No class in WI as teachers protest union-busting governor

[falloutboy14]

Just in casually glancing on this thread developing since the vote, not trying to troll...seriously trying to understand.

1. How is what happened here any different procedure wise (outside of stave vs national scale) with the healthcare vote in D.C.?
2. How many of these public union workers are going to stay employed now that the bill is passed? I had heard they all keep their jobs in exchange for losing collective bargaining until the budget is balanced. Why is this a bad thing? Id rather stay frozen at (random numbers) 30-40k for the next 3 years than risk being layed off in 6 months.

Regarding 1.
- The health care bill took place over the course of about 8 months, April to December as I recall. During that time, and correct me if I'm wrong, democrats were very open to compromise. Obviously there were facets they wanted in the bill, but the bill that they ended with was slimmer then where democrats started out, though the Wisconsin bill was narrowed down as well I guess. That said I don't remember any form of compromise coming from Walker. Granted Democrats left town pretty quickly, but I do remember democrats asking to meet to create a compromise, which Walker described as rediculous.
- One of the demorcats who was in wisconsin still said that when they were voting on the bill, the bill was still in the drafting process. It was not allowed to be debated, and repubs refused to disclose what was in & not in the bill. There were also other procedurial laws that were broken. I've heard that the attorney general is going to be looking into the whole thing, and there's an argument for it being removed.
- The whole process has been mis-leading. Remember back when we were talking about the budget crisis, and unions said they were willing to make significant compromises? Turns out that was all a ploy to damage the unions.
Regarding 2.

The measure forbids most government workers from collectively bargaining for wage increases beyond the rate of inflation unless approved by referendum. It also requires public workers to pay more toward their pensions and double their health insurance contribution, a combination equivalent to an 8 percent pay cut for the average worker.

Imagine working at your job for the next 30 years, and only getting cost of living wage increases. Keep in mind this is people with a bachelor's & for some a master's degree.

[archibaldcrane]

Just in casually glancing on this thread developing since the vote, not trying to troll...seriously trying to understand.

1. How is what happened here any different procedure wise (outside of stave vs national scale) with the healthcare vote in D.C.?
2. How many of these public union workers are going to stay employed now that the bill is passed? I had heard they all keep their jobs in exchange for losing collective bargaining until the budget is balanced. Why is this a bad thing? Id rather stay frozen at (random numbers) 30-40k for the next 3 years than risk being layed off in 6 months.
3. Also from what I understand, Walker campaigned on doing just what he did and still got elected. If thats true, why was this not seen coming?

re: 3: Walker had never mentioned dismantling unions in any way at any point in his campaign. He states he campaigned on this, and that is a complete lie.

re: 2: There are many, many other ways to make up the budgetary gap other than laying off thousands of state workers. Walker isn't doing this out of necessity, he's threatening layoffs only to get what he wants, which is the destruction of the unions. Also, the unions already conceded an 8% pay cut - that is the extent to which this situation affects the budget. Walker doesn't care about the budget, he's just using it as a tool to destroy his political opponents (the unions). Implying this is an "either/or" situation is false.

re: 1: The main difference would be that the health care bill was debated for nearly a full year and incorporated 200 republican-introduced amendments. Walker tried to pass this budget repair bill in 4 days with no negotiations and no amendments.

I hope that clears those things up.

[Zeb]

So which side of the aisle is Wisconsin's Supreme Court leaning? Wonder how quick they're gonna slap any shit down when it someone brings it to their table. Unless they're mostly republican with only a few years left on their term...

[archibaldcrane]

Regarding Wisconsin's debt "crisis":

in January 2011, Moody’s issued a national report that combined state debt and pension liabilities. Moody’s studies and rates debt issued by governments and corporations, and its ratings can affect how much those issuing bonds will have to pay in interest.

The report says that combining those obligations makes it easier to compare the fiscal health of states. Those with the highest ratings have the most serious debt burdens, which makes them less appealing to investors.

Wisconsin’s rating was 37th as measured by the amount of debt per capita, 38th (debt by GDP) 39 (by personal income) and 41 (by revenue).

Wisconsin is better-off, deficit-wise, than somewhere between 36 and 40 other states.

Read more about how Wisconsin isn't "broke": http://politifact.com/wisconsin/stat...sconsin-broke/

Also, Walker said he refused to raise taxes - that was something he did campaign on. Guess what's in his 2-year budget from last week?

