector unions.

And yes, I can source that, but right now, I got to get to work.

mcrain

Mar 2, 2011, 08:58 AM

Thomas Veil

Mar 2, 2011, 03:53 PM

When all else fails...cheat!

Ohio collective bargaining bill clears Senate committee, set for full Senate vote later today (http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2011/03/ohio_collective_bargaining_bil.html)

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- A Republican-controlled Ohio Senate committee has approved controversial Senate Bill 5, a proposal sharply restricting collective bargaining rights for unionized state and local workers.

The Insurance, Commerce and Labor Committee approved the bill by the narrowest margin possible, a 7-5 vote, with Columbus Republican Sen. Jim Hughes voting with the four Democrats against the measure.

Before the hearing started, Senate President Tom Niehaus made certain Republicans would have the votes to move the bill by booting Cincinnati Republican Sen. Bill Seitz off of the committee. Both Hughes and Seitz were known to oppose the bill. Niehaus replaced Seitz with Sen. Cliff Hite, a Findlay Republican.

Fraternal Order of Police President Jay McDonald said the late switch was unfair. "That's flat-out gaming the system," he said.
Emphasis mine.

It's no use for Ohio Senators to start packing their bags and begging beds from out-of-town relatives. Ohio's 33-member Senate has only ten Democrats -- and a quorum is a simple majority, 17 members.

Edit: My daughter (a young teacher) just called to tell me the Senate passed it by one vote. Ohio's House is Republican-controlled too.

Bastards.

iJohnHenry

Mar 2, 2011, 04:26 PM

Bastards.

Dismissals should be sometime in the future, to avoid this crap.

Time to take to the streets, and make them lose face.

mcrain

Mar 2, 2011, 04:28 PM

Dismissals should be sometime in the future, to avoid this crap.

Time to take to the streets, and make them lose face.

What do those on the right suggest when they don't get their way?

dsnort

Mar 2, 2011, 05:23 PM

When public opinion was against the Republicans and the last two years of CONSTANT filibustering, did that stop them? Nope, that got them elected!

Soooo, where did all those people that were against the Republicans go on election day? Was there a picnic?

To be honest, I don't put any faith in any poll, I threw out a poll 'cause Lee said Arran "pwnd" me with one.:mad:

Couple of reasons not to put much faith in, or base any decisions on, polls.

1. Lots of people commissioning a lot of polls, they usually get the result they're paying for. Lots of people and organizations out there with an axe to grind, most of them keep that axe well hidden.

2. Even if a poll is completely accurate, all you actually learn from it is how effective the competing PR campaigns are. They don't tell you anything about the truth of the situation, or what might be the best way to proceed. Far better to decide for yourself.

Earlier in this thread I posted this:

Carnac the Magnificent moment coming soon.

That moment has arrived!

And Carnac says, "Someone in this thread will make an ad hominem attack against a source of data, without offering any competing or countering data. The word "laughable" will be used."

Rasmussen? Laughable. Do try again. ;)

C'mon Lee, you can do better than that.

leekohler

Mar 2, 2011, 05:26 PM

C'mon Lee, you can do better than that.

You were the one who posted the poll. Rasmussin is right-leaning and biased. I think it's you who need to do better. You try to counter a poll from Forbes with one from an obviously biased source? And you tell me I need to do better?

Thomas Veil

Mar 2, 2011, 06:35 PM

Missing Wisconsin Democrats to face $100 per day fine (http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/02/wisconsin.budget/index.html?hpt=T2)

(CNN) -- Wisconsin Senate Republicans on Wednesday adopted a resolution that would fine missing Democrats $100 every day they remain away from the state capital, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald told reporters.
The measure could also force the absentee lawmakers to forfeit their parking spaces and discretionary spending accounts.

The Democratic lawmakers were not immediately available for comment.
Fourteen Democratic state senators have fled to Illinois to prevent a quorum on a budget bill that would curtail the collective bargaining rights of most public-sector workers.

The state Senate has to pass a second round of individual resolutions that target each missing lawmaker before the fines will take effect, said Fitzgerald spokesman Andrew Welhouse.

The second vote is scheduled for Friday and would go into effect immediately after its presumed passage.

Republicans need a single Democrat to cross party lines and rejoin the 33-member legislature to meet the quorum of 20 lawmakers required in a vote on the controversial budget repair bill. Only 17 lawmakers are required for most other issues.Nice, huh? Thuggery at its best.

Meanwhile, back here in Ohio, we're already hearing the words "ballot initiative" in the air. :cool:

And despite the Republicans' putting on airs of invulnerability, I really do think they're gonna be in a lot of trouble in 2012. People are not going to take this lying down. Already these labor protests have greatly dwarfed the Tea Party tools who have showed up...plus, behind every union member who showed up to protest, there are tons of sympathetic people standing behind them, who know they could be next.

Peterkro

Mar 3, 2011, 01:54 PM

I'm not sure as I value my eyes too much to watch Fox,apparently arrest warrants issued for Dem senators.

(possibly unconstitutional)

mcrain

Mar 3, 2011, 02:09 PM

I'm not sure as I value my eyes too much to watch Fox,apparently arrest warrants issued for Dem senators.

(possibly unconstitutional)

Can we arrest the Republican Senators who filibustered everything over the last two years? Please, someone say yes.

FoxNews (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/03/senate-gop-wisconsin-order-police-awol-dems-custody/#)

chrmjenkins

Mar 3, 2011, 02:27 PM

Can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet. Recall initiatives under way for 8 GOP Wisconsin senators.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-wisconsin-recall-20110303,0,330049.story

leekohler

Mar 3, 2011, 02:31 PM

Can we arrest the Republican Senators who filibustered everything over the last two years? Please, someone say yes.

FoxNews (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/03/senate-gop-wisconsin-order-police-awol-dems-custody/#)

Someone please tell when it became OK for police to cross state lines to arrest people. This is also against the law in Wisconsin. They cannot arrest the Democrats by their own laws. The Republicans nopw have shown they have no respect for their own laws. This is not going to play well with the general population. Note to Wisconsin Republicans and police, don't even try to come into our state. You have no jurisdiction.

Can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet. Recall initiatives under way for 8 GOP Wisconsin senators.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-wisconsin-recall-20110303,0,330049.story

Like I said. The Republicans' BS is not going to sit well with anyone.

chrmjenkins

Mar 3, 2011, 02:37 PM

Like I said. The Republicans' BS is not going to sit well with anyone.

Sadly the governor is exempt until Jan 2012. There is a 1 year minimum of service before a recall can be initiated, but the tremendous signature burden would make it unlikely for that office regardless.

Peterkro

Mar 3, 2011, 02:41 PM

Someone please tell when it became OK for police to cross state lines to arrest people.

As far as I'm aware it's not,and not being far from Canada is a bonus,in fact they are welcome to stay in my home in the U.K. if necessary.

rdowns

Mar 3, 2011, 02:47 PM

Criminalizing your political opponents. Way to go Republicans.

leekohler

Mar 3, 2011, 02:49 PM

Criminalizing your political opponents. Way to go Republicans.

Leave it to them to stoop as low as possible.

mcrain

Mar 3, 2011, 02:52 PM

Leave it to them to stoop as low as possible.

It's only a matter of time before they arrest the family members of the absent senators.

Anyone else just see that in Arizona they barred the public from press conferences because they didn't like the public disagreement being televised.

leekohler

Mar 3, 2011, 02:54 PM

It's only a matter of time before they arrest the family members of the absent senators.

Oh- I'd love to see them try that.

Anyone else just see that in Arizona they barred the public from press conferences because they didn't like the public disagreement being televised.

Wow. Is that legal? Sounds like a constitutional challenge waiting to happen.

mcrain

Mar 3, 2011, 02:57 PM

Oh- I'd love to see them try that.

Wow. Is that legal? Sounds like a constitutional challenge waiting to happen.

Has "legal" "moral" or "right" stopped the GOP from doing anything in the last 30 years?

leekohler

Mar 3, 2011, 04:22 PM

Has "legal" "moral" or "right" stopped the GOP from doing anything in the last 30 years?

It certainly didn't stop the war.

Thomas Veil

Mar 3, 2011, 05:31 PM

Leave it to them to stoop as low as possible.This is starting to remind me of the bat**** behavior of Republicans in the Terry Schiavo case in 2005. And we all know how well that turned out for the GOP in the 2006 election.

Can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet. Recall initiatives under way for 8 GOP Wisconsin senators.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-wisconsin-recall-20110303,0,330049.storyGood to hear. But that's not the only story not being reported by the media.

In Chicago, a show of support for Wisconsin workers
(http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-02-26/news/ct-met-solidarity-rally-chicago-0227-20110226_1_chicago-rally-wisconsin-gov-tea-party-groups)
Colorado labor backers, pro-choice activists, Tea Party members rally at Capitol (http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_17493482)

Pro-labor rally descends on Boston (http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/2011_0227pro-labor_rallydescends_on_hub/srvc=home&position=0)

Not to mention...

Juneau:

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Crowd-JuneauAlaska-web.jpg

San Francisco:

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Solidarity-SF-web.jpg

St. Paul:

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Crowd-StPaul-web.jpg

Michigan:

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Crowd-Michigan-web.jpg

Raleigh:

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Crowd-Raleigh-web.jpg

...among others. (http://front.moveon.org/50-photos-from-the-50-state-rallies-to-save-the-american-dream/)

My favorites:

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Sign-BornAgainFundamentalist-WI-web.jpg

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Sign-RsAgainstBill-WI-web.jpg

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Sign-MyFirstGraders-web.jpg

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Sign-DeathOfMiddleClass-web.jpg

leekohler

Mar 3, 2011, 05:43 PM

This is starting to remind me of the bat**** behavior of Republicans in the Terry Schiavo case in 2005. And we all know how well that turned out for the GOP in the 2006 election.

Good to hear. But that's not the only story not being reported by the media.

In Chicago, a show of support for Wisconsin workers
(http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-02-26/news/ct-met-solidarity-rally-chicago-0227-20110226_1_chicago-rally-wisconsin-gov-tea-party-groups)
Colorado labor backers, pro-choice activists, Tea Party members rally at Capitol (http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_17493482)

Pro-labor rally descends on Boston (http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/2011_0227pro-labor_rallydescends_on_hub/srvc=home&position=0)

Not to mention...

Juneau:

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Crowd-JuneauAlaska-web.jpg

San Francisco:

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Solidarity-SF-web.jpg

St. Paul:

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Crowd-StPaul-web.jpg

Michigan:

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Crowd-Michigan-web.jpg

Raleigh:

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Crowd-Raleigh-web.jpg

...among others. (http://front.moveon.org/50-photos-from-the-50-state-rallies-to-save-the-american-dream/)

My favorites:

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Sign-BornAgainFundamentalist-WI-web.jpg

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Sign-RsAgainstBill-WI-web.jpg

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Sign-MyFirstGraders-web.jpg

http://front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Sign-DeathOfMiddleClass-web.jpg

Good to see that people are finally standing up and fighting. I hope this gets even bigger. Republicans will have a very tough time next election if this continues. They will be swept out like they never have before. So, let them keep trying to pull crap like this. These will grow and make the Tea Party rallies look pathetically small.

Liquorpuki

Mar 3, 2011, 10:43 PM

You mean the "local or state government politicians" the union spent a lot of money to help elect? I honestly don't see how someone can look at that situation and not see a conflict of interest.

Why is it a conflict of interest with the unions and not a conflict with all other sources of campaign funding? Every group lobbies for their own self-interest. For the unions, their priority is self-preservation and they'll contribute to whichever candidate has a platform that's in line with this. This is not wrong.

Depends, could be they have value only as scrap metal. The comments by the democratic administrator for State Facilities seem to suggest that possibility.

If they were scrap metal, they wouldn't have workers running them.

Actually, having worked with government bid processes before, there often can be quite valid and compelling reasons for no-bid. The bid process can be slow, unflexible, and often yields results that are sub-optimal.

Part of my job involves putting govt contracts out to bid. The process is slow and unflexible but it has to be in order to be fair. And the only thing that's suboptimal is the time needed to go through the bidding process. If the results were suboptimal in any other way, then the contract administrator failed to do his job correctly.

hulugu

Mar 3, 2011, 10:47 PM

It's only a matter of time before they arrest the family members of the absent senators.

Anyone else just see that in Arizona they barred the public from press conferences because they didn't like the public disagreement being televised.

What? Where did you see this?

EDIT: Wow! I totally missed this one (http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2011/03/01/20110301russell-pearce-senate-bans-public-press-conferences.html); too busy reading the bills they're trying to pass.

leekohler

Mar 3, 2011, 10:52 PM

What? Where did you see this?

EDIT: Wow! I totally missed this one (http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2011/03/01/20110301russell-pearce-senate-bans-public-press-conferences.html); too busy reading the bills they're trying to pass.

How's that for freedom, fivepoint?

Sydde

Mar 4, 2011, 01:09 AM

OK, so now it will cost half a million dollars (http://www.fox6now.com/news/witi-20110303-capitol-cleanup-costs,0,5141893.story) to clean up after the protesters, six million to restore the capitol interior, and another million for the exterior. Presumably, these workers would be getting scale...:eek:

rdowns

Mar 4, 2011, 08:03 AM

yg17

Mar 4, 2011, 08:06 AM

If duct tape is all it takes to destroy down a capital, then why the hell are we spending billions on weapons? Maybe we can send some duct tape to Libya :rolleyes:

Huntn

Mar 4, 2011, 08:15 AM

You guys know that marble is a very soft stone, not really suitable for flooring and as many types of rock stains easily. But still I wonder what they did exactly to the marble that will cost $6M to fix? Maybe the next time the protest should be held on the lawn. Yes I realize there is probably 3' of snow there. :p

SwiftLives

Mar 4, 2011, 08:54 AM

leekohler

Mar 4, 2011, 09:12 AM

I have a question about the endgame here....

What can people do about Walker? He can't be recalled until next year, and as we all know but often forget, people have a very short political memory. So what would be his motivation to kill this legislation rather than wait them out?

Can the Democrats reasonably stay elsewhere until Walker backs down?

I just feel like both sides are up against a brick wall that isn't moving. I'm just curious as to what potential endgame scenarios would be here.

(I'm from SC – Not a terribly friendly union state. So I honestly don't know how a lot of this works...)

The Dems cans stay in Illinois as long as they want, Wisconsin cannot come in here with their police and get them. No way in hell. The have no jurisdiction. If Walker gives workers layoff notices, he's signing his political death warrant in no uncertain terms. The reaction this has caused is proof enough of that.

SwiftLives

Mar 4, 2011, 09:21 AM

citizenzen

Mar 4, 2011, 10:20 AM

The union crowd, on the other hand, has been fairly well insulated from the aforementioned effects, up until now anyway.

This is a totally erroneous notion. I work for the state of California, am a union member, and have been anything but "insulated from the aforementioned effects".

California's budget crisis has been going on since 2003 and all during that that time our union has made concessions that impacted my wallet. Cost of living pay increases were negotiated away. A couple of years ago state workers accepted a furlough that cost me about $5,000 in lost wages that one year alone. At the university where I work numbers of people have been laid off and this year we'll cut an addition 18% from our budget with additional sacrifices to be made. All the while republicans steadfastly refuse to raise taxes one thin dime.

So please, if you think that unions haven't been impacted, you're sorely mistaken.

leekohler

Mar 4, 2011, 10:28 AM

I get that. I also get that Illinois is highly unlikely to "extradite" the Democrats back to Indiana.

But it doesn't seem like there's anything anyone can do to force Walker to drop this legislation. And I hate to be a cynic, but there's a good chance "war fatigue" will set in after a few months. It just seems to me that there's absolutely nothing anyone can do to change this other than wait until next January to attempt to recall Walker. And that's going to be what? A 3-6 month process?

Whatever it takes to get rid of people like Walker, I'm all for.

BTW, the Wiscinsin police are already siding with the protesters, vocally anyway. They know they are next.

Rodimus Prime

Mar 4, 2011, 10:49 AM

Whatever it takes to get rid of people like Walker, I'm all for.

BTW, the Wiscinsin police are already siding with the protesters, vocally anyway. They know they are next.

The police should do what the Houston Police union did one year when the city tried not to give them a race since the police can not nor should not be allowed to legally stick they just refused to write speeding tickets.

lets just say after the city lost a few million with in a few weeks they quickly gave in to the police unions demands.

