Wisconsin Takes A Stand For Fiscal Sanity

[giblets]

Having a minority party stall legislation in hope that a few changes will be made isn't any more undemocratic than having courts strike it down. A system without checks on what the majority can do would be seriously broken.

[Wezil]

Fleeing the jurisdiction is not "making compromises".

[Wezil]

I truly hope to see this issue with parties reversed in the future. Watching Democratic heads explode about the unfairness of it all would be hilarious.

[DaShi]

I truly hope to see this issue with parties reversed in the future. Watching Democratic heads explode about the unfairness of it all would be hilarious.

Just wait until Obama vetoes the Republican budget.

Or just go back to December 2010 when the Republicans held the middle class at gunpoint until Obama gave into their demands.

[Wezil]

The perfect example would be the R' minority fleeing the State when a D' majority wanted to provide pay raises.

That would be so cool.

[DaShi]

I would love to see that.

[DinoDoc]

I'm not familiar with Wis. law. Would it be possible for the Wis. GOP to pass alternative certification for new teachers (to replace a few of the striking ones) and an expansion of school choice while the Dems have fled the field? Or would that require a quorum?

[giblets]

Fleeing the jurisdiction is not "making compromises".

They've offered a compromise by agreeing to pay cuts but wanting unions to keep their bargaining rights. If they didn't leave the state then the Republicans could pass whatever legislation they wanted or, in other words, no compromises.

[Dinner]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12555893

Read this BBC article. The union has agreed to all cuts (which amount to an 8% reduction in take home pay) but they're holding out for their right to collectively bargain. The proposed bill would make it illegal for unions to bargain over benefits and working conditions plus it would make it illegal for employers to automatically deduct union dues even if the person wants them to do that. Lastly, the bill would require a vote every year to recertify the union and if 50% plus one vote not to certify then the union would be forced to disband at that work place. In short, it's a comprehensive, all around, attack on workers' right to unionize attacking the union's ability to raise money, to bargain for better benefits and working conditions, and even just to continue to exist.

[Dinner]

I'm not familiar with Wis. law. Would it be possible for the Wis. GOP to pass alternative certification for new teachers (to replace a few of the striking ones) and an expansion of school choice while the Dems have fled the field? Or would that require a quorum?

The state legislature cannot hold any votes until there are enough members present to fill the quorum. Personally, I don't see any difference between a filibuster which prevents the legislature from doing it's job or refusing to fill a quorum which does the same thing.

[giblets]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12555893

Read this BBC article. The union has agreed to all cuts (which amount to an 8% reduction in take home pay) but they're holding out for their right to collectively bargain. The proposed bill would make it illegal for unions to bargain over benefits and working conditions plus it would make it illegal for employers to automatically deduct union dues even if the person wants them to do that. Lastly, the bill would require a vote every year to recertify the union and if 50% plus one vote not to certify then the union would be forced to disband at that work place. In short, it's a comprehensive, all around, attack on workers' right to unionize attacking the union's ability to raise money, to bargain for better benefits and working conditions, and even just to continue to exist.

I didn't see any of that in their campaign platform.

[Dinner]

It's obvious why Republicans are doing this now; it's just classic shock doctrine. WI's financial troubles are pretty trivial and if all state workers took a 3% pay cut then the budget would be balanced or alternatively if each adult paid a grand total of $32 per year more then the budget would also be balanced. The governor though wanted to attack just one union, the union which didn't support him, while the police officers' union, which is even bigger and costs the state government more money then the teachers' union, doesn't have to take a single cut because the police union supported him in the last election. This is just political hackery at its worst and instead of honestly trying to balance the budget Republicans are simply attempting to use the power of their office to attack the political base of the other party.

[DinoDoc]

The state legislature cannot hold any votes until there are enough members present to fill the quorum.

Link? I was under the impression that was for budgetary matters.

[rah]

Did the union agree to all the cuts before or after this mess started? Just curious.

[Wezil]

I didn't see any of that in their campaign platform.

s.16 of the link you provided (iirc).