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/loc...0aa178e6d.html

Low-income taxpayers in Wisconsin would lose hundreds of dollars in tax credits a year under Gov. Scott Walker’s proposed budget — at the same time the governor wants tax cuts for businesses and investors to boost jobs.
Walker proposes cutting about $16 million a year from the program, which in 2009 paid 273,939 low-income Wisconsin residents a total of $133 million.
Under Walker’s proposed biennial budget, a single mother with two children earning about minimum wage — $15,000 a year — would lose $302 of her $704 Earned Income Tax Credit next year, according to estimates from the nonpartisan Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance. A two-parent household with two children earning $30,000 a year would see its tax credit cut by $194 to $258, the alliance said.
“Gov. Walker’s raid on the Earned Income Tax Credit is the most egregious example of Walker’s war on Wisconsin families,” said Rep. Tamara Grigsby, D-Milwaukee. “At a time when Wisconsin is supposed to be putting people to work, Gov. Walker is actually stealing from working families in order to give big payouts to special interests.”
The program gives rebates to qualifying taxpayers earning $48,362 a year or less.

[archibaldcrane]

So which side of the aisle is Wisconsin's Supreme Court leaning? Wonder how quick they're gonna slap any shit down when it someone brings it to their table. Unless they're mostly republican with only a few years left on their term...

There's a new Supreme Court judge being elected on April 5th. If Kloppenberg beats out the incumbent Prosser, it's believed that the state Supreme Court will side against Walker's legislation.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepo...116288374.html

State Supreme Court Justice David Prosser will face Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg on the April 5 ballot, voters decided Tuesday.
Prosser and Kloppenburg bested Marla Stephens, director of the appellate division of the state public defender's office, and Madison attorney Joel Winnig in the primary.
The incumbent took a commanding lead early, garnering a majority of votes cast. Kloppenburg was comfortably in second place, with more votes than Stephens and Winnig combined.
Kloppenburg and Prosser will now square off in an election that will determine the court's direction. Since 2008, the court has been controlled 4-3 by a conservative majority that includes Prosser.
The winner will earn a 10-year term on the court.

[Meresgi]

Total noob question, how are the supreme court judges elected? By actual voting of the people?

[archibaldcrane]

In Wisconsin, I believe so yes.

If you meant Federal Supreme Court, they are nominated by the president and approved by congress.

[Altariel]

these people protesting are just fucking pawns in the game they don't even understand.

Strangely enough I didn't hear this objection from the right when they were busing people from all over the country to shout down Congressmen outside of their own district over health insurance reform.

[Acturus]

Buddy of mine lives outside of Madison, and has this as his Facebook profile picture:

Spoiler: show

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y27...-Wisconsin.jpg

I lol'd

[Talint]

Fascinating... Some of them seem more unruly than others.

[Melchiah]

Appears to be Wisconsin State Police removing those protesters. Aren't they one of the agencies who got to keep all their collective bargaining rights?

It's like the Governor isn't afraid of any sort of backlash, at all. I genuinely think they are surprised at how the people of Wisconsin have reacted.

[Olo401]

By the way, I'm fucking pissed at Obama for the White House response to this whole thing, especially since one of his campaign promises was to be "boots on the ground" in support of workers rights. He's pretty much ignored it except to say a few words during the first three days of the protests, and yesterday he couldn't even lend a word of support from his own mouth (he had his new press lapdog do it).

What's he worried about - security? Just make it a surprise visit like Bush used to do in the middle of the night flying into Baghdad.

[Senoska]

SHIT JUST GOT REAL:
http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/20...ted-officials/

Republicans in Michigan have come up with a revolutionary solution to the state’s growing budget crisis: claim the right to auction off entire municipal entities, like cities, counties, school districts and water systems.


In a new bill being pushed by Governor Rick Snyder (R), the governor, or a company hired by the governor, would have the power to declare municipal entities insolvent. Amid the fiscal emergency, the governor or the governor’s agent would then be empowered to appoint an emergency manager to oversee all financial matters.
Under language in the bill, that individual would be able to cancel any and all contracts — including collective bargaining rights for unions — and outright dis-incorporate whole cities, dismissing lawfully elected officials in the process.


In short, “they want a corporate monopoly state,” author Naomi Klein explained during an appearance on Wednesday’s Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC.
This video is from The Rachel Maddow Show, broadcast Wednesday, March 9, 2011.

Going to lansing this weekend. NO FUCKING WAY

[guartz]

My perception of guartz right now is of someone who is arguing about how a mosquito is such an evil to us all, meanwhile we're surrounded by lions, bears, and t-rexes.

This mosquito is the bias that permeates and allows the continuation of, the corrupt two party system. If you think I'm nuts, look no further then the replies in this forum. Not one person here managed to articulate the need for public sector collective bargaining rights, instead it is assumed that the collective bargaining rights for public employee's is essential and in some fantasy somehow represents freedom in general. So, as I said before, Walker has managed to do one thing, and one thing only, and he cut the funding apparatus of democratic party. This is very clear if you actually, you know, look at what the bill contains.