Huntn

Mar 4, 2011, 10:58 AM

My guess if this law passes and outlaws strikes and collective bargaining, it will go the the US Supreme Court.

fivepoint

Mar 4, 2011, 10:59 AM

http://reason.com/assets/mc/jtaylor/bokunions.jpg

;)

leekohler

Mar 4, 2011, 11:15 AM

http://reason.com/assets/mc/jtaylor/bokunions.jpg

;)

What's your point? That everyone here somehow agrees with everything FDR said? Some of us don't blindly follow politicians, fivepoint- or ideologies.

Sydde

Mar 4, 2011, 11:17 AM

Now a there is bunch of noise over Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 946 (pdf) (http://legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/Stat0946.pdf) section 12, which could possibly be interpreted to make the senators felons for not performing a "known mandatory, nondiscretionary ministerial duty". Not sure how the courts will interpret that.

These extremists will be out of power soon. When that happens, their actions could well come back to bite them in the soft parts.

OttawaGuy

Mar 4, 2011, 11:22 AM

It's only a matter of time before they arrest the family members of the absent senators.

If that happened I would call the family members hostages.

Rt&Dzine

Mar 4, 2011, 11:38 AM

edit: Wow! I totally missed this one (http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2011/03/01/20110301russell-pearce-senate-bans-public-press-conferences.html); too busy reading the bills they're trying to pass.

how's that for freedom, fivepoint?

274353.

fivepoint

Mar 4, 2011, 11:40 AM

What's your point? That everyone here somehow agrees with everything FDR said? Some of us don't blindly follow politicians, fivepoint- or ideologies.

Did you take me off of your 'ignore' list? Why? Can I convince you to reconsider? :D

chrmjenkins

Mar 4, 2011, 11:46 AM

The Dems cans stay in Illinois as long as they want, Wisconsin cannot come in here with their police and get them. No way in hell. The have no jurisdiction. If Walker gives workers layoff notices, he's signing his political death warrant in no uncertain terms. The reaction this has caused is proof enough of that.

I get that. I also get that Illinois is highly unlikely to "extradite" the Democrats back to Indiana.

But it doesn't seem like there's anything anyone can do to force Walker to drop this legislation. And I hate to be a cynic, but there's a good chance "war fatigue" will set in after a few months. It just seems to me that there's absolutely nothing anyone can do to change this other than wait until next January to attempt to recall Walker. And that's going to be what? A 3-6 month process?

Best case scenario is that 3+ of the GOP senators do in fact lose their recall elections to Democrats. Then, Walker has to deal with a politically hostile Democrat majority in the State legislator and is going to have hell getting his agenda through.

My understanding of the recall procedure is that Walker's own recall, which cannot be initiated until January of 2012, would require 25% of his vote total across the state to sign the recall petition, which would lead to another election. The number of people this would take seems unlikely. This is different than the senator proceedings, which require only 25% of the votes for governor in that particular district, 15-21k for the senators.

fivepoint

Mar 4, 2011, 11:58 AM

Best case scenario is that 3+ of the GOP senators do in fact lose their recall elections to Democrats. Then, Walker has to deal with a politically hostile Democrat majority in the State legislator and is going to have hell getting his agenda through.

My understanding of the recall procedure is that Walker's own recall, which cannot be initiated until January of 2012, would require 25% of his vote total across the state to sign the recall petition, which would lead to another election. The number of people this would take seems unlikely. This is different than the senator proceedings, which require only 25% of the votes for governor in that particular district, 15-21k for the senators.

The only reason the legislature is so close at the moment is because only a certain percentage of them were up for reelection. Get ready for the next round because the Democrats in Wisconsin are going to lose even more seats!

mrkramer

Mar 4, 2011, 12:22 PM

The only reason the legislature is so close at the moment is because only a certain percentage of them were up for reelection. Get ready for the next round because the Democrats in Wisconsin are going to lose even more seats!

Didn't someone post a poll somewhere that 60% of people supported the Unions? if that's true then it sounds more like the republicans are going to be losing a lot of seats.

yg17

Mar 4, 2011, 12:25 PM

Didn't someone post a poll somewhere that 60% of people supported the Unions? if that's true then it sounds more like the republicans are going to be losing a lot of seats.

62% support collective bargaining rights, 33% oppose (http://www.minnpost.com/dailyglean/2011/03/03/26287/national_poll_shows_heavy_support_for_collective_bargaining)

But the republicans are going to win more seats in 2012 :rolleyes:

leekohler

Mar 4, 2011, 12:30 PM

62% support collective bargaining rights, 33% oppose (http://www.minnpost.com/dailyglean/2011/03/03/26287/national_poll_shows_heavy_support_for_collective_bargaining)

But the republicans are going to win more seats in 2012 :rolleyes:

Fivepoint does not know what Wisconsin is like. The Republicans will get hammered for this, believe me.

yg17

Mar 4, 2011, 12:32 PM

Fivepoint does not know what Wisconsin is like. The Republicans will get hammered for this, believe me.

http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2011/03/poll-watch-ppp-d-wisconsin-union.html

Another poll that was taken in Wisconsin. The independents are on the side of the Democrats and unions, and the indy's can make or break an election.

What I haven't seen and would love to see is a poll on the recall of Scott Walker. He can be recalled in January 2012 and if he keeps this crap up, there just might be enough support to kick his ass out.

leekohler

Mar 4, 2011, 12:34 PM

http://argojournal.blogspot.com/2011/03/poll-watch-ppp-d-wisconsin-union.html

Another poll that was taken in Wisconsin. The independents are on the side of the Democrats and unions, and the indy's can make or break an election.

What I haven't seen and would love to see is a poll on the recall of Scott Walker. He can be recalled in January 2012 and if he keeps this crap up, there just might be enough support to kick his ass out.

I hope so. It would be a good message to send to the Tea Partiers, that's for sure.

mcrain

Mar 4, 2011, 01:08 PM

Don't forget that the next election cycle includes the presidential race, and you won't have elections decided solely by the votes of the far right fringe.

SwiftLives

Mar 4, 2011, 01:41 PM

Fivepoint does not know what Wisconsin is like. The Republicans will get hammered for this, believe me.

You're assuming that people's memories will last long enough for them to actually do something about it.

You're also assuming there will still be enough angry people to turn out to the polls in a year's time to oust Walker.

After all, we live in a country where good voter turnout is around 40%. For a special election, I'd guess turnout would be closer to 20%.

I'm not saying people won't still be angry in a year. I am saying they will be beaten down and apathetic.

(This is assuming the recall election is not held next November, but rather much earlier).

I'm no fun when I'm cynical.

leekohler

Mar 4, 2011, 02:05 PM

You're assuming that people's memories will last long enough for them to actually do something about it.

You're also assuming there will still be enough angry people to turn out to the polls in a year's time to oust Walker.

After all, we live in a country where good voter turnout is around 40%. For a special election, I'd guess turnout would be closer to 20%.

I'm not saying people won't still be angry in a year. I am saying they will be beaten down and apathetic.

(This is assuming the recall election is not held next November, but rather much earlier).

I'm no fun when I'm cynical.

IMO- the Republicans have crossed the line, and I don't think this will be forgotten any time soon.

rdowns

Mar 4, 2011, 02:08 PM

IMO- the Republicans have crossed the line, and I don't think this will be forgotten any time soon.

This fight has huge national implications. The outcome here will determine what other Republican governors go after unions in their states. This won't be over any time soon.

leekohler

Mar 4, 2011, 02:13 PM

This fight has huge national implications. The outcome here will determine what other Republican governors go after unions in their states. This won't be over any time soon.

Absolutely, this is enormous.

rdowns

Mar 4, 2011, 02:34 PM

Once again, Jon Stewart nails it (1st segment).

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/thu-march-3-2011-diane-ravitch

citizenzen

Mar 4, 2011, 03:17 PM

Once again, Jon Stewart nails it (1st segment)...

Thanks. I just ate. Now I feel sick.

Thomas Veil

Mar 4, 2011, 06:03 PM

Well, he's sticking to his guns.

Wisconsin governor issues letter to unions on possible layoffs (http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/04/wisconsin.budget/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1)

(CNN) -- Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has issued notices to unions warning them of possible layoffs in early April if the budget impasse continues, a spokesman said Friday.

The measure "may be able to be rescinded and layoffs avoided" if 14 Senate Democrats return to the state Capitol, officials said.

"Without Senate action within 15 days, individual employees may begin to receive potential termination notifications," said spokesman Cullen Werwie.

Walker has warned that the state may have to lay off 1,500 state workers -- unless the absent lawmakers return to the state Capitol.Keep it up, Scott. This is really gonna turn up the public opinion against you.

And apparently it never occurred to him that to the public workers, 1500 layoffs is a painful but small price to pay for keeping their bargaining rights.

If, that is, he doesn't just turn around and find another excuse to take them away.

In the same part of town:

Wisconsin Democrat tackled as he tries to enter Capitol (http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/04/wisconsin.budget/index.html?hpt=T1)

(CNN) -- A Wisconsin Democrat was tackled by Capitol police as he tried to walk through a door in the state legislature, which has been closed to the public.

Assembly member Nick Milroy, a Democrat assembly member, tried to enter the building Thursday night when police officers blocked his path and hauled him to the ground before the lawmaker could produce an official identification that permits him access.

"This armed-palace environment created by Gov. Walker has everyone feeling very tense, and emotions are running high," said Milroy of the incident, captured on camera by Milwaukee-based WISN-TV.

Police closed the facility after crowds demonstrated in and around the building, contributing to $6.5 million in damage and other costs since mid-February, according to Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch.

Milroy "was attempting to gain access without showing his ID," said Huebsch. He "was using his own political agenda to get himself arrested and make a point."Sure. :rolleyes:

Hey, why should they have recognized somebody who works there every day??

leekohler

Mar 4, 2011, 06:06 PM

Well, he's sticking to his guns.

Keep it up, Scott. This is really gonna turn up the public opinion against you.

And apparently it never occurred to him that to the public workers, 1500 layoffs is a painful but small price to pay for keeping their bargaining rights.

Let him. Let him do it.

In the same part of town:

Sure. :rolleyes:

Hey, why should they have recognized somebody who works there every day??

That's just stupid.

Lord Blackadder

Mar 4, 2011, 06:12 PM

Well, he's sticking to his guns.

Keep it up, Scott. This is really gonna turn up the public opinion against you.

I think that both Scott and the Wisconsin 14 have clearly staked their reputations on this showdown. If Scott is right, and the electorate are behind him on this, this is only the beginning of a wider union-busting effort in the state. If not, the cost to him and his party will be pretty high.

It will also demonstrate how successful the need for reduced spending can be used as a pretext to push the larger Republican agenda.

iJohnHenry

Mar 4, 2011, 06:14 PM

That's just stupid.

This is how the bureaucratic mind functions, Lee.

Thomas Veil

Mar 4, 2011, 06:57 PM

Man, are these guys on a power trip (http://www.democratsforprogress.com/2011/03/02/take-five-right-wrong-beyond-edition/).

As the standoff between labor and America’s Worst Governor continues in Madison, so too does the running battle between Wisconsin Republican legislators and rudimentary human intelligence.

Sen. Mary Lazich, R-Waukesha, and Rep. Mark Honadel, R-Milwaukee, authored a bill that would prohibit tricking the call’s recipient into believing the caller is someone they are not for malicious purposes.

“While use of spoofing is said to have some legitimate uses, it can also be used to frighten, harass and potentially defraud,” Lazich and Honadel said in an e-mail to legislators.

The bill language forbids a caller from intentionally providing a false phone number and convincing the person receiving the call that it comes from someone other than the actual caller.

The bill’s authors disavow any connection between this proposal and the fact that Governor Scott Walker had a chummy and very public conversation last week with a blogger who represented himself as Walker’s crypto-fascist sugar daddy David Koch.Wonder if there's anything in this bill that forbids recording yourself while pretending to be a pimp in an ACORN office, or an underage teenager at Planned Parenthood?

Naaaaaaaaaaah!

Lord Blackadder

Mar 4, 2011, 07:10 PM

A childish gesture and an obvious waste of taxpayer dollars.

Sydde

Mar 4, 2011, 07:34 PM

Man, are these guys on a power trip (http://www.democratsforprogress.com/2011/03/02/take-five-right-wrong-beyond-edition/).

The question is, did the caller actually have "malicious intent"? Millions of witnesses will testify that the intent and the result were devoid of malice. Also, the content, AFAIK, was presented without being edited to distort its content.

Not to mention the matter of jurisdiction. My instinct would be to require candidates to pass an intelligence test, much more cost effective than to pass laws to protect fools from themselves.

Rodimus Prime

Mar 4, 2011, 08:17 PM

Sure. :rolleyes:

Hey, why should they have recognized somebody who works there every day??

well be fair to the cops. They are under orders to not let the public in and chances are those are not normally cops there watching over the grounds. They are extra security brought in. They are not going to recognize someone who works there. Hell they could even be the cops that work there but think of how many faces they see every day and many of them regulars. Chances even though guys would not of had a clue who he was.

Thomas Veil

Mar 7, 2011, 02:26 PM

Why employee pensions aren't bankrupting states (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/03/06/109649/why-employee-pensions-arent-bankrupting.html)

Kevin G. Hall | McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: March 06, 2011 07:46:46 PM

WASHINGTON — From state legislatures to Congress to tea party rallies, a vocal backlash is rising against what are perceived as too-generous retirement benefits for state and local government workers. However, that widespread perception doesn't match reality.

A close look at state and local pension plans across the nation, and a comparison of them to those in the private sector, reveals a more complicated story. However, the short answer is that there's simply no evidence that state pensions are the current burden to public finances that their critics claim.

Pension contributions from state and local employers aren't blowing up budgets. They amount to just 2.9 percent of state spending, on average, according to the National Association of State Retirement Administrators. The Center for Retirement Research at Boston College puts the figure a bit higher at 3.8 percent.

Though there's no direct comparison, state and local pension contributions approximate the burden shouldered by private companies. The nonpartisan Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates that retirement funding for private employers amounts to about 3.5 percent of employee compensation.

Nor are state and local government pension funds broke. They're underfunded, in large measure because — like the investments held in 401(k) plans by American private-sector employees — they sunk along with the entire stock market during the Great Recession of 2007-2009. And like 401(k) plans, the investments made by public-sector pension plans are increasingly on firmer footing as the rising tide on Wall Street lifts all boats.

Boston College researchers project that if the assets in state and local pension plans were frozen tomorrow and there was no more growth in investment returns, there'd still be enough money in most state plans to pay benefits for years to come.

Which brings up a very interesting question: should Wisconsin workers even be offering to take on much heftier contributions, just to please Walker? Given the info in this article, they may be required to contribute more, but not the figures which I've heard, which were as high as $8000 per year.

Meanwhile, a Wisconsin Policy Research Institute poll (http://www.wpri.org/polls/March2011/ToplinesWPRIFebMar%202011.pdf) has some pretty bad news for Walker and the GOP:

Q9. Overall, do you strongly approve, somewhat approve, somewhat disapprove, or strongly disapprove of the way Scott Walker is handling his job as Governor of Wisconsin?
Strongly approve .................................................... 29
Somewhat approve ................................................. 14
Somewhat disapprove .............................................. 8
Strongly disapprove ............................................... 45
Don't know / Refused ............................................... 4

And, not that surprisingly:

Q33. Raising the income tax on people making over $150,000 a year
Strongly favor ........................................................ 52
Somewhat favor ..................................................... 20
Somewhat oppose .................................................. 11
Strongly oppose ..................................................... 16
Don't Know/Refuse .................................................. 2Dems don't get away scott-free in this poll, but it's clear that public sentiment is against Republican policies.

MattSepeta

Mar 7, 2011, 04:02 PM

mcrain

Mar 7, 2011, 04:28 PM

Like it or not, at least this guy is sticking to his guns instead of pandering to the ever-so-easily swayed "public opinion".

What on earth did the voters think he would do? Expand collective bargaining "rights"?

I'm assuming you were all for universal health care and massive health care reform? I mean, didn't President Obama run on that platform? Oh wait, when the Republicans oppose something, they represent the majority of Americans, and they are justified in basically shutting down efficient operations of the government, but when Republicans support something, any Democrat who opposes their efforts to take away rights is NOT representing the majority (because 60+% is not the majority), and MUST return immediately and allow the Republicans to do whatever they want.

Ok, at least we have a better idea why Republicans can say with a straight face that they are willing to compromise with anyone who agrees with them.

