The Wisconsin Governor does not like unions.

It still needs to pass the Senate, and it's the Wisconsin Senators who have dashed to Illinois.

Long ways to go on this bill.

Don't they have filibuster in their Assembly? Why did the Dems give up?

nm. I said I was done yesterday.

Dirt that is the odd things, 4 Republicans switched sides. And 28 assembly people abstained from voting.

MattDaddy wrote:
KingGorilla wrote:

The measure passed the Assembly in the wee morning hours, for those not checking CNN. That is what our Fore Fathers fought for, secret, late night democracy.

I told myself yesterday that I was done posting in this thread, but this statement is a huge misrepresentation of what happened.

The dems in the assembly have been debating ths issue by way of amendments for 61 hours, more than has even been allowed since anyone can remember. Once they were done, the vote was taken. The dems were present (throwing tantrums, btw) and knew this was coming. The reason it was done at 1am is because that was when the democrats were finally done (or finally cut off). 61 hours is way more than enough time to make your case.

This was not some sneak out in the middle of the night behind their backs vote.

I've bolded the part I'm responding to. That's not quite the case (though at least this time they didn't try to sneak the vote through before Democrats were present).

Associated Press[/url]]Debate had gone on for 60 hours and 15 Democrats were still waiting to speak when the vote started around 1 a.m. Friday. Speaker Pro Tem Bill Kramer, R-Waukesha, opened the roll and closed it within seconds.
Democrats looked around, bewildered. Only 13 of the 38 Democratic members managed to vote in time.

15 members still on the docket to speak, the roll open and closed for a handful of seconds, without any warning. Surely you would agree this is hardly a shining example of the democratic process?

[Edit: I see MattDaddy removed his post. I'm leaving my quote of it intact, with a plea for both sides to continue civil discourse and avoid any ad hominems. There should always be room for reasonable, passionate disagreement.]

Well, nevermind. The link seems to be broken.

Well, since Dimmer manged to quote me before I backed out, I'll follow up on the response.

No, that is not the way I would like to see a vote taken. After 61 hours, they should've handled the call for a vote better than they did.

That said, after 61 hours, enough is enough. One guy interviewed said they had 15 people to speak, and then said maybe more. They had no intention of voting for it, and were just trying to drag out the process.

It was going to pass the assembly, the only question was when. From the video I saw, the dems were present in the room when the call for a vote was made. A lot of them chose to scream and yell and never voted. For the record, 4 Republicans and a number of Democrats voted against it, so there was time to cast a "no" vote

*sigh*

It's like you've never seen what happens in legislatures or Congress and assumes this is only how Democrats behave. Ridiculous.

MattDaddy wrote:

From the video I saw, the dems were present in the room when the call for a vote was made. A lot of them chose to scream and yell and never voted. For the record, 4 Republicans and a number of Democrats voted against it, so there was time to cast a "no" vote.

I'm sorry, were they passing state legislature or playing God of War? In one of those quick reflexes and stimuli response are necessary, in the other that's generally not how things are done.

In fact, if all of the Democrats had plenty of time to think through the results of their actions the ones that did respond with a kneejerk "No" probably would not have. Their participation in that travesty can now be used as a blessing for the process, albeit in a round about way exactly like you did.

I'm waiting for them to take sticks to each other.

Never mind it's just not worth it

Thanks for taking the time to respond, MattDaddy. I'm glad we can agree that the way Assembly Republicans handled that vote was inappropriate.

With the vote open for a handful of seconds (without any warning), most Democrats weren't able to vote. The shouting afterwards was from their understandable anger about how this vote was carried out. I'm grateful to the four Republican Assembly members who had the guts to vote against the bill, but the overall behavior by the Republicans in our state Assembly has been shameful (calling a meeting to order early solely in an attempt to pass a vote before any Democrats arrived, then doing an ambush vote with people still on the docket to speak).

Here's the thing: the rules and procedures in our legislative process are in place, in no small measure, to ensure the voice of the minority has a chance to be heard. The small sacrifice of allowing dissent time to occur is a pittance compared to the protection those procedures afford when it's your turn to be in the minority. When, in the fullness of time, your party is not the majority, will you be so quick to act as an apologist for legislation which is contrary to your ideals being forced through?

Well-reasoned dissent is at the core of what makes a democracy strong. It's far too easy to fall prey to simplistic answers and lazy reasoning when those voices are absent (or silenced). So far, the Republicans in our state legislature have shown themselves willing to act in bad faith in the pursuance of their political agenda. Is it any wonder that our state senators felt their only recourse to allow time for debate was to leave the state?

The Assembly could have passed the bill (the Republicans should have the votes). By following the parliamentary rules and conventions of the Assembly they could have even made its passage a non-issue. Instead they chose a path bound to provoke controversy, and to make it much harder for any common ground to be found on the difficult decisions we have ahead. How does this help the people of Wisconsin they've been elected to serve?

Michael wrote:

Never mind it's just not worth it

Don't leave us hanging. Post what you want.

goman wrote:
Michael wrote:

Never mind it's just not worth it

Don't leave us hanging. Post what you want.

Immediately after I wrote my post I realized the futility of this entire discussion. In this topic especially there are two distinct mindsets, and each side can keep pointing out how ridiculous the other is acting until the cows come home. There's plenty of stupid sh*t and hypocrisy going on with both side. I'm just tired of it. If this forum had a delete function I would have used it.

Michael wrote:

Immediately after I wrote my post I realized the futility of this entire discussion. In this topic especially there are two distinct mindsets, and each side can keep pointing out how ridiculous the other is acting until the cows come home. There's plenty of stupid sh*t and hypocrisy going on with both side. I'm just tired of it. If this forum had a delete function I would have used it.