So starting in July, unions can only negotiate wage, so things like benefits and pensions are out. The practical effect of that, during the negotiations politicians have to come up with funding immediately instead of writing it off to the future. (Aka raise taxes) It will also require that union dues are voluntary, which seems like a strange thing to add in this bill, but actually makes sense when you consider that unions have been using their mandatory dues for underhanded political funding. Unions have to vote all annually in order to remain unionized. Also, "Require state workers to contribute 5.8 percent of their salary toward their pensions and pay 12.6 percent of their health insurance costs. Those changes would amount to an 8 percent pay cut on average, starting in April."

[guartz]

SHIT JUST GOT REAL:
http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/20...ted-officials/

wow, that's fucking evil. Here, is a worthy cause to protest. (cynic in me thinks that not a single fuck is gonna be given)

[Plow]

the fact that the state has no clear profit/loss margin was never taken into consideration.

it's statements like these that do 3 things:

make you look retarded

make your philosophy look retarded

make you believe your retarded philosophy

[Plow]

This mosquito is the bias that permeates and allows the continuation of, the corrupt two party system. If you think I'm nuts, look no further then the replies in this forum. Not one person here managed to articulate the need for public sector collective bargaining rights, instead it is assumed that the collective bargaining rights for public employee's is essential and in some fantasy somehow represents freedom in general. So, as I said before, Walker has managed to do one thing, and one thing only, and he cut the funding apparatus of democratic party. This is very clear if you actually, you know, look at what the bill contains.

It has been articulated. It's really quite simple. Hoping you win your vote, then hoping the representative actually gives a shit, then hoping the changes you propose get passed, is not an effective or reasonable way to expect people to negotiate *exclusively*.

You're trying to argue that working in the public sector should eliminate your right to negotiate for your job because you can just let the politicians do it.

So starting in July, unions can only negotiate wage, so things like benefits and pensions are out. The practical effect of that, during the negotiations politicians have to come up with funding immediately instead of writing it off to the future. (Aka raise taxes) It will also require that union dues are voluntary, which seems like a strange thing to add in this bill, but actually makes sense when you consider that unions have been using their mandatory dues for underhanded political funding. Unions have to vote all annually in order to remain unionized. Also, "Require state workers to contribute 5.8 percent of their salary toward their pensions and pay 12.6 percent of their health insurance costs. Those changes would amount to an 8 percent pay cut on average, starting in April."

They can't negotiate actual wages above cost of living...

It would be one thing if they simply stripped the ability to negotiate for benefits, and they could still eventually get their pay raised to restore their own savings etc. when the manufactured "crisis" is over. That's not the case. This is stripping the ability to negotiate for benefits, and straight up capping their pay permanently.

[Kuya]

This mosquito is the bias that permeates and allows the continuation of, the corrupt two party system. If you think I'm nuts, look no further then the replies in this forum. Not one person here managed to articulate the need for public sector collective bargaining rights, instead it is assumed that the collective bargaining rights for public employee's is essential and in some fantasy somehow represents freedom in general. So, as I said before, Walker has managed to do one thing, and one thing only, and he cut the funding apparatus of democratic party. This is very clear if you actually, you know, look at what the bill contains.

So starting in July, unions can only negotiate wage, so things like benefits and pensions are out. The practical effect of that, during the negotiations politicians have to come up with funding immediately instead of writing it off to the future. (Aka raise taxes) It will also require that union dues are voluntary, which seems like a strange thing to add in this bill, but actually makes sense when you consider that unions have been using their mandatory dues for underhanded political funding. Unions have to vote all annually in order to remain unionized. Also, "Require state workers to contribute 5.8 percent of their salary toward their pensions and pay 12.6 percent of their health insurance costs. Those changes would amount to an 8 percent pay cut on average, starting in April."

Okay, so this mosquitoe, is a really really bad mosquito, meanwhile, we're surrounded by lions, bears, and t-rexes, and i think i saw a Reaper too.

[Plow]

deer tick flu?

[guartz]

It has been articulated. It's really quite simple. Hoping you win your vote, then hoping the representative actually gives a shit, then hoping the changes you propose get passed, is not an effective or reasonable way to expect people to negotiate *exclusively*.
You're trying to argue that working in the public sector should eliminate your right to negotiate for your job because you can just let the politicians do it.

*facepalm*
At least like, you know, fuck, Google the topic first.

They can't negotiate actual wages above cost of living...

It would be one thing if they simply stripped the ability to negotiate for benefits, and they could still eventually get their pay raised to restore their own savings etc. when the manufactured "crisis" is over. That's not the case. This is stripping the ability to negotiate for benefits, and straight up capping their pay permanently.

O'RELLY? R U SPECIAL SURE? I THOUGHT THE BILL SET RAISES TO RATE OF INFLATION. BUT I R DUB. ACTUALLY WAGES WILL BE AT COST OF LIVING!





rofl plow, you must be trollin

wages at cost of living? Wtf, do they check your bills and pay like, that exact amount? wtf plow. lol