MattSepeta

Mar 7, 2011, 04:31 PM

I'm assuming you were all for universal health care and massive health care reform? I mean, didn't President Obama run on that platform? Oh wait, when the Republicans oppose something, they represent the majority of Americans, and they are justified in basically shutting down efficient operations of the government, but when Republicans support something, any Democrat who opposes their efforts to take away rights is NOT representing the majority (because 60+% is not the majority), and MUST return immediately and allow the Republicans to do whatever they want.

Ok, at least we have a better idea why Republicans can say with a straight face that they are willing to compromise with anyone who agrees with them.

You assume correctly. I was all for HCR. What are you getting at?

Rt&Dzine

Mar 7, 2011, 04:44 PM

Like it or not, at least this guy is sticking to his guns instead of pandering to the ever-so-easily swayed "public opinion".

So much for representing the people. People criticized Obama for the same thing.

MattSepeta

Mar 7, 2011, 04:46 PM

So much for representing the people. People criticized Obama for the same thing.

I would rather see an honest, opinionated, steadfast guy on the other team than a slimey, shape-shifting guy on my team. Any day.

Rt&Dzine

Mar 7, 2011, 04:48 PM

I would rather see an honest, opinionated, steadfast guy on the other team than a slimey, shape-shifting guy on my team. Any day.

You think Walker is honest? You've got to be kidding.

MattSepeta

Mar 7, 2011, 04:50 PM

You think Walker is honest? You've got to be kidding.

I am not really following this Wisconsin thing, not a WI resident, does not concern me, so I really do not know.

Has he done anything dishonest?

Did he campaign on union-strengthening?

Did he campaign on increased benefits for public workers?

Rt&Dzine

Mar 7, 2011, 05:01 PM

I am not really following this Wisconsin thing, not a WI resident, does not concern me, so I really do not know.

Has he done anything dishonest?

Did you read this thread?

NT1440

Mar 7, 2011, 05:13 PM

Like it or not, at least this guy is sticking to his guns instead of pandering to the ever-so-easily swayed "public opinion".

That's right, screw democracy! The opinion of the people should only matter when they are sold the brands we call "candidates". After that, the public should just know their place before they dare get involved in policy decisions that directly effect their lives!

Stupid public, your life is determined by politician's agendas, now your role.

Thomas Veil

Mar 7, 2011, 05:26 PM

I would rather see an honest, opinionated, steadfast guy on the other team than a slimey, shape-shifting guy on my team. Any day.Steadfast is one thing, but this is bordering on is full-on George Bush-style arrogance.

I mean, I appreciate what Walker's stubbornness is doing to revive the Democratic base, but his absolute inflexibility, his disdain for every opinion but his, is hurting the state.

And then there's the segment Rachel Maddow (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5mJHi0fqOA) had last Friday, showing that Walker pulled similar stuff when he was the executive of Milwaukee County, and it ended up disastrously, with the county losing money.

Sydde

Mar 7, 2011, 08:56 PM

While not quite dishonest, this is just pointlessly corrupt (http://host.madison.com/ct/news/opinion/column/dave_zweifel/article_5b9c269c-45cd-11e0-bcf3-001cc4c002e0.html) and this giveaway to a big contributor (http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/117500053.html) is sleazy at the very least, criminal at worst, just exactly why we need public campaign financing.

Walker complains about dire economic circumstances and a critically unstable budget situation and still finds ways to shower favors on well-to-do folks who are least in need if help. To the average voter last year, Walker's rhetoric was not representative of what he is now on about.

Huntn

Mar 9, 2011, 08:28 AM

08March2011- Rachel Maddow Show (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#41979418). She started her show with "Wisconsin, You Won." The Governor is now negotiating. Then she continued with It's Not About The Budget. It's about a Republican Power grab. The first thing the new Republican Governor did was give millions in corporate tax breaks and then ask for millions from the unions. Net result, no money saved regarding the budget. What is suspicious is that the unions have agreed to income cuts, but the Governor and Republican legislature want more- they don't want to have to negotiate with the state unions.

Michael Steel, former head of GOP, guest on Rachel Maddow Show- "It is about the budget." Read as "we don't want to have to negotiate with unions over wages in the future".

Did you guys know there are reports that state governments are trying to push through laws that would allow the Governor to summarily unincorporated towns? Allow the State government to summarily force townships to be run by corporations without any input from the voters? This is what I heard last night. I don't have time now, but I need to look for some links on this.

Thomas Veil

Mar 9, 2011, 02:19 PM

08March2011- Rachel Maddow Show (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#41979418). She started her show with "Wisconsin, You Won." The Governor is not negotiating. Then she continued with It's Not About The Budget. It's about a Republican Power grab. The first thing the new Republican Governor did was give millions in corporate tax breaks and then ask for millions from the unions. Net result, no money saved regarding the budget. What is suspicious is that the unions have agreed to income cuts, but the Governor and Republican legislature want more- they don't want to have to negotiate with the state unions.

Michael Steel, former head of GOP, guest on Rachel Maddow Show- "It is about the budget." Read as "we don't want to have to negotiate with unions over wages in the future".

Did you guys know there are reports that state governments are trying to push through laws that would allow the Governor to summarily unincorporated towns? Allow the State government to summarily force townships to be run by corporations without any input from the voters? This is what I heard last night. I don't have time now, but I need to look for some links on this.At the risk of repeating myself, pension plans don't even seem to be in that much trouble (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12080992&postcount=323). The public employee concession offers may not even be necessary. Of course this is about union-busting, not the budget.

As to the other stuff you mentioned, I await it with a kind of horror-filled anticipation.

Edit: Never mind. Mcrain just beat you to it. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1112545) And it's pretty damned shocking.

rdowns

Mar 9, 2011, 05:53 PM

Maddow blog: (http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/03/09/6229962-wisconsin-republicans-make-surprise-move-on-union-busting-bill)

Potentially big news in Wisconsin just now. The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports that Republican Senators have moved Governor Walker's budget-repair bill to a joint committee. That committee can then rework the bill and send it back to the House and Senate for a vote. From the Journal-Sentinel:

What changes would be made remains unclear, but Democrats said they had not been consulted on them. They raised concerns that Republicans would take out all the spending in the bill and leave only the changes to collective bargaining.

To pass spending measures, 20 senators must be present, but Republicans hold just 19 seats. But Republicans would not need any Democrats to be present to pass the collective bargaining changes as a standalone bill.

That squares with what we're hearing, too -- that Republicans have split Governor Walker's bill into two parts. They can vote on anything that's not fiscally related. Since the union-busting is not about the budget, as we've been saying throughout the standoff, they could vote on that without the Democrats present.

A Republican source in Madison tells NBC's Mike Taibbi that Senate Republicans could vote on the provisions to strip collective bargaining rights as soon as tonight. Mr. Taibbi reports that the source is furious because a compromise with Democrats had nearly been in place. Another report, on WisPolitics, makes it sound like this development happened in a hurry.

We'll have much more on the show at 9 PM Eastern.

chrmjenkins

Mar 9, 2011, 06:34 PM

Maddow blog: (http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/03/09/6229962-wisconsin-republicans-make-surprise-move-on-union-busting-bill)

I wonder what they'll do when they start getting recalled.

Liquorpuki

Mar 9, 2011, 07:34 PM

So they passed the bill.

Here comes the backlash

Thomas Veil

Mar 9, 2011, 07:37 PM

Time to break out the torches and pitchforks. :mad:

KingYaba

Mar 9, 2011, 07:39 PM

2012 will certainly be interesting in Wisconsin.

Thomas Veil

Mar 9, 2011, 07:41 PM

I doubt Walker and some of his colleagues will make it to November of that year. They'll be out in a May recall election.

dscuber9000

Mar 9, 2011, 07:49 PM

Sydde

Mar 9, 2011, 07:50 PM

I doubt Walker and some of his colleagues will make it to November of that year. They'll be out in a May recall election.

Some of the senators are eligible for recall as we speak (FWIW — the lege will be out of session by the time any of that takes place).

Thomas Veil

Mar 9, 2011, 07:51 PM

Here is a detailed article (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41996994/ns/politics-more_politics/) about the bill just passed. The last half of it lists some other things that are on Walker's chopping block.

Walker wants to repeal an inmate early release program enacted two years ago and revert to a 1999 truth-in-sentencing law he sponsored as an Assembly member that requires prisoners to serve their entire sentence without time taken off for good behavior. Former Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle had touted the early release program as a way to save money and relieve prison crowding.

Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne, who was the deputy corrections secretary when the early release law was implemented, said the potential financial savings could be immense but the biggest benefit was to the prison environment.

Walker is also targeting a high-profile program in which eighth or ninth grade students who sign a pledge to get good grades and be good citizens are guaranteed a place in a Wisconsin college or university and some financial aid. The first students who signed the pledge will begin college this fall and once fully operational, more than 70,000 students could be a part of it.

Under Walker's proposal, no more students could sign up for the program after this year.

Walker would also gut funding for public financing for Supreme Court campaigns, a law passed in 2009. Both candidates in the April 5 election are taking the public financing and abiding by the spending limits under the new law. Walker wants to make it a voluntary tax return check-off, which would limit the amount of public financing available.

The governor would also eliminate a 2009 law mandating insurers cover contraception, something supporters had fought for years to get passed. And, he would do away with a 21-year-old law requiring Wisconsin communities to recycle. That program was started under a Republic predecessor, Gov. Tommy Thompson.Something to piss off everyone. I repeat, this guy isn't gonna make it past May 2012.

Liquorpuki

Mar 9, 2011, 08:03 PM

That's incredible. I can't believe Walker went that far on an issue he didn't even campaign on. He says they can't afford to keep that going, yet he spent the exact same amount of money on tax cuts for corporations. You really can't make this up. I guess in his mind teachers make more money than they should?

I wonder what the Wisconsin public servants that voted for Walker are thinking right now.

If I worked in the public sector over there, I'd burn my vacation time starting tomorrow and start shopping my resume in the private sector when I got back.

Thomas Veil

Mar 9, 2011, 09:13 PM

Maddow just showed video of the outside of the Wisconsin capitol. Oh my god, people are angry. There are tons of them, and they are banging on the doors to get in. The tea party thinks they're angry? They ain't seen nothin' yet.

She also showed footage (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/41998976#41998976) of Rep. Barca warning strenuously that the vote was illegal (because of no public notice), and the Republicans just talking over him, voting and walking out. These guys have now broken the law.

Rodimus Prime

Mar 9, 2011, 09:13 PM

I say the senators should refuse to come home until they bring it back. They can still hold it over the heads of the Wisconsin GOP saying put in in the bill that removes the previous ones.
I also call the no vote guy a coward as well. If he had voted against the bill he could at least make somewhat of a case.

I would say let the Wisconsin goverment shut down. The public will blame the GOP for it. Dems come out on top no matter how you slice it.

Also I say the union should try to get the law over thrown in court.

mgguy

Mar 9, 2011, 09:25 PM

I'm glad for this outcome. You can't have 14 awol Senators controlling the legislative agenda. Let's see how well-mannered the demonstrators can be in response to legislation they don't like being passed. The tea party folks were raked over the coals for responding angrily over the passing of Obamacare, and now it will be interesting to see if these demonstrators get called out if they respond in a similar fashion to this legislation.

leekohler

Mar 9, 2011, 09:34 PM

mgguy

Mar 9, 2011, 09:45 PM

Let me get this straight- you think it's OK for the government to take away people's collective bargaining rights? What else do you think the government should take away from people?

Please provide a reference that establishes that what were taken away are "rights" in a legal sense. If they are rights, as you claim, a remedy can be sought through the courts.

Thomas Veil

Mar 9, 2011, 09:51 PM

Also I say the union should try to get the law over thrown in court.Well, the Dems are talking about getting a ruling from the AG as to whether the vote was even legal. But he's a Republican, and even if he sides with the Democrats, with 24 hrs. notice GOP can have this vote again by the weekend.

Yeah, it's time for a stay of execution order until the people can impeach these guys and vote some sane representatives in.

Interesting, though. The collective bargaining part of the bill was necessary for budgetary reasons. But in order to pass this thing, they separated it from the budget bill -- effectively admitting that they lied, that this part is not about the budget, but has been about union busting all along.

leekohler

Mar 9, 2011, 10:06 PM

Please provide a reference that establishes that what were taken away are "rights" in a legal sense. If they are rights, as you claim, a remedy can be sought through the courts.

This entire thread has been about the government taking away collective bargaining rights from public employees. It's completely disingenuous of you to ignore that. But hey- color me unsurprised.

Rodimus Prime

Mar 9, 2011, 10:20 PM

I expect a fair number of recall elections going. The governor will be put up for recall in 2012, and safe to say at least 3 and up to 8 senators can say bye bye to office.

That would put the dems back in control.

mgguy

Mar 9, 2011, 10:44 PM

This entire thread has been about the government taking away collective bargaining rights from public employees. It's completely disingenuous of you to ignore that. But hey- color me unsurprised.

Yes, this is the terminology that has been used here, but i'm not sure these are rights in a legal sense. I think collective bargaining was established through the legislative process and are not in the state's constitution, and hence can be taken away through legislation, as was done today. Nothing illegal here, is there?

R.Perez

Mar 9, 2011, 10:46 PM

National Strike. Shut down the schools, ports, state offices etc... When the country slows down to a complete crawl, maybe they will be begin to take notice.

Thomas Veil

Mar 9, 2011, 10:55 PM

At some point, if this spreads to other states. But right now public opinion is in favor of public employees. I wouldn't want to jeopardize that.

I do think, as many have said, the Republicans are overplaying their hand -- what with wanting to take over cities in Michigan, bust unions in Wisconsin, and jail strikers in Ohio. I think we're approaching a tipping point. People have just had it.

You know that old saw, "...then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't object because I wasn't in a union...and when they came for me, there was nobody left to object"? I think the average American is starting to put himself in the position of "me".

leekohler

Mar 9, 2011, 11:08 PM

Yes, this is the terminology that has been used here, but i'm not sure these are rights in a legal sense. I think collective bargaining was established through the legislative process and are not in the state's constitution, and hence can be taken away through legislation, as was done today. Nothing illegal here, is there?

I would think it falls right into this section of the Constitution:

Freedom of assembly, sometimes used interchangeably with the freedom of association, is the individual right to come together and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests.[1] The right to freedom of association is recognized as a human right, a political freedom and a civil liberty.

Freedom of assembly and freedom of association may be used to distinguish between the freedom to assemble in public places and the freedom of joining an association. Freedom of assembly is often used in the context of the right to protest, while freedom of association is used in the context of labor rights and the right to collective bargaining, for example by joining a trade union. Freedom of assembly, as guaranteed in the Canadian Constitution and the Constitution of the United States, is interpreted to mean both the freedom to assemble and the freedom to join an association.

Maybe I'm crazy, but that sounds like a "right" to me. But hey, color me silly to think this is still the USA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_assembly

Thomas Veil

Mar 9, 2011, 11:12 PM

leekohler

Mar 9, 2011, 11:23 PM

MSNBC now has all segments of tonight's Maddow show online (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#41999124). See for yourself. It's pretty horrifying -- but try to watch all segments. Maddow is doing outstanding work covering this issue.

OMG- are they trying to start a civil war in their own state? Because I can tell you, that's what they're asking for. They have crossed the line, and they will pay for it. :mad:

hulugu

Mar 9, 2011, 11:36 PM

gibbz

Mar 9, 2011, 11:40 PM

Seems the open meetings law was violated.

leekohler

Mar 9, 2011, 11:42 PM

Seems the open meetings law was violated.

Not just that, but the Constitution of the USA. These people are nothing short of disgusting. It should be obvious by now what the Teapublicans are about, and it ain't freedom.

gibbz

Mar 9, 2011, 11:44 PM

Not just that, but the Constitution of the USA. These people are nothing short of disgusting.

They are and it seems very clear what the original motives were (as if there were any doubt). It was supposed to be a bill based on fiscal responsibility except all the fiscal parts were removed.

leekohler

Mar 9, 2011, 11:46 PM

They are and it seems very clear what the original motives were (as if there were any doubt). It was supposed to be a bill based on fiscal responsibility except all the fiscal parts were removed.

Yeah, isn't that just a bit strange? Mgguy, you see no problem here? really?

CalBoy

Mar 10, 2011, 12:03 AM

Please provide a reference that establishes that what were taken away are "rights" in a legal sense. If they are rights, as you claim, a remedy can be sought through the courts.

Are you interested in a real legal answer, or just empty politicking?

The Wisconsin workers will have their rights taken away the moment this bill becomes law. Until now they couldn't sue in court because it was only a bill.

The right to collectively bargain is inherent in the First and 14th Amendments. A union is nothing more than a political organization that maximizes benefits for its members, much like business groups, corporate conglomerates, or professional associations.

By stripping Wisconsin workers of their right to organize around a particular issue (namely worker's rights), Wisconsin will very soon be violating the First and 14th Amendments.

Yes, this is the terminology that has been used here, but i'm not sure these are rights in a legal sense. I think collective bargaining was established through the legislative process and are not in the state's constitution, and hence can be taken away through legislation, as was done today. Nothing illegal here, is there?

Collective bargaining is not derived from the legislative process. Even if no laws existed concerning unions, any group of workers would have the right to form a public organization that advanced a particular goal.

Most legislation concerning unions simply states that employers cannot overtly stop workers from organizing (so of course they do it through subversion).

Wisconsin is also violating Federal Law since the National Labor Relations Board is responsible for overseeing union activity, and I don't think they've ever endorsed the position that unions can be legislated away.

I can't even imagine the legal fiction that would make such a law workable. I mean, couldn't all workers simply incorporate and make themselves shareholders in a single entity called "Union of Wisconsin Corp?" :confused:

The very nature of this bill is unethical, deeply disturbing, and reminiscent of a social conflict everyone thought had ended over a century ago.

Rodimus Prime

Mar 10, 2011, 12:03 AM

the hope is governor veto the bill. But I do not see that happening.

fivepoint

Mar 10, 2011, 07:56 AM

OMG- are they trying to start a civil war in their own state? Because I can tell you, that's what they're asking for. They have crossed the line, and they will pay for it. :mad:

Hardly. :rolleyes:

People don't realize (thanks in no part to the liberal media who LIES using words like 'rights' to describe privileges previously but no longer granted to unions in WI) that the union thugs protesting in Wisconsin don't remotely represent the people of Wisconsin.

Governor Walker was elected running on exactly this platform, but now that the shoe is on the other foot, liberals don't support the results of the election. They won't even stand their post and vote straight up, they instead run off to Illinois with Wisconsin police trying to catch up.

The taxpayers of Wisconsin will reward Walker and the Republican legislature for doing EXACTLY what they said they were going to do, for cutting spending that needed to be cut, for gutting unions that have been gutting our school systems for far too long.

Wisconsin is just the beginning. People are realizing that the government isn't just an endless pit of money which they can fleece at every opportunity. People are realizing that they're not going to continue to support significant raises for horrible teachers who should be fired, when they themselves have been getting pay cuts and have been having to tighten their belt at home. The unions are being shown for what they really are... a way for bad workers to tie their future to that of endlessly more qualified and capable workers.

http://biggovernment.com/files/2011/03/Foden20110113-PublicSectors20110118041654.jpg

For the record, I think every individual has the right to bargain for the best possible compensation they can reach individually. I think individuals should actively work to get the best possible compensation from their employer. I do not disparage any worker from attempting to improve their own compensation and conditions. My suggestion is that this is A) Individual based, not group B) Based on free market principles (what are others doing this job in the private sector getting paid? What's the supply/demand? and that C) In the event of collective bargaining, taxpayers should have better individuals working on their behalf, who personally benefit from securing contracts beneficial to the taxpayers when in negotiations with the unions.

citizenzen

Mar 10, 2011, 08:47 AM

La la la... liberal media... yeah, yeah, yeah... union thugs... do wop, do wop, do wop

Nice use of "liberal media" and "union thugs".

A 5P post without those favorite hits is like a Knack concert without "My Sharona". :rolleyes:

Peterkro

Mar 10, 2011, 08:49 AM

Nice use of "liberal media" and "union thugs".

A 5P post without those favorite hits is like a Knack concert without "My Sharona". :rolleyes:

But,but,but you forgot that eternal favourite "substantive"

fivepoint

Mar 10, 2011, 08:51 AM

rdowns

Mar 10, 2011, 09:00 AM

Nice substantive responses.

I would be remiss not to congratulate you on your predictable reply.

My bold is bigger I win.

CaptMurdock

Mar 10, 2011, 09:21 AM

Nice substantive responses.

Yeah, it's so much more "substantive" to cut-and-paste from your neofascist talking points sites. Nice cartoon on the economy, BTW. Were they out of "Kill a 9-year-old immigrant for Jesus" cartoons?

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 09:32 AM

Hardly. :rolleyes:

People don't realize (thanks in no part to the liberal media who LIES using words like 'rights' to describe privileges previously but no longer granted to unions in WI) that the union thugs protesting in Wisconsin don't remotely represent the people of Wisconsin.

Governor Walker was elected running on exactly this platform, but now that the shoe is on the other foot, liberals don't support the results of the election. They won't even stand their post and vote straight up, they instead run off to Illinois with Wisconsin police trying to catch up.

The taxpayers of Wisconsin will reward Walker and the Republican legislature for doing EXACTLY what they said they were going to do, for cutting spending that needed to be cut, for gutting unions that have been gutting our school systems for far too long.

Wisconsin is just the beginning. People are realizing that the government isn't just an endless pit of money which they can fleece at every opportunity. People are realizing that they're not going to continue to support significant raises for horrible teachers who should be fired, when they themselves have been getting pay cuts and have been having to tighten their belt at home. The unions are being shown for what they really are... a way for bad workers to tie their future to that of endlessly more qualified and capable workers.

http://biggovernment.com/files/2011/03/Foden20110113-PublicSectors20110118041654.jpg

For the record, I think every individual has the right to bargain for the best possible compensation they can reach individually. I think individuals should actively work to get the best possible compensation from their employer. I do not disparage any worker from attempting to improve their own compensation and conditions. My suggestion is that this is A) Individual based, not group B) Based on free market principles (what are others doing this job in the private sector getting paid? What's the supply/demand? and that C) In the event of collective bargaining, taxpayers should have better individuals working on their behalf, who personally benefit from securing contracts beneficial to the taxpayers when in negotiations with the unions.

Fivepoint- the right to collective bargaining is IN THE CONSTITUTION, as has been pointed out in this thread already by more people than just myself. I thought you were all about the Constitution and what it stands for?

The person who ruined the budget was the governor, not the workers. He created this budget hole when he gave corporations tax breaks, and now expects that hole to be filled by taking money and benefits from state workers, who have already said they would be willing to make concessions regarding pay and benefits. But that was not enough for him. He wants to take their collective bargaining rights as well. That blatantly goes against the laws of this land and the Constitution. Do you believe in the Constitution or not?

Now, I don't know where you get your info, but the people of Wisconsin are extremely angry about this. Also, Walker most certainly did NOT run on this platform. He's going to get his butt recalled next year, along with other Republicans.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2011/02/what-did-walker-campaign-on.html

fivepoint

Mar 10, 2011, 09:35 AM

Yeah, it's so much more "substantive" to cut-and-paste from your neofascist talking points sites. Nice cartoon on the economy, BTW. Were they out of "Kill a 9-year-old immigrant for Jesus" cartoons?

Right, because personal liberty, constitutionalism, freedom, small-government, free market, etc. are all well known tenants of NEOFASCISTS. ;)
Brilliant political analysis.

fivepoint

Mar 10, 2011, 09:36 AM

Fivepoint- the right to collective bargaining is IN THE CONSTITUTION, as has been pointed out in this thread already by more people than just myself. I thought you were all about the Constitution and what it stands for?

Which Article and Section?

CaptMurdock

Mar 10, 2011, 09:41 AM

Brilliant political analysis.

Thanks! Always like to keep my audience riveted! :D

BTW, in answer to leekohler's question, try the First Amendment. The "assembly" part.

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 09:42 AM

Right, because personal liberty, constitutionalism, freedom, small-government, free market, etc. are all well known tenants of NEOFASCISTS. ;)
Brilliant political analysis.

None of which you or Walker believe in.

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 09:43 AM

Which Article and Section?

Please read the thread, fivepoint. I'm not here to babysit you. It's on the previous page, for God's sake, in more than a few posts.

fivepoint

Mar 10, 2011, 09:57 AM

Please read the thread, fivepoint. I'm not here to babysit you. It's on the previous page, for God's sake, in more than a few posts.

Haha, the only thing I remember you referencing was the Freedom of Assembly. :rolleyes:
They're allowed to assemble as much as they want, that doesn't mean their employer is FORCED to recognize and negotiate with them as a group entity.

Hahaha, the day I take a constitution lesson from Lee.... well, lets just say it's not any day soon. :p

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 10:54 AM

Haha, the only thing I remember you referencing was the Freedom of Assembly. :rolleyes:
They're allowed to assemble as much as they want, that doesn't mean their employer is FORCED to recognize and negotiate with them as a group entity.

Hahaha, the day I take a constitution lesson from Lee.... well, lets just say it's not any day soon. :p

That's all you have? That's your response? Wow, well the day I expect a substantive reply from fivepoint... well, let's just say it's not any day soon.

You may want to refer to the other posts in the thread, especially Calboy's. But hey, not gonna hold my breath on that one. It's clear that you prefer the head- in-the-sand approach. Anything you disagree with, you deem as not in the Constitution, even if it is. I see how that works now.

Huntn

Mar 10, 2011, 10:59 AM

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 11:16 AM

This move takes away the only tool that workers possess to collectively have a say with their jobs. I assume the conservatives in this forum think this is an outstanding thing?

Can collective bargaining be outlawed? Republicans are fervently hoping it can. Will this go to the Supreme Court? I'm hoping so. The bill does not ban unions, but it severely limits their abilities to negotiate certain compensations such as health care and pensions. I assume strikes are still a possibility which carry some weight, but maybe they have outlawed the ability to strike? Is so, so much for liberty.

Ohio has a proposed bill in the works that would require jail time for anyone who strikes, not sure about Wisconsin. The Republicans have lost it if they think stuff like this will get them votes in the future.

And this damn well better go to the Supreme Court. When the Wisconsin legislature rammed this through yesterday, they also broke the laws of their own state.

http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/wisconsin/wisconsin-democrats-say-senate-republicans-violated-open-meeting-law

mcrain

Mar 10, 2011, 11:37 AM

I say allow states to pass laws that prohibit people from banding together and collectively bargain...

Then use that very law to revoke the charters of every corporation that does business in the states, and require individuals to negotiate as individuals.

If you want to have a walmart in town, then you have to do it as an individual.

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 12:01 PM

Sydde

Mar 10, 2011, 12:10 PM

Governor Walker was elected running on exactly this platform

So sorry, I think this assertion is an out-and-out lie, where ever you got it from. My best friend lives in Oshkosh, she says his campaign material suggested none of this. When you can submit clear evidence that shows she is mistaken, I will admit you are correct. Until then, I accuse you of disseminating false information and Walker of being a charlatan.

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 12:12 PM

NT1440

Mar 10, 2011, 12:17 PM

So sorry, I think this assertion is an out-and-out lie, where ever you got it from. My best friend lives in Oshkosh, she says his campaign material suggested none of this. When you can submit clear evidence that shows she is mistaken, I will admit you are correct. Until then, I accuse you of disseminating false information and Walker of being a charlatan.
He ran on balancing the budget, apparently you can do anything you want under that rhetoric, even hand out roughly the equivalent amount you ask from the unions in concessions to the corporations as tax breaks. How's that for "redistribution of wealth"? :rolleyes:

I believe this would qualify as trickle-up economics (in impacts, not in rhetoric), a funny thing we've been seeing over the last 30+ years.

Sydde

Mar 10, 2011, 12:23 PM

He ran on balancing the budget, apparently you can do anything you want under that rhetoric, even hand out roughly the equivalent amount you ask from the unions in concessions to the corporations as tax breaks. How's that for "redistribution of wealth"? :rolleyes:

I believe this would qualify as trickle-up economics (in impacts, not in rhetoric), a funny thing we've been seeing over the last 30+ years.

"spray-" up

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 12:25 PM

"spray-" up

Yeah, as it was a lot more than a trickle.

hulugu

Mar 10, 2011, 12:33 PM

Haha, the only thing I remember you referencing was the Freedom of Assembly. :rolleyes:

Well, freedom to assemble would be the basis of law, would it not?

They're allowed to assemble as much as they want, that doesn't mean their employer is FORCED to recognize and negotiate with them as a group entity.

The employer is not forced to negotiate by law, but rather by a de facto relationship.

mccrain here makes an interesting point, what is the structural difference between a corporation and a union. Maybe the union workers should all quit, form a corporation called Union Workers of Wisconsin and become contractors?

Hahaha, the day I take a constitution lesson from Lee.... well, lets just say it's not any day soon. :p

I keep forgetting you're a constitutional scholar.

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 12:52 PM

Wow- yeah, Wisconsin Republicans are real jerks. There is a provision for firing any workers who participate in strikes and walkouts. Lovely. :mad:

On Wednesday night, Republicans in Wisconsin's state senate rammed through a retooled version of Governor Scott Walker's controversial "budget repair bill" with the 14 senate Democrats still in hiding in Illinois. The senate bill eliminates collective bargaining rights for most public-sector unions, a provision that has labor leaders and protesters up in arms. But there's another explosive provision in the bill that's received little attention: The bill authorizes state officials to fire any state employee who joins a strike, walk-out, sit-in, or coordinated effort to call in sick.

According to an analysis (PDF) of the Senate bill by Wisconsin's Legislative Fiscal Bureau (LFB), the legislation gives state officials the power to fire workers during a "state of emergency" declared by the governor under several conditions. If a state employee misses three working days without an approved leave of absence, that's grounds for being fired. State workers can also be dumped if, according to the LFB's analysis, they participate in a "strike, work stoppage, sit-down, stay-in, slowdown, or other concerted activities to interrupt the operations or services of state government, including mass resignations or sick calls."

Sorry about the link, it's all I have right now. But I'm sure this will pop up everywhere soon.

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/03/wisconsin-walker-union-republican-senate-budget-bill

Thomas Veil

Mar 10, 2011, 01:19 PM

Right, because personal liberty, constitutionalism, freedom, small-government, free market, etc. are all well known tenants of NEOFASCISTS. ;)The word is tenets, quiz kid.

It's also kind of grotesque that you use noble words like freedom, liberty and constitutionalism to describe fascism. It's the same principle as those people who kill for Jesus.

Wow- yeah, Wisconsin Republicans are real jerks. There is a provision for firing any workers who participate in strikes and walkouts. Lovely. :mad:

Sorry about the link, it's all I have right now. But I'm sure this will pop up everywhere soon.

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/03/wisconsin-walker-union-republican-senate-budget-billHoly ****. Do they have to wear shackles on the job as well?

freeny

Mar 10, 2011, 02:43 PM

Wow, so in just two short years the GOP has made companies legally allowed to buy elections and removed workers of their only bargaining tool for equal rights in the work force. Somehow I highly doubt this is what the founding fathers had envisioned...

The country is moving in the wrong direction.

NT1440

Mar 10, 2011, 02:48 PM

Somehow I highly doubt this is what the founding fathers had envisioned...

Depends on which ones you're talking about. They were very diverse.

A favorite quote of mine from James Madison:

"The man who is possessed of wealth, who lolls on his sofa, or rolls in his carriage, cannot judge of the wants or feelings of the day laborer. The government we mean to erect is intended to last for ages. The landed interest, at present, is prevalent; but in process of time, when we approximate to the states and kingdoms of Europe; when the number of landholders shall be comparatively small, through the various means of trade and manufactures, will not the landed interest be overbalanced in future elections, and unless wisely provided against, what will become of your government? In England, at this day, if elections were open to all classes of people, the property of the landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would soon take place. If these observations be jsut, our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation. Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and to answer these purposes, they ought to have permanency and stability. Various have been the propositions; but my opinion is, the longer they continue in office, the better will these views be answered." - Federal Convention of 1787

dsnort

Mar 10, 2011, 03:32 PM

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 03:39 PM

I wouldn't get too worked up about this. The Repubs blew it with the Opens Meeting law, IMO.

I would be very surprised if the Dems can't find a judge to issue a stay, and then it'll be a lawyers argument over the word "shall" and the phrase "compelling reason".

To reiterate, I think this law is the right thing to do, they just did it very poorly.

No- it is the wrong thing to do, no matter how it's done. Collective bargaining is protected in the Constitution. I don't know how many more times that has to be said.

Republicans in Wisconsin are toast, sooner, rather than later. Recall efforts are already under way for several congressman, and Walker can kiss his butt goodbye next year. If you think I'm wrong, you don't know Wisconsin.

Liquorpuki

Mar 10, 2011, 04:17 PM

For the record, I think every individual has the right to bargain for the best possible compensation they can reach individually. I think individuals should actively work to get the best possible compensation from their employer. I do not disparage any worker from attempting to improve their own compensation and conditions. My suggestion is that this is A) Individual based, not group

This would work in private industry where the managers who issue the paychecks and the rest of the workforce have a vested interest in keeping their company afloat. There's common ground there. Not in public service where the guys who issue the checks (the politicians) are gone in 4 years and care more about pushing an ideology than rewarding employee merit. The politician who cuts public school funding and squeezes 40-50 kids into a classroom, half of which don't speak English, to subsidize corporate taxcuts is totally blind to the idea of employee compensation in the first place. Hence why we need teachers unions.

B) Based on free market principles (what are others doing this job in the private sector getting paid? What's the supply/demand?

Any labor that's common to both public and private sectors already adheres to supply/demand. Both public and private sectors compete for teachers, engineers, clerks, attorneys, etc. There's no rule that says you're stuck in one sector and can't apply for a job in the other. Pay scales, perks, etc, fall in line for the sake of incentives to hire and retain labor.

The public sector also has jobs that don't exist in the private sector (IE police, fire), so you can't apply free market competition to everything.

C) In the event of collective bargaining, taxpayers should have better individuals working on their behalf, who personally benefit from securing contracts beneficial to the taxpayers when in negotiations with the unions.

This is confusing and doesn't make sense. Politicians are the individuals who are supposed to be working on behalf of the taxpayers yet many of them fail miserably. And the reason many of them fail is because they personally benefit not by representing the taxpayers, but by rewarding those who can get them into higher office.

Thomas Veil

Mar 10, 2011, 06:14 PM

MSNBC has a great photo album (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41996994/ns/politics-more_politics/) containing dramatic pictures from the last three weeks. Hey tea party -- this is what democracy looks like.

http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110310-wisconsinProtests-jc-05.grid-9x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110310-wisconsinProtests-jc-03.grid-4x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110310-wisconsin-01.grid-7x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110304-wisconsin-jc-02.grid-9x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110303-wisconsin-update-01.grid-8x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110303-wisconsin-update-03.grid-9x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110228-wisconsin-protests-04.grid-8x2.JPG http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110225-wisconsin-jc-04.grid-8x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110225-wisconsin-jc-03.grid-8x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110225-wisconsin-protests-02.grid-9x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110224-wisconsin-jc-03.grid-8x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110224-wisconsin-08.grid-8x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110222-wisconsin-jw-01.grid-8x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110220-wisc-05.grid-8x2.jpg http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-110220-wisc/ss-110220-wisc-04.grid-9x2.jpg

Look what you've done to the Democratic base, tea party. You've energized us like never before. This is only the beginning. We've been taking this crap for three decades, watching you operate our government by remote control, and we, the middle class and the working poor, have had enough of it.

R.Perez

Mar 10, 2011, 06:21 PM

I still say it's time for a national strike.

because they need us
and we don't need them
it is our sweat and labor
on which they all depend
they need us to drive their trucks
they need us to shine their crowns
they need us to be the cops
who beat our comrades down
but what good are all their laws
with no one to institute 'em
and what good are all their guns
if there's no one there to shoot 'em- Evan Greer

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 06:56 PM

MSNBC has a great photo album (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41996994/ns/politics-more_politics/) containing dramatic pictures from the last three weeks. Hey tea party -- this is what democracy looks like.

Look what you've done to the Democratic base, tea party. You've energized us like never before. This is only the beginning. We've been taking this crap for three decades, watching you operate our government by remote control, and we, the middle class and the working poor, have had enough of it.

Damn right! BTW- what's happening in Ohio?

I still say it's time for a national strike.

Agreed. What can they do? Fire everyone?

joepunk

Mar 10, 2011, 07:07 PM

Enough talk STRIKE!!!!

Here's some posters for the strikers

Cat Strike Poster (http://grafischeheilanstalt.tumblr.com/post/3764041716/mattack-wisconsins-iww-hired-eric-drooker-to) and hi-res jpg (http://www.justseeds.org/blog/images/genstrike_span_hires.jpg)

IWW Posters (http://store.iww.org/poster.html)

R.Perez

Mar 10, 2011, 07:17 PM

There is a coordinated national walkout tomorrow (Friday) at 2 pm in solidarity with Wisconsin. I don't have school that day, but if I did I would participate.

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 07:25 PM

There is a coordinated national walkout tomorrow (Friday) at 2 pm in solidarity with Wisconsin. I don't have school that day, but if I did I would participate.

Good. Do you have a link with info?

R.Perez

Mar 10, 2011, 07:30 PM

Good. Do you have a link with info?

here is the info for UW-Madison specifically..

http://twincities.indymedia.org/2011/mar/student-walkout-solidarity-wi

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 07:37 PM

here is the info for UW-Madison specifically..

http://twincities.indymedia.org/2011/mar/student-walkout-solidarity-wi

Awesome. This crap needs to stop.

iJohnHenry

Mar 10, 2011, 07:52 PM

Awesome. This crap needs to stop.

In their quest for even more undeserved power, they have awaken the sleeping giant.

I hope he bites them in the ass, but from a personal hygiene level, he might be best to brush his teeth afterwards.

Infection, you understand.

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 07:53 PM

In their quest for even more undeserved power, they have awaken the sleeping giant.

Oh- they have no idea what they've just done to themselves.

Thomas Veil

Mar 10, 2011, 08:34 PM

Damn right! BTW- what's happening in Ohio?There have been hearings on SB5 from Tuesday through today, for all the good they'll do. I do not know how imminent final passage is, however. News media are strangely quiet on that. Maybe they don't even know. Considering Wisconsin, that would not be a surprise.

The other day Gov. Kasich made his State of the State address to the assembled Ohio legislature, but it was protested loudly just outside the doors of the House chamber.

http://media.cleveland.com/open_impact/photo/9364142-large.jpg

Tea party and FreedomWorks people showed up, too, but only a few dozen.

Slightly OT, Kasich is also looking at privatizing the Ohio Lottery (http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/03/legislative_panel_gets_proposa.html). If that isn't a recipe for mischief, I'll eat my hat.

One of my current favorite guys, liberal Sen. Sherrod Brown, made waves by saying this recently:

"You know, I look back in history, and some of the worst governments we ever had, you know one of the first things they did? They went after the trade unions. Hitler didn't want unions. Stalin didn't want unions. Mubarak didn't want independent unions. These autocrats in history don't want independent unions."Link (http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/mar/08/sherrod-brown/sen-sherrod-brown-says-hitler-stalin-and-mubarek-a/)

He took some heat for that and, to my disappointment, kind of backtracked. But -- according to PolitiFact.com...

http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com:80/rulings%2Ftom-true.gif

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 09:00 PM

There have been hearings on SB5 from Tuesday through today, for all the good they'll do. I do not know how imminent final passage is, however. News media are strangely quiet on that. Maybe they don't even know. Considering Wisconsin, that would not be a surprise.

The other day Gov. Kasich made his State of the State address to the assembled Ohio legislature, but it was protested loudly just outside the doors of the House chamber.

http://media.cleveland.com/open_impact/photo/9364142-large.jpg

Tea party and FreedomWorks people showed up, too, but only a few dozen.

Slightly OT, Kasich is also looking at privatizing the Ohio Lottery (http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/03/legislative_panel_gets_proposa.html). If that isn't a recipe for mischief, I'll eat my hat.

One of my current favorite guys, liberal Sen. Sherrod Brown, made waves by saying this recently:

Link (http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/mar/08/sherrod-brown/sen-sherrod-brown-says-hitler-stalin-and-mubarek-a/)

He took some heat for that and, to my disappointment, kind of backtracked. But -- according to PolitiFact.com...

http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com:80/rulings%2Ftom-true.gif

Good. Keep it up. The Republicans ave gone too far. They really are the fascists we knew them to be all along. Yes, I said it. I don't care if it Godwin's the thread. It's the truth. This cannot be a coincidence that they are doing this all at once. This was a coordinated attack on basic freedoms in these states. Disgusting.

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 09:11 PM

Welcome to the club, my friend. I do recall getting bashed a few years ago in this very forum for calling the Bush era Reps crypto-fascists.
Cheers,

Ahmed

I don't care anymore. We call them what they are from now on.

mgguy

Mar 10, 2011, 09:19 PM

Fivepoint- the right to collective bargaining is IN THE CONSTITUTION

If this is true, why is it that the state of Virginia doesn't have collective bargaining for state workers? I don't think they even are unionized, or so I've heard. The Wisconsin bill doesn't do away with all collective bargaining, it just takes some things off the bargaining table.

leekohler

Mar 10, 2011, 09:26 PM

If this is true, why is it that the state of Virginia doesn't have collective bargaining for state workers? I don't think they even are unionized, or so I've heard. The Wisconsin bill doesn't do away with all collective bargaining, it just takes some things off the bargaining table.

Just some things off the table? Let's see- they get fired if they strike. The Ohio law says people go to jail if they strike. This all sounds OK to you? Really? Teachers going to jail if they strike? And this is just taking "some things off the bargaining table"?

If the workers of the state of Virginia want to unionize, they can. Not sure what is unclear in the Constitution. It's all been explained by several posters here quite plainly.

mgguy

Mar 10, 2011, 09:48 PM

If the workers of the state of Virginia want to unionize, they can. Not sure what is unclear in the Constitution.

They may be able to unionize, but not engage in collective bargaining with the state.

http://law.justia.com/codes/virginia/2010/title-40-1/chapter-4/40-1-57-2/

2010 Virginia Code
Title 40.1 - LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT.
Chapter 4 - Labor Unions, Strikes, etc (40.1-52 thru 40.1-76)
40.1-57.2 - Prohibition against collective bargaining.
Share|
§ 40.1-57.2. Prohibition against collective bargaining.
No state, county, municipal, or like governmental officer, agent or governing body is vested with or possesses any authority to recognize any labor union or other employee association as a bargaining agent of any public officers or employees, or to collectively bargain or enter into any collective bargaining contract with any such union or association or its agents with respect to any matter relating to them or their employment or service.
(1993, cc. 868, 879.)

Huntn

Mar 10, 2011, 11:30 PM

djjclark

Mar 11, 2011, 01:48 AM

http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/teacher-s-unions-collective-bargaining

The First Amendment of the BILL OF RIGHTS provides: "Congress shall make no law . . . prohibiting . . . the right of people peaceably to assemble." This right, as applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, has been interpreted to give teachers and other employees the right to free association, including the right to join a union, such as the National Education Association or the American Federation of Teachers. However, the Constitution does not grant teachers the right to bargain collectively with employers. This right is based on applicable provisions in state constitutions, federal statutes, or state statutes. Similarly, teachers do not have a constitutional right to strike, though other federal law or state law may permit teachers to strike.

leekohler

Mar 11, 2011, 03:18 AM

Thomas Veil

Mar 11, 2011, 05:19 AM

Take away 1.7 billion from working class and give 1.8 billion to business tax breaks and raise the state budget deficit by 140M in the process giving business a good deal. Using government to kill off the largest independent contributors (unions) to liberal causes. I love Rachel Maddow's reporting 03/10/11. And she reported on the Republican Party's efforts to make it harder for members of conceived hostile demographic groups to vote. It's not about voter fraud, it's about stopping people from voting.Maddow has been doing some incredible shows lately. Missed it last night, but I will have to download the podcast. Thanks for reminding me.

Welcome to the club, my friend. I do recall getting bashed a few years ago in this very forum for calling the Bush era Reps crypto-fascists.
Cheers,

AhmedThere is a growing body of thought that Godwin's Law is falling into irrelevancy as it becomes harder not to mention fascism when discussing these kinds of things. I mean, excuse me, there's this great big ****ing elephant in the room, and we're not supposed to say what it is?

dsnort

Mar 11, 2011, 07:11 AM

This is extremely vague.

No, it's actually quite clear.

So what is the federal law that permits it?

National Labor Relations Act, circa 1935, ( the Wagner Act). It established the rights of private employees to form unions. All public unions exist because various government bodies have extended the act to the public sphere, in Wisconsin in the 1950's.

There is a growing body of thought that Godwin's Law is falling into irrelevancy as it becomes harder not to mention fascism when discussing these kinds of things. I mean, excuse me, there's this great big ****ing elephant in the room, and we're not supposed to say what it is?

Yeah, I know people that believe speed limits are irrelevant because their running late.

Peterkro

Mar 11, 2011, 07:30 AM

There is a growing body of thought that Godwin's Law is falling into irrelevancy as it becomes harder not to mention fascism when discussing these kinds of things. I mean, excuse me, there's this great big ****ing elephant in the room, and we're not supposed to say what it is?

Godwins law was never about appropriate comparisons to fascism (it actually refers to Nazis and not fascism in general) but that continued inappropriate comparison detracted from the real comparisons that can be made. Although I wouldn't yet label what is happening in the U.S. as fascism but certainly a undercurrent of fascism pervades many of the right wing groups at present.

leekohler

Mar 11, 2011, 07:45 AM

mgguy

Mar 11, 2011, 09:06 AM

Then what is the point of joining a union if you can't collectively bargain or strike? This is a vague statement as it then goes on to mention federal laws that permit teachers to strike as well as state laws. So, if a federal law exists that permits teachers to strike, I fail to see how a state could override that law.

You may not understand it, but states can and do restrict collective bargaining by state workers. My post above references the law in Virginia as an example, but you must have passed over it.

leekohler

Mar 11, 2011, 09:14 AM

You may not understand it, but states can and do restrict collective bargaining by state workers. My post above references the law in Virginia as an example, but you must have passed over it.

I did, but it still seems wrong to me. Just because a law exists does not make it right, nor constitutional. For example, DOMA exists and is enforced, but will most likely be declared unconstitutional.

And again, what is the point of a union if they cannot collectively bargain? That's the whole point of a union.

mcrain

Mar 11, 2011, 09:28 AM

And again, what is the point of a union if they cannot collectively bargain? That's the whole point of a union.

A union can do a lot even when it can not collectively bargain. For example, a union can assist its individual members in their efforts to negotiate for their individual contractual terms.

mgguy is right, collective bargaining is a permissive right, and not automatic. The people can organize and be members of a union, but that union doesn't automatically have powers to represent its members in contractual discussions with the state or employer.

That could change. The Obama administration campaigned on card-check, and could easily change federal law to allow for more universal union bargaining powers. It's a federal issue, and could easily preempt state law, including wisconsin, ohio, texas, etc.

leekohler

Mar 11, 2011, 09:32 AM

A union can do a lot even when it can not collectively bargain. For example, a union can assist its individual members in their efforts to negotiate for their individual contractual terms.

mgguy is right, collective bargaining is a permissive right, and not automatic. The people can organize and be members of a union, but that union doesn't automatically have powers to represent its members in contractual discussions with the state or employer.

That could change. The Obama administration campaigned on card-check, and could easily change federal law to allow for more universal union bargaining powers. It's a federal issue, and could easily preempt state law, including wisconsin, ohio, texas, etc.

Then I think it's time we pushed Obama on this. After this travesty that the Republicans are pushing in various states, I would not be surprised to see them swept from office in huge numbers in 2012.

mcrain

Mar 11, 2011, 09:56 AM

Then I think it's time we pushed Obama on this. After this travesty that the Republicans are pushing in various states, I would not be surprised to see them swept from office in huge numbers in 2012.

Perhaps in some places, but nationally, the big danger this election cycle is that the majority of Senate seats up for grabs are currently held by Democrats.

leekohler

Mar 11, 2011, 10:10 AM

Perhaps in some places, but nationally, the big danger this election cycle is that the majority of Senate seats up for grabs are currently held by Democrats.

After this BS, I don't see much danger, quite honestly. The line has been crossed, and the Republicans have energized the Democratic base and pissed off independents as well. The Republicans will see the result of their actions in Wisconsin soon enough when they lose their jobs in recall elections.

chrmjenkins

Mar 11, 2011, 11:18 AM

After this BS, I don't see much danger, quite honestly. The line has been crossed, and the Republicans have energized the Democratic base and pissed off independents as well. The Republicans will see the result of their actions in Wisconsin soon enough when they lose their jobs in recall elections.

I'm beginning to wonder if the tea party has been a better call for progressive sanity than progressives could have ever mustered themselves.

rdowns

Mar 11, 2011, 11:31 AM

An an FYI, New York has had the Taylor Law in effect since the late 60s. While it takes away the right to strike, collective bargaining is legal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_law

leekohler

Mar 11, 2011, 12:05 PM

I'm beginning to wonder if the tea party has been a better call for progressive sanity than progressives could have ever mustered themselves.

I think you could be right.

An an FYI, New York has had the Taylor Law in effect since the late 60s. While it takes away the right to strike, collective bargaining is legal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_law

Still- not allowing people to strike is just crazy.

Liquorpuki

Mar 11, 2011, 01:06 PM

Still- not allowing people to strike is just crazy.

There are many public departments that are not allowed to strike, usulaly because they're essential services. IE Imagine what would happen if Police, Fire, and Prison guards went on strike.

Striking is the last resort anyway (the employees are betting the politiicans will cave and won't replace or lock them out). As long as collective bargaining exists and the employees have an input into their their contracts, it usually doesn't go that far.

As far as striking in Wisconsin, that GOP bill turned public service into at-will employment. (http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/03/wisconsin-walker-union-republican-senate-budget-bill) Most public employees there now have no leverage or input into the terms of their employment and now they can be fired for striking, even if it's for safety reasons. All they need now are a few incompetent politicians in charge of General Funds to start doing damage to municipal and state departments.

CalBoy

Mar 11, 2011, 03:35 PM

If the workers of the state of Virginia want to unionize, they can. Not sure what is unclear in the Constitution. It's all been explained by several posters here quite plainly.

I have to post a correction. After doing better research, I have found out that the NLRB does not extend to state employees or even most Federal employees (with the curious exception of the Postal Service).

If, however, the Federal government were to extend current union laws to state employees, it would be perfectly constitutional under Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (1985). Do I think that's going to happen now? Probably not. Obama would have to work against a Republican House, and if he couldn't pass meaningful healthcare reforms while he had two houses of Congress, he certainly isn't going to be able to do it when he barely has one house.

On a broader note, I want to know how one can even maintain that unions for workers are banned by statute, but contracts with conglomerate companies are not also simultaneously banned.

Virginia doesn't have unionized workers and doesn't allow its workers to collectively bargain with the state. So why on Earth should Virginia permit AT&T to collectively bargain with the state to provide government buildings with telecom infrastructure? Shouldn't each telephone line be serviced by an individual employee hired independently of any other association? Shouldn't each construction project only be awarded to individual contractors? Why do we allow certain unions into the equation but not others? What kind of "free market" does this advance?

We have to move beyond this farce of corporate personhood, or be willing to place burdens on their power so that we don't place the needs of living breathing individuals above that of a legal fiction.

Thomas Veil

Mar 11, 2011, 06:52 PM

I'm not sure what point dsnort was making, but I've sent a St. Bernard equipped with a keg in search of it. :D

As far as the so-called corporate personhood decision, did you know that it has always been a fiction? Prior to the 1886 court case Santa Clara County vs. Union Pacific Railroad, the Supreme Court had consistently ruled against the idea, and in the decision reached in that case, corporate personhood was not a part of the final decision.

So how did corporate personhood come out of that case?

After the Supreme Court writes it’s opinions on the case, it’s the job of the court reporter to write a short summary called a headnote which is a summary of the decision. Davis was the Reporter of Decisions at the time, and included in his summary is a phrase that is nowhere in the opinions of the court, but is what much of the concept of ‘corporate personhood’ is based on. “The court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does”, in other words saying corporations enjoy the same rights as a person under the 14th amendment. Headnotes are treated with the force of law, and thus were corporations armed with one of their most potent legal weapons, personhood, not by the Supreme Court itself but by the court reporter who just happened coincidentally to have been a corporate railroad president earlier in his life.Link. (http://booksbelow.wordpress.com/2010/01/21/the-murky-history-of-j-c-bancroft-davis-and-corporate-personhood/) You can find other evidence by googling "J.C. Bankroft Davis".

And thus was perpetrated (depending on your view) one of the biggest blunders or biggest frauds in U.S. history.

Thomas Veil

Mar 12, 2011, 05:43 PM

FYI: a replay of today's big Wisconsin protest is live now here (http://www.michaelmoore.com/).

From the early part of the video, we're hearing there were between 150,000 and 200,000 people there.

mgguy

Mar 12, 2011, 08:02 PM

FYI: a replay of today's big Wisconsin protest is live now here (http://www.michaelmoore.com/).

From the early part of the video, we're hearing there were between 150,000 and 200,000 people there.

Perhaps they should instead take their sideshow to Virginia, which hasn't allowed ANY collective bargaining with state workers for some years now. I don't know for sure, but i suspect maybe Virginia leans democrat and these protesters don't want to take on their own. These folks can't stand the thought of losing any union dues or political influence.

Edit: I may be wrong about virginia being run mostly by democrats, and if republicans are in control there, i wonder even more why the democrats haven't protested there.

Huntn

Mar 12, 2011, 08:39 PM

These folks can't stand the thought of losing any union dues or political influence.

Please point me at the people who like losing political influence. Conservatives? :confused:

mgguy

Mar 12, 2011, 08:55 PM

Please point me at the people who like losing political influence. Conservatives? :confused:

None to my knowledge. IDK, but this may explain their outrage more than does any concern they profess to have for worker rights.

dsnort

Mar 12, 2011, 08:55 PM

I'm not sure what point dsnort was making, but I've sent a St. Bernard equipped with a keg in search of it. :D

My apologies, I can be a bit oblique at times. (The keg was put to good use, I swear!)

I assume you are referring to this:

Yeah, I know people that believe speed limits are irrelevant because their running late.

Which I posted in response to this:

There is a growing body of thought that Godwin's Law is falling into irrelevancy as it becomes harder not to mention fascism when discussing these kinds of things. I mean, excuse me, there's this great big ****ing elephant in the room, and we're not supposed to say what it is?

It's a comment on the very human tendency of people to question the relevance or even legitimacy of things, ( rules of logic and or debate) , that don't serve their purposes.

Sydde

Mar 12, 2011, 09:19 PM

Every state senator eligible for recall at this time has a petition circulating. 8 Ds and 8 Rs (who have been in office more than a year) are under attack. Look the stories up yourself, there are many, and the spin is dizzying. Apparently Obama is behind the recalls against the Rs, and there are paid Koch fiends from Utah circulating petitions against the Ds. This will be fun.

chrmjenkins

Mar 14, 2011, 03:14 PM

It seems that one GOP state senator's own wife is signing his recall petition.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/03/wisconsin_state_senators_wife.html

leekohler

Mar 14, 2011, 03:23 PM

It seems that one GOP state senator's own wife is signing his recall petition.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/03/wisconsin_state_senators_wife.html

Karma's a bitch, ain't it? Pay attention, Republicans.

iJohnHenry

Mar 14, 2011, 04:41 PM

It seems that one GOP state senator's own wife is signing his recall petition.

Maybe she's a nymphomaniac??

Thomas Veil

Mar 14, 2011, 05:12 PM

It seems that one GOP state senator's own wife is signing his recall petition.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/03/wisconsin_state_senators_wife.htmlI just saw that. Freakin' hilarious.

One of those Republican senators – Randy Hooper may have others problems to deal with. When protestors showed up outside his home over the weekend – they were told by Hooper’s wife that he no longer lives there – instead he’s living with his 25-year-old mistress who also happens to be a right-wing lobbyist in Madison. The blog “Blogging Blue” reports that Hooper’s wife gladly signed the recall petition against her husband. Link (http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2011/03/hooper’s-wife-gladly-signed-recall-petition-against-her-husband)

leekohler

Mar 14, 2011, 05:14 PM

I just saw that. Freakin' hilarious.

Link (http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2011/03/hooper’s-wife-gladly-signed-recall-petition-against-her-husband)

That won't sit well with the "family values" crowd. He will most likely be the first to go.

Lord Blackadder

Mar 14, 2011, 05:26 PM

I just saw that. Freakin' hilarious.

Comedy gold.

dsnort

Mar 14, 2011, 10:02 PM

It seems that one GOP state senator's own wife is signing his recall petition.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/03/wisconsin_state_senators_wife.html

"Hell hath no fury....."

That's too good!

NT1440

Mar 14, 2011, 10:18 PM

That won't sit well with the "family values" crowd. He will most likely be the first to go.

Sure it will, just blame it on the patriotism. :rolleyes:
:p

Thomas Veil

Mar 25, 2011, 08:16 PM

The latest bizarre twist in this horror story...

Indiana prosecutor advises WI governor to fake an attack on himself (http://current.com/1teqp4c)

An Indiana deputy prosecutor and Republican activist resigned Thursday after the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism uncovered an email to Gov. Scott Walker in which he suggested a fake attack on the governor to discredit union protesters.

Carlos F. Lam submitted his resignation shortly before the Center published a story quoting his Feb. 19 email, which praised Walker for standing up to unions but went on to say that the chaos in Wisconsin presented “a good opportunity for what’s called a ‘false flag’ operation.”

“If you could employ an associate who pretends to be sympathetic to the unions’ cause to physically attack you (or even use a firearm against you), you could discredit the unions,” the email said....

Lam is the second Indiana prosecutor to resign over suggestions to use violence in Wisconsin.

He sent this email the same Saturday on which another Indiana law-enforcement figure, state Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey Cox, tweeted that riot police should “use live ammunition” to clear the Capitol of protesters.
Gee...what swell law enforcement guys.

Ugg

Mar 25, 2011, 08:44 PM

The latest bizarre twist in this horror story...

Gee...what swell law enforcement guys.

I wonder when the next Kent State (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings) is going to take place.

The right's only possible response to democratic discussion and debate seems to be violence. I really think that McVeigh and Loughner were only the appetizers to their bach(m)annalian orgies.

Sydde

Mar 25, 2011, 11:23 PM

"Budget Repair Bill" published despite court injunction (http://www.wkow.com/Global/story.asp?S=14324316)

Late Friday afternoon, in a surprise move, the non-partisan Legislative Reference Bureau published the law stripping collective bargaining rights from most public employees.

Wisconsin officials and lawmakers can't seem to agree on whether or not publication by the LRB means the law will take effect as early as Saturday. But, the head of the Legislative Reference Bureau, Steve Miller, says their publication Friday is not the final step.

... the law can't go into effect until it's published by Secretary of State Doug La Follette.

The controversial bill was indefinitely put on hold last Friday when Dane County Judge Maryanne Sumi ordered a temporary restraining order blocking the publication of the law. But, despite that court order, the bill was published late Friday afternoon, not by the Secretary of State, but the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Apparently, this is just too important, it has to has to has to happen now, f' the law, just do this thing.

What I want to know is, if the people in charge of making and enforcing the laws have no respect for the laws, where does that leave us? If they refuse to observe the social contract, why should they expect compliance from everyone else?

Thomas Veil

Mar 26, 2011, 04:16 AM

If the Republicans are right and the LRB has to publish a law within 10 days of its being signed, you'd still think that, given the court's injunction, the Republicans would consult the court to see whether there is a conflict. As it is, it's possible they've opened themselves up to a contempt of court charge, at the very least.

It's kind of stunning how little regard these people have for anybody but themselves.

leekohler

Mar 26, 2011, 11:20 AM

If
It's kind of stunning how little regard these people have for anybody but themselves.

No, it's not. Republicans are just showing their true colors. They've only ever cared about themselves.

mgguy

Mar 26, 2011, 11:59 AM

No, it's not. Republicans are just showing their true colors. They've only ever cared about themselves.

This deserves an :rolleyes: for substance.

leekohler

Mar 26, 2011, 12:05 PM

This deserves an :rolleyes: for substance.

The truth needs to be told. You don't have to like it. Even with charities, there's something in it for them, like tax breaks. I wonder how many would donate if the tax breaks weren't there?

And if the cared about others or the law, how do you explain these actions?

Sydde

Mar 26, 2011, 09:41 PM

The truth needs to be told. You don't have to like it. Even with charities, there's something in it for them, like tax breaks. I wonder how many would donate if the tax breaks weren't there?

And if the cared about others or the law, how do you explain these actions?

Bearing in mind, of course, that Walker is not a republican so much as a Tea Parody Koch Fiend. Their more recent excesses withal, it is not fair to tar republicans with this brush, a few of them are more than an excretory orifice.

mcrain

Mar 28, 2011, 10:16 AM

Bearing in mind, of course, that Walker is not a republican so much as a Tea Parody Koch Fiend. Their more recent excesses withal, it is not fair to tar republicans with this brush, a few of them are more than an excretory orifice.

The Republican Party needed to rebrand after GWB. The Tea Party is the Republican Party. If not...

Where are the reasonable Republicans standing up to this BS? In Wisconsin, they ALL voted for this. So, in that state, 0% of the elected Republicans can avoid the tar and feathers.

How many reasonable Republicans in the media have denounced this BS? .....

How many Republicans in other states? Christie? Who else? ....

I'm sorry, but either the majority of the Republican party is actually represented by the Tea Party, or they are sitting quietly and allowing them to say and do these things without any resistence and NO reasonable conservative response.

Thomas Veil

Mar 28, 2011, 02:34 PM

The Republican Party needed to rebrand after GWB. The Tea Party is the Republican Party....

I'm sorry, but either the majority of the Republican party is actually represented by the Tea Party, or they are sitting quietly and allowing them to say and do these things without any resistence and NO reasonable conservative response.I've professed something similar in the past.

We started with real Republicans. Then Uncle Ronnie declared the old guard insufficiently conservative, and voila! we had the Reagan Republicans. Then in the wake of 9/11 the Reagan Republicans weren't conservative enough, and we had the Bush-Cheney neocons. In light of the neocons' crushing failures, we now have the latest reinvention, the tea party.

And in each case, the new guys have moved farther and farther (and more angrily and fanatically) to the right, declaring themselves to be the real thing and each old guard some sort of pale impostor.

But the neocons have sold their souls to the devil in exchange for a victory in the House. Now they find themselves along for the ride, like a cat burglar who finds out only too late that the thug he's allied himself with isn't another burglar but a homicidal maniac.

The Republicans used to be a serious party with a few crazies. Now the inmates are in control of the asylum. As someone else pointed out, political lunatics we used to laugh at on street corners now have shows on Fox and audiences of believers.

And Godwin be damned, but one has to point out that a country awash in fanatical leaders, extreme right-wing propaganda and contrived bogeymen to fear, is ripe for being led down the path of fascism.

dime21

Mar 28, 2011, 05:04 PM

Ugg

Mar 28, 2011, 06:18 PM

IMO Unions are an obsolete relic of the past. They had their day, now it's time to let them die. Today they are nothing but political money funnels, and serve no real useful purpose. Don't get me wrong, they were vital to protecting workers 100 years ago, but nowadays we have Workers Comp, Minimum Wage, Non-Discrimination laws, Child Labor laws, OSHA, employer sponsored retirement plans, employer sponsored health care, and a whole host of other such things. That said, I am actually not against the concept of unions - workers should be allowed to form them if they choose, no matter how silly it may seem. So in that sense, I am against this Wisconsin legislature that removes those rights.

The thing I am very much against though, is the legislation in some states that requires the use of union labor. That to me is a slap in the face to all the entrepreneurs and small business owners out there. It is cutting them off at the knees, forcing the dollars to flow to the enormous union machine.

As an example I have a friend who owns a construction company in the DC metro area. The majority of his work was historically from federal government contracts. After Obama passed a horrible piece of legislation requiring all fed gov't construction to be awarded to union shops, that nearly put my friend out of business. He's had to lay off 3/4 of his workers, over 250 people in the past two years because of that mandatory union legislation. That is absolute crap, it is the epitome of greedy liberal special-interest groups and their high-dollar lobbying efforts. They care about no one but themselves, lobbying for and then passing laws that eliminate fair competition and steal dollars away from hard working people. If unions cannot be competitive on their own, they should be allowed to whither and die, instead of passing anti-competitive laws that create an artificial demand for them.

Yet, the lack of unions is directly responsible for the impoverishment of millions of Americans. How do you justify that?

Miller-McCune (http://www.miller-mccune.com/business-economics/unions-wages-and-the-moral-economy-29498/)
Unions, Wages and the ‘Moral Economy’

Researchers say the decline of unions in the U.S. contributes to the growing wage gap for all private sector workers, including nonunion members.

The public sector unions fighting for their lives in Wisconsin likely have had an influence well beyond their own members. It’s called the “threat effect,” as when a private schoolteacher gets a wage increase because her peers in public schools are under union contract.

In this way, workers who don’t pay union dues are beholden to those who do. But it’s not just the direct threat of unions that can make employers more generous, researchers say. A new study from Harvard University (“Unions, Norms and the Rise in American Wage Inequality”) contends that unions historically have been the “pillars of the moral economy,” promoting higher wages and better treatment for all workers. The message resonates a little louder today on the 100th anniversary of the deadly Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire that ultimately bolstered private industry unions in the United States.

In the United States today, 36 percent of public sector workers are union members. In the private sector, however, union membership and influence has declined sharply in recent decades. From 1973 to 2007, the census shows, union membership in the U.S. private sector dropped from 34 percent to 8 percent for men.
At the same time — and not coincidentally, according to Western — the wage gap between the richest and poorest workers in the private sector grew by 40 percent for men, reflecting both falling wages at the bottom and rising wages at the top.

dime21

Mar 28, 2011, 09:49 PM

Yet, the lack of unions is directly responsible for the impoverishment of millions of Americans. How do you justify that?
Drawing a conclusion between declining private sector union membership, and an increasing wage gap, I would call it a deliberate and dishonest confusion between correlation and causation. Let me guess, that study was conducted by a pro-union liberal? That's no different than the studies published by "independent" labs that "prove" Microsoft Windows is more stable and more secure than OSX. And oh BTW, the study was funded by a grant from Microsoft Corp. A complete joke.

Also, I guess he "forgot" to take into consideration the 5+ million blue collar manufacturing jobs that have been moved to China over the past 20 years. Supply and demand affects the job market just like anything else. Remember the dot-com boom? A huge demand for tech workers and not enough people to fill the jobs will of course increase those salaries, as we saw during that time. Conversely, salaries go down when there's a huge supply of workers and not enough jobs for them all. The Department of Labor estimates between 5 and 6 Million US manufacturing jobs have been lost to the Chinese since 1990. You do the math. Hint: unions are not part of this equation.

Lastly, If you want a real world comparison, check out the salary of a unionized detroit auto worker. Then compare that to the salary of a non-union worker at the Toyota or BMW factories here in the US. Hint: the non-union worker performing the exact same job makes more money.

Thomas Veil

Mar 28, 2011, 10:58 PM

...I would call it a deliberate and dishonest confusion between correlation and causation....There are those words again.

I can see that this is going to be the new fallback excuse for everything that conservatism screws up: it's all correlation but not causation. In other words, whenever we do something and it hurts the economy in general and workers in particular, it's just a co-inky-dink.

You offer no explanation of why corporations should have unilateral, unlimited power to transfer jobs overseas, while you apparently advocate workers having little or no recourse. If the answer you're offering is "supply and demand", it's a ridiculous one.

dime21

Mar 29, 2011, 10:09 AM

There are those words again.

I can see that this is going to be the new fallback excuse for everything that conservatism screws up: it's all correlation but not causation. In other words, whenever we do something and it hurts the economy in general and workers in particular, it's just a co-inky-dink.

You offer no explanation of why corporations should have unilateral, unlimited power to transfer jobs overseas, while you apparently advocate workers having little or no recourse. If the answer you're offering is "supply and demand", it's a ridiculous one.
lol, you mis-interpreted. again. I never said corporations should have unilateral unlimited power to transfer jobs overseas. Please start reading the words instead of trying to put them into my mouth. As a matter of fact, I'm rather against a "unilateral, unlimited power to transfer jobs overseas". But since you made a faulty ass-umption, you wouldn't know that.

As for the coorelation, you might as well toss globlal warming onto that same chart. The rise in Earth's surface temperature is caused by the decline in private sector union membership. lol.

Please, do tell, what recourse do workers have against their employer for jobs moved overseas? Last time I checked, it was none. What's your answer here? Unions? Are they the workers recourse? Yeah, a lot of good they did throughout the 90's, when a democrat president was in office, and manufacturing jobs started leaving the country by the millions. :rolleyes:

NT1440

Mar 29, 2011, 10:35 AM

Please, do tell, what recourse do workers have against their employer for jobs moved overseas? Last time I checked, it was none. What's your answer here? Unions? Are they the workers recourse? Yeah, a lot of good they did throughout the 90's, when a democrat president was in office, and manufacturing jobs started leaving the country by the millions. :rolleyes:

The labor force in this country has been under assault for decades now under all the presidents in office. Keep playing the Dem vs. GOP game though, it really shows you have a complete grasp on the actual issue and that politics isn't just a team sport for you. :rolleyes:

Ugg

Mar 29, 2011, 10:44 AM

lol, you mis-interpreted. again. I never said corporations should have unilateral unlimited power to transfer jobs overseas. Please start reading the words instead of trying to put them into my mouth. As a matter of fact, I'm rather against a "unilateral, unlimited power to transfer jobs overseas". But since you made a faulty ass-umption, you wouldn't know that.

As for the coorelation, you might as well toss globlal warming onto that same chart. The rise in Earth's surface temperature is caused by the decline in private sector union membership. lol.

Please, do tell, what recourse do workers have against their employer for jobs moved overseas? Last time I checked, it was none. What's your answer here? Unions? Are they the workers recourse? Yeah, a lot of good they did throughout the 90's, when a democrat president was in office, and manufacturing jobs started leaving the country by the millions. :rolleyes:

One of the biggest problems with Americans is they are unwilling to look overseas to see how other people do things and in the case of unions and labor relations, there are quite a few excellent examples.

Really all we have to do is look north of the border first, then to France and Germany where unions have in all honesty, helped preserve family.

A major reason for jobs being shipped overseas has been the insane belief that private industry is better at handling health care. Health care costs have driven jobs overseas, not unions.

dime21

Mar 29, 2011, 10:48 AM

The labor force in this country has been under assault for decades now under all the presidents in office. Keep playing the Dem vs. GOP game though, it really shows you have a complete grasp on the actual issue and that politics isn't just a team sport for you. :rolleyes:
That's a lovely straw man argument you've assembled, but it doesn't address the question I was responding to. What recourse do workers have over jobs that are sent out of the country? And how do Unions help with that situation? Non political answer: 1) None. 2) And they don't.

dime21

Mar 29, 2011, 10:49 AM

A major reason for jobs being shipped overseas has been the insane belief that private industry is better at handling health care. Health care costs have driven jobs overseas, not unions.
So ObamaCare, which will cost even more than the private system we have today, will help this situation how?

Eraserhead

Mar 29, 2011, 02:27 PM

So ObamaCare, which will cost even more than the private system we have today, will help this situation how?

Source?

mcrain

Mar 29, 2011, 02:41 PM

To the extent unions are obsolete, so are corporations. There is no reason for Bob to need to have a corporate entity in order for him to run his x-ray machine. Corporations are a created existance that only is allowed by government permission. I say we rescind that permission, maybe seize all assets owned by those corporations, and then sell those assets to the highest US citizen bidders. Either that or just end the corporate form and let the individual owners take their share of assets.

Radical enough? Almost as radical as the idea of eliminating voluntary associations of workers that exists pursuant to democratic process for the purpose of representing its members.

(FYI, I don't actually support the idea of asset forfeiture. I only present the idea as similar to the right-wing desire to eliminate unions).

MattSepeta

Mar 29, 2011, 03:06 PM

I wonder when the next Kent State (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings) is going to take place.

The right's only possible response to democratic discussion and debate seems to be violence. I really think that McVeigh and Loughner were only the appetizers to their bach(m)annalian orgies.

Left (http://abcnews.go.com/US/gunman-enters-discovery-channel-headquarters-employees-evacuated/story?id=11535128)

Left (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_plane_crash#Suicide_note)

Left
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Republican_National_Convention#Post-RNC_convictions_of_protesters)

Left (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/145627-dem-lawmaker-on-labor-protests-get-a-little-bloody-when-necessary)

Left (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski#Psychological_analysis)

And FINALLY

Left
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Lee_Loughner#Views)

So what were you blathering on about again? Something about trying to make grand sweeping accusations pinning the "right" as "violent," despite many of the past incidences I have illustrated being perpetrated by "the left".

How about the death threats to Gov. Walker? Those are condoning violence, they MUST be from the "right"!

The wacko that flew his plane into the Texas IRS offices? Must be a Tea-Partier! Oh wait, he was an anti-bush anti-business liberal!

How about the lunatic that held up a a discovery channel office? he must have been anti-environment! Oh wait, he was anti-population and an environmental extremist. Now those are typically views held by "the right" right? WRONG

how about that nut job the Unibomber. He was targeting universities, he must have been an inbred un-educated tea partier moron, right? Wrong. He was a luddite liberal.

Now, the grand finale. You claiming that Jared Loughner was a result of "the right" is utterly dishonest and inaccurate at best, downright evil, underhanded, and ulterior at worst.

unlike yourself, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are simply an ill-informed liberal apologist all to eager to shift blame from an individual to an ideology.

So, did I prove that the "left" commits these atrocities?

No. I proved that PEOPLE commit these atrocities. Liberal people. Conservative people. INSANE people (Loughner).

Also- It is seriously disgusting to try to use Giffords as a political pawn. Shame on you.

Sydde

Mar 29, 2011, 11:18 PM

I have a rather thick volume lying on my coffee table, entitled "Weird Wisconsin". Aptly named.

Judge enjoins the government from implementing anti-union law (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/29/us-wisconsin-appeal-idUSTRE72S41R20110329?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews)

Back and forth this battle goes. I believe the recall petitions will start to come due in May, with elections following almost immediately (a week after certification, as I understand it). Perhaps the situation will stabilize then, with some checks on this Koch fiend's attacks upon the state.

hulugu

Mar 30, 2011, 01:39 AM

...

So what were you blathering on about again? Something about trying to make grand sweeping accusations pinning the "right" as "violent," despite many of the past incidences I have illustrated being perpetrated by "the left"... ....

unlike yourself, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are simply an ill-informed liberal apologist all to eager to shift blame from an individual to an ideology.

Trying to paint singular acts of domestic terrorism on the right or left is a foolish game because it depends entirely on how you define right or left. For instance, the bombing of Wall Street by followers of Luigi Galleani, an anarchist, would seemingly be posted to the left as would the bombing of the Los Angeles Times. However, would you post the Ludlow Massacre to the right? What about the 2001 anthrax attacks or the Centennial Olympic Park bombing?
The Holocaust Museum shooting? Right or left?
The assassination of George Tiller?
The bombing of the Martin Luther King parade?

Or we could evaluate the groups considered terrorist groups in the United States, from Wikipedia I count 8 for the right and 7 for the left.

We could also look at the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is currently tracking 1,002 hate groups, most of whom are linked to the far-right.

While extremism exists on both sides, the number of pro-Marxist or animal rights terrorism groups is small—and in the case of the ELF, there's a vast difference between burning down a mansion and setting a bomb of in a crowd—compared to the large number of anti-immigrant, pro-white groups.

By membership, I'd argue that the right has a larger number of people engaged in violent extremism, but since so much of it is based in street-level thuggery, it gets little national reporting.

Lastly, Loughner's act was more akin to the Columbine kids or the Virginia Tech shooter, and is vastly different from the self-directed mayhem of Timothy McVeigh who was operating under a specific ideology shared by others. Timothy McVeigh's ideology still lives. Loughner's was like the Unabombers, utterly incoherent.
You're conflating the two to make a simple argument, but it's a fundamentally inaccurate one.

Thomas Veil

Mar 30, 2011, 06:27 AM

Thomas Veil

Mar 30, 2011, 05:51 PM

Ohio House approves overhaul of collective bargaining law (http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2011/03/ohio_house_approves_overhaul_o.html)

COLUMBUS, Ohio – The Ohio House has approved Senate Bill 5, the controversial overhaul of the state's collective bargaining law, following nearly four hours of impassioned floor speeches.

The vote was 53-44 and was greeted with loud boos and chants of "Shame on you!" from opponents in the gallery. House Speaker William G. Batchelder banged his gavel repeatedly, and asked the highway patrol to clear the chamber.

The bill contains several changes made by the GOP-controlled House, so it will go back to the Senate for a concurrence vote, expected soon. The bill is expected to reach Republican Gov. John Kasich's desk by next week, and opponents have vowed to put it on the fall ballot for a voter referendum....

Before the vote, several members of both parties spoke about the bill on the House floor, at times eliciting cheers and boos from an audience of mostly SB 5 opponents.

Batchelder threatened to clear the chamber's balcony more than once after opponents of the bill jeered during Republican floor speeches.

"We will clear the gallery if that continues," Batchelder said. "This is the House of Representatives."

After the vote and the chamber was cleared, Batchelder resumed the session by saying, "Now that the intellectuals have left the chamber..."Nice, huh? It's not fully passed yet, but that's a technicality at this point. It's pretty much a done deal.

I met Batchelder in the course of my job a few months back, and...well, ya know how people can be really nice to you, but you get the immediate impression that they are 100% phony? Yeah, it was like that.

I can't wait for November so Ohio can kick Kasich, Batchelder and these other bastards out.

Edit: reaction from Ohioans (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42347349/ns/politics-more_politics/):

Standing in the Ohio Statehouse Rotunda after the House vote Wednesday, union steelworker Curt Yarger said he saw the bill as "a preliminary attack on working people."

"I shouldn't have any disillusion that I'll be next in the private sector," said Yarger, 43, of Mansfield.

Leo Geiger, a Republican who works as a sewer inspector for the city of Dayton and didn't attend protests because he couldn't take the time off, said he's "deathly afraid that this is going to affect me, my family and the entire state of Ohio in an incredibly negative way."

Geiger, 34, called the bill and the way it has moved through the Legislature "completely un-American" and said he believes it has more to do with "political payback" than the budget.

"I find this to be loathsome," he said Wednesday night. "I find this to be disrespectful to Ohioans and disrespectful to the process of Democracy."...

Two vocal Republicans who again voted against the bill — Sens. Tim Grendell and Bill Seitz — delivered lengthy speeches on the continuing legal flaws in the bill.

Grendell said House changes set up a system for judging performance in teachers that will harm education in the state.

"They'll be teaching to the tests on steroids now, because 50 percent of their evaluation — whether to keep their job, get a pay raise, I don't know what else — is depending on that test," he said....

Pickerington teacher Patricia Kuhn-Morgan said..."I've spoken to a lot of educators who are typically straight-ticket Republicans that have said to me that they won't ever vote for another Republican because of how this bill's been pushed through and the democratic process has been abused."

State Rep. Robert Hagan, a Democrat from Youngstown, took issue with the notion that the bill was aimed at saving money.

"Don't ever lie to us and don't be hypocritical and don't dance around it as if it's finances, because you know what it is: It's to bust the union," Hagan told his fellow lawmakers.It's now cleared the Senate and is on its way to Kasich's desk, BTW.

Naimfan

Mar 31, 2011, 10:30 AM

Thomas Veil

Mar 31, 2011, 03:21 PM

That's what happens when labor doesn't work as hard as they can in the last election cycle. To a degree, they have only themselves to blame--there were many labor people who didn't get out because they were not "satisfied" with the progress President Obama et al made.Unfortunately, you make a very good point. It seems to take very little to drive Republicans to the polls; even fantasy issues will do it. But Democrats, independents and others get easily discouraged and sit elections out.

I'm as disappointed in Obama as anybody. Frustrated with the Blue Dogs, too. But I'll vote for Obama again in 2012, if only because the alternative is going to be worse.

I will say this: if, after all this, we still sit on our asses and just take it, well...we deserve it, then.

leekohler

Mar 31, 2011, 11:49 PM

I will say this: if, after all this, we still sit on our asses and just take it, well...we deserve it, then.

Thomas, you won't. This is the wake up call people have needed for a very long time. The Republicans have screwed themselves, trust me.

MattSepeta

Apr 1, 2011, 10:11 AM

Trying to paint singular acts of domestic terrorism on the right or left is a foolish game because it depends entirely on how you define right or left. For instance, the bombing of Wall Street by followers of Luigi Galleani, an anarchist, would seemingly be posted to the left as would the bombing of the Los Angeles Times. However, would you post the Ludlow Massacre to the right? What about the 2001 anthrax attacks or the Centennial Olympic Park bombing?
The Holocaust Museum shooting? Right or left?
The assassination of George Tiller?
The bombing of the Martin Luther King parade?

Or we could evaluate the groups considered terrorist groups in the United States, from Wikipedia I count 8 for the right and 7 for the left.

We could also look at the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is currently tracking 1,002 hate groups, most of whom are linked to the far-right.

While extremism exists on both sides, the number of pro-Marxist or animal rights terrorism groups is small—and in the case of the ELF, there's a vast difference between burning down a mansion and setting a bomb of in a crowd—compared to the large number of anti-immigrant, pro-white groups.

By membership, I'd argue that the right has a larger number of people engaged in violent extremism, but since so much of it is based in street-level thuggery, it gets little national reporting.

Lastly, Loughner's act was more akin to the Columbine kids or the Virginia Tech shooter, and is vastly different from the self-directed mayhem of Timothy McVeigh who was operating under a specific ideology shared by others. Timothy McVeigh's ideology still lives. Loughner's was like the Unabombers, utterly incoherent.
You're conflating the two to make a simple argument, but it's a fundamentally inaccurate one.

you missed my entire point....

So, did I prove that the "left" commits these atrocities?

No. I proved that PEOPLE commit these atrocities. Liberal people. Conservative people. INSANE people (Loughner).

Also- It is seriously disgusting to try to use Giffords as a political pawn. Shame on you.

Also, seeing as to how this thread is about Wisconsin and the evil republicans... Might a swell leave this here. Just some more peaceful protesting gone awry :rolleyes:

This lady (http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/03/breaking-wi-teacher-charged-with-sending-death-threats-to-gop-lawmakers/) finally caught, responsible for this:

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/death-threat.jpg

MyDesktopBroke

Apr 1, 2011, 12:25 PM

Kapanke is also the first one the dems are filing to recall (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-wi-electionrecall-ka,0,6019180.story). They've apparently got enough signatures to do it, too.

Obviously the death threats are unacceptable and the perp should be prosecuted to the full extent. There's an appropriate way to deal with politicians you disagree with - you elect some one else. That actually has a chance to change things, unlike sending ridiculous death emails.

hulugu

Apr 1, 2011, 12:52 PM

you missed my entire point....

Also, seeing as to how this thread is about Wisconsin and the evil republicans... Might a swell leave this here. Just some more peaceful protesting gone awry...

Maybe your point was poorly made, because what I see is an attempt to equalize the violent rhetoric on the ends of the political spectrum in America and they are not equal.

As for death threats, while they should be taken seriously, they are so ubiquitous as to be part of being in the public eye.

Sydde

Apr 1, 2011, 12:53 PM

Obviously the death threats are unacceptable and the perp should be prosecuted to the full extent. There's an appropriate way to deal with politicians you disagree with - you elect some one else. That actually has a chance to change things, unlike sending ridiculous death emails.
The reverse sort of thing (old news) is also unacceptable (http://www.postcrescent.com/article/20110325/APC0101/103250556/Indiana-prosecutor-Carlos-F-Lam-resigns-after-recommending-Wisconsin-Governor-Scott-Walker-stage-fake-attack-against-himself). At this point, with everyone struggling to claim the moral high ground, that vacant peak looks like it would be a nice quiet place for a picnic.

rdowns

Apr 5, 2011, 04:33 PM

Color me surprised (http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/119159584.html). :rolleyes:

Just in his mid-20s, Brian Deschane has no college degree, very little management experience and two drunken-driving convictions.

Yet he has landed an $81,500-per-year job in Gov. Scott Walker's administration overseeing environmental and regulatory matters and dozens of employees at the Department of Commerce. Even though Walker says the state is broke and public employees are overpaid, Deschane already has earned a promotion and a 26% pay raise in just two months with the state.

How did Deschane score his plum assignment with the Walker team?

It's all in the family.

His father is Jerry Deschane, executive vice president and longtime lobbyist for the Madison-based Wisconsin Builders Association, which bet big on Walker during last year's governor's race.

The group's political action committee gave $29,000 to Walker and his running mate, Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch, last year, making it one of the top five PAC donors to the governor's successful campaign. Even more impressive, members of the trade group funneled more than $92,000 through its conduit to Walker's campaign over the past two years.

Total donations: $121,652.

That's big-time backing from the homebuilders.

The younger Deschane didn't respond to questions about his job.

But his father said he doesn't think his group's financial support of the first-term Republican helped his son in his job search.

"He got the position himself," said Jerry Deschane, who returned to the trade group in September after a hiatus during which he worked as an independent lobbyist for many groups, including the builders association. "I didn't get it for him."..

Rodimus Prime

Apr 5, 2011, 06:11 PM

Color me surprised (http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/119159584.html). :rolleyes:

that is a load of horse crap that he got that job on his own.
It is a government job that is clearly of a level that requires a college degree from an accredit school.
That means automaticly his application should of been tossed out. On top of that he has has 2 DUI which I believe means he has a felonoy convection against him which is also an automatic no go for the goverment job.

This is something that really should be looked into and the governor busted for it. Bribing is pretty clear here and a huge waste of tax payer money. $120k brib gets over 200k of tax payer money.

Sydde

Apr 5, 2011, 09:36 PM

More :rolleyes: fodder:

Now Scott Walker wants the federal money for high-speed rail (http://alttransport.com/2011/03/scott-walker-now-wants-the-high-speed-rail-funds-he-rejected-in-the-first-place/):
Less than half a year after rejecting federal funds to build a high-speed rail connecting Milwaukee to Madison, Wisconsin governor Scott Walker is now asking for at least $150 million from the feds to upgrade an existing Milwaukee-to-Chicago passenger line.

Wait, what?

Ironic, considering Walker had staked his political career on opposition to the Midwest High Speed Rail Initiative, even launching a campaign website www.notrain.com (http://www.notrain.com) towards his high-minded goal. In spite the $810 million that the federal government had offered the state, Walker had originally refused the project because he said it was a “a waste of taxpayer money.”

Now, Walker wants federal funds to buy two train sets and eight locomotives, build a maintenance facility in Milwaukee as well as renovate the train shed at the downtown Milwaukee Amtrak-Greyhound station for Amtrak’s Hiawatha line connecting Milwaukee-to-Chicago.

When asked about the reversal in his position, Walker told the the Journal Sentinel that he had always supported improvements to the Hiawatha line.

“This is not inconsistent with the position I took in the past,” he said.

Maybe local business was at risk? (http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/106790123.html)

Journal-Sentinel story from November 5thMadison — Governor-elect Scott Walker reached out to a Milwaukee train manufacturer Friday, seeking to keep its operations in the state long-term as he advocates for stopping a passenger rail project involving the company.

"Governor-elect Walker is reaching out to leadership at Talgo to encourage them to stay in Wisconsin," Walker spokeswoman Jill Bader said Friday.

Walker, a Republican, campaigned on an unambiguous promise to end the passenger rail line, funded with $810 million in federal stimulus money, which he has called a boondoggle. Bader said Walker was not backing away from that promise.

This week, (Walker's predecessor) Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle, a supporter of the project, halted work on that line temporarily after Walker's election.

That has thrown some doubt over jobs at Talgo, which is building two trains for an existing Milwaukee-to-Chicago rail service and had plans to build two more for the proposed Milwaukee-to-Madison line.

Walker has said repeatedly he wants to ask Congress to redirect the $810 million from the rail project to make it available for the state's pressing needs to upgrade its roads and bridges. But Doyle and the state transportation officials have repeatedly said that won't happen.

For your own good, do not try to figure this guy out, he cannot even seem to figure himself out.

mrkramer

Apr 6, 2011, 01:39 AM

For your own good, do not try to figure this guy out, he cannot even seem to figure himself out.

He's pretty easy to figure out, he's a corrupt power-hungry politician. I would be shocked if some of the money isn't being funneled to him by some of the construction companies.

Sydde

Apr 6, 2011, 08:10 PM

Are we bored with the Gem of the Upper Midwest yet? Hope not, this thing is going to drag on and on. We can expect at least ten more months of entertainment.

They had a nifty little election yesterday. One of the issues on the ballot was a state supreme court (SCOW?) chair currently held by justice David Prosser. He was challenged by Assistant AG Joanne Kloppenberg, who finished last night's vote count with a 204 vote lead out of 1.4Million. Hopefully she has a dedicated direct line to Senator Al Franken, for moral support at least. These two could still be pulling on the rope when Walker's recall signature collection gets under way (December, if I understand correctly).

Link (http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=14395922)

rdowns

Apr 6, 2011, 08:33 PM

mrkramer

Apr 8, 2011, 05:36 AM

Thomas Veil

Apr 8, 2011, 05:55 AM

...Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus said it was "human error" that resulted in more than 14,000 votes from her predominantly GOP county not being reported to The Associated Press on Tuesday. She said the most significant error occurred when she entered but did not save totals from the city of Brookfield, a suburb of Milwaukee.

"This is not a case of extra votes or extra ballots being found," Nickolaus said. "This is human error, which I apologize for."

Nickolaus worked for 13 years for a Republican caucus that was controlled by Prosser when he was Assembly speaker in 1995 and 1996. She was given immunity from prosecution in a 2002 criminal investigation into illegal activity by members of the caucus where she worked as a data analyst and computer specialist.

The corruption probe took down five legislative leaders, all of whom reached plea deals. Nickolaus resigned from her state job in 2002 just before launching her county clerk campaign.

Nickolaus also has been criticized by the Waukesha County Board for her handling of past elections and lack of oversight in her operations.

An audit of Nickolaus' handling of the 2010 election found she needed to take steps to improve security and backup procedures, including by not sharing passwords. The audit was requested after the county's director of administration said Nickolaus had been uncooperative with attempts to have county experts review her systems and confirm backups were in place.

The surprise discovery of votes that could give Prosser the win had liberal groups crying foul.

"There is a history of secrecy and partisanship surrounding the Waukesha County Clerk and there remain unanswered questions," Scot Ross, director of the liberal group One Wisconsin Now, said in a statement.

Rep. Peter Barca, Democratic Assembly minority leader, said the mistake raises significant suspicion that could warrant an investigation.Link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42483089/ns/us_news/)

Chronic incompetence or brazen corruption? Take your pick.

Wisconsin, you sure have some political housecleaning to do.

mrkramer

Apr 8, 2011, 06:00 AM

Link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42483089/ns/us_news/)

Chronic incompetence or brazen corruption? Take your pick.

Wisconsin, you sure have some political housecleaning to do.

That's the article, I linked to in my post above. I hope they investigate, and if it is incompetence she needs to be removed from office, and if it is corruption throw her in jail.

dsnort

Apr 8, 2011, 06:06 AM

Most likely incompetence, the new totals were verified or at least cross checked by an operative of the Democratic party.

Arran

May 26, 2011, 10:39 AM

leekohler

May 26, 2011, 10:43 AM

"(Reuters) - A Wisconsin judge on Thursday voided a controversial Republican-backed law restricting the collective bargaining rights of public sector unions."

Full story: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/26/us-unions-wisconsin-idUSTRE74P4PR20110526

So that whole, hugely expensive, debacle was for nothing because the Republican legislators decided it was more convenient for them to ignore the law. If I do that in my job, I get fired.

Yes! Take that, Teapublicans! You can't just do whatever you want!

Big win for the little guy. Ohio is next.

BTW- it looks like quite a few politicians will be getting fired in Wisconsin come June.

chrmjenkins

May 26, 2011, 10:53 AM

Finally, populist rage will accomplish something and people will realize they are actually accountable to their constituents.

Arran

May 26, 2011, 11:24 AM

BTW- it looks like quite a few politicians will be getting fired in Wisconsin come June.

Getting fired would be lenient for that gang of crooks. Public servants? Bah!

You can watch the illegal meeting at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfGo3YzfEbQ (The action starts around 2:15. It's a complete joke. Makes Wisconsin look like a banana republic).

leekohler

May 26, 2011, 12:15 PM

Getting fired would be lenient for that gang of crooks. Public servants? Bah!

You can watch the illegal meeting at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfGo3YzfEbQ (The action starts around 2:15. It's a complete joke. Makes Wisconsin look like a banana republic).

I've seen it before. Thanks for posting it again. What a sad moment that was for our country.

Thomas Veil

May 27, 2011, 06:24 AM

Glad to see this, although you know they're just going to try again. (Maybe we'll luck out and they'll be on summer recess until the date they're thrown out.)

The "repeal SB-5" referendum signature drive is going well here in Ohio. And yeah, I signed.

Got a little pissed off, though, when I went to renew my auto tags and encountered another referendum to "outlaw" health care reform. :rolleyes:

obeygiant

Jul 30, 2011, 10:56 PM

Now the bill is law, and we have some very early evidence of how it is working. And for one beleaguered Wisconsin school district, it's a godsend, not a disaster.

The Kaukauna School District, in the Fox River Valley of Wisconsin near Appleton, has about 4,200 students and about 400 employees. It has struggled in recent times and this year faced a deficit of $400,000. But after the law went into effect, at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday, school officials put in place new policies they estimate will turn that $400,000 deficit into a $1.5 million surplus. And it's all because of the very provisions that union leaders predicted would be disastrous.

In the past, teachers and other staff at Kaukauna were required to pay 10 percent of the cost of their health insurance coverage and none of their pension costs. Now, they'll pay 12.6 percent of the cost of their coverage (still well below rates in much of the private sector) and also contribute 5.8 percent of salary to their pensions. The changes will save the school board an estimated $1.2 million this year, according to board President Todd Arnoldussen.

Of course, Wisconsin unions had offered to make benefit concessions during the budget fight. Wouldn't Kaukauna's money problems have been solved if Walker had just accepted those concessions and not demanded cutbacks in collective bargaining powers?

"The monetary part of it is not the entire issue," says Arnoldussen, a political independent who won a spot on the board in a nonpartisan election. Indeed, some of the most important improvements in Kaukauna's outlook are because of the new limits on collective bargaining.

In the past, Kaukauna's agreement with the teachers union required the school district to purchase health insurance coverage from something called WEA Trust -- a company created by the Wisconsin teachers union. "It was in the collective bargaining agreement that we could only negotiate with them," says Arnoldussen. "Well, you know what happens when you can only negotiate with one vendor." This year, WEA Trust told Kaukauna that it would face a significant increase in premiums.

Now, the collective bargaining agreement is gone, and the school district is free to shop around for coverage. And all of a sudden, WEA Trust has changed its position. "With these changes, the schools could go out for bids, and lo and behold, WEA Trust said, 'We can match the lowest bid,'" says Republican state Rep. Jim Steineke, who represents the area and supports the Walker changes. At least for the moment, Kaukauna is staying with WEA Trust, but saving substantial amounts of money.link (http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/06/union-curbs-rescue-wisconsin-school-district#.TjTDiIWxApo.facebook)

Well....

Rodimus Prime

Jul 30, 2011, 11:06 PM

link (http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/06/union-curbs-rescue-wisconsin-school-district#.TjTDiIWxApo.facebook)

Well....

I have a feeling a lot of info was left out and a pension is not something you really should have to pay into. It is part of your pay check. It is crap like this that is insane and I still believe the law was pass illegally.

The recall is going to be ugly and the Governor knows he will be next.

hulugu

Jul 30, 2011, 11:53 PM

link (http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/06/union-curbs-rescue-wisconsin-school-district#.TjTDiIWxApo.facebook)

Well....

Thanks for the article. Interesting. The question remains how this will affect the larger school districts in Wisconsin, but the Kaukauana School District remains an interesting case study.

What will be more interesting, I think, is the long-term changes because of this bill. Will teacher salaries improve overtime or remain stagnant? Will healthcare and pensions remain or will the next governor or school board use those funds to cover other costs?

I think there may still be medium and long-term consequences, but it's entirely possible that this is a solution—one arrived at messily.

munkees

Jul 31, 2011, 12:04 AM

Thanks for the article. Interesting. The question remains how this will affect the larger school districts in Wisconsin, but the Kaukauana School District remains an interesting case study.

What will be more interesting, I think, is the long-term changes because of this bill. Will teacher salaries improve overtime or remain stagnant? Will healthcare and pensions remain or will the next governor or school board use those funds to cover other costs?

I think there may still be medium and long-term consequences, but it's entirely possible that this is a solution—one arrived at messily.

I hope you are correct, I feel for the loss of power, but I also am glad that power was taken from those unions. I see it as a lose lose win win. Unions lose, union works will lose, but it a win for the tax payer, and the local organization being held hostage by the unions. However, I think there needs to be some safe guards put back in place for the employees that are losing, to keep them from getting screwed even more.