For what it's worth, I'd be interested in hearing your reasonable critique of how both sides have behaved through this process to date.

Koch Industry Gasoline:
Chevron
Union
Union 76
Conoco

Koch Industry/Georgia-Pacific Products:
Angel Soft toilet paper
Brawny paper towels
Dixie plates, bowls, napkins and cups
Mardi Gras napkins and towels
Quilted Northern toilet paper
Soft ‘n Gentle toilet paper
Sparkle napkins
Vanity fair napkins
Zee napkins

Thank you for that. I did not realize that I was a passive supporter of the Koch's politics by purchasing some of their products. I will not continue this practice.

Michael wrote:
goman wrote:
Michael wrote:

Never mind it's just not worth it

Don't leave us hanging. Post what you want.

Immediately after I wrote my post I realized the futility of this entire discussion. In this topic especially there are two distinct mindsets, and each side can keep pointing out how ridiculous the other is acting until the cows come home. There's plenty of stupid sh*t and hypocrisy going on with both side. I'm just tired of it. If this forum had a delete function I would have used it.

The futility is not having a discussion. The point is not to convince the other side, but to find common ground and work from there.

Dimmerswitch wrote:

Thanks for taking the time to respond, MattDaddy. I'm glad we can agree that the way Assembly Republicans handled that vote was inappropriate.

With the vote open for a handful of seconds (without any warning), most Democrats weren't able to vote. The shouting afterwards was from their understandable anger about how this vote was carried out. I'm grateful to the four Republican Assembly members who had the guts to vote against the bill, but the overall behavior by the Republicans in our state Assembly has been shameful (calling a meeting to order early solely in an attempt to pass a vote before any Democrats arrived, then doing an ambush vote with people still on the docket to speak).

Here's the thing: the rules and procedures in our legislative process are in place, in no small measure, to ensure the voice of the minority has a chance to be heard. The small sacrifice of allowing dissent time to occur is a pittance compared to the protection those procedures afford when it's your turn to be in the minority. When, in the fullness of time, your party is not the majority, will you be so quick to act as an apologist for legislation which is contrary to your ideals being forced through?

Well-reasoned dissent is at the core of what makes a democracy strong. It's far too easy to fall prey to simplistic answers and lazy reasoning when those voices are absent (or silenced). So far, the Republicans in our state legislature have shown themselves willing to act in bad faith in the pursuance of their political agenda. Is it any wonder that our state senators felt their only recourse to allow time for debate was to leave the state?

The Assembly could have passed the bill (the Republicans should have the votes). By following the parliamentary rules and conventions of the Assembly they could have even made its passage a non-issue. Instead they chose a path bound to provoke controversy, and to make it much harder for any common ground to be found on the difficult decisions we have ahead. How does this help the people of Wisconsin they've been elected to serve?

This is a great and well written post. I agree with the message but feel it necessary to point out that when Democrats had majority in 2009 they passed a billion dollar budget repair bill in 24 hours with no public hearing, pretty in the same manner that we saw last week. That does not excuse the Republican action this year, but rather highlights that there is plenty of asshattery to go around.

Michael wrote:

I agree with the message but feel it necessary to point out that when Democrats had majority in 2009 they passed a billion dollar budget repair bill in 24 hours with no public hearing, pretty in the same manner that we saw last week. That does not excuse the Republican action this year, but rather highlights that there is plenty of asshattery to go around.

I think that a partisan vote which occurred with warning and allowed enough time for all votes to be cast, is qualitatively different than a vote which happened with no warning and had the floor open for a handful of seconds while people were on the docket to speak. (Rephrased: the difference between those approaches is in kind, not in degree).

That said, I'm not a fan of how the budget repair bill in 2009 was passed either. I agree that it's important for people to be able to have input on the legislative process, regardless of which party is in power.

Michael wrote:

This is a great and well written post. I agree with the message but feel it necessary to point out that when Democrats had majority in 2009 they passed a billion dollar budget repair bill in 24 hours with no public hearing, pretty in the same manner that we saw last week. That does not excuse the Republican action this year, but rather highlights that there is plenty of asshattery to go around.

Agreed here. Cramming bills through seems to be par for the 21st century thus far.

I think that is, in part, due to the absolute refusal to compromise that can be found on all sides of the aisle.

goman wrote:

The futility is not having a discussion. The point is not to convince the other side, but to find common ground and work from there.

And yet your posts have consisted of "The GOP are greedy bastards" and a list of Koch Industries ties for boycotting.

MattDaddy wrote:
goman wrote:

The futility is not having a discussion. The point is not to convince the other side, but to find common ground and work from there.

And yet your posts have consisted of "The GOP are greedy bastards" and a list of Koch Industries ties for boycotting.

I'd like to beg us all to keep civility in mind, since I think there's a good conversation available to have here.

Not looking to act as a moderator, but I'd be bummed if we managed to either turn this into an echo chamber through making opposing viewpoints unwelcome or simply devolve to the point where Certis ends up locking the thread.

As I've stated before, I consider myself a democrat and even I'm not thrilled with how the democratic senators responded to this. I understand the logic behind it but I don't agree with it. If I'm going to complain about Republicans using procedure to block "the will of the people" then I have to be honest and complain about the Dems when they do it.

The union busting bill certainly doesn't appear to be supported by the majority of the people of Wisconsin, though I'm sure this could be debated, but it is supported by the majority of their elected officials.

This is how a republic works. The people vote representatives in office to cast votes for them. The side with the most votes wins. If the Republican representatives go off the tracks and start passing legislation that the people truly hate then the people can vote them out of office on the next go around and hopefully put new people in to change the laws. Let the people protest, hold rallies, march, write their representatives, etc. But don't hold up every single piece of legislation in the state simply to delay one item that you know, without a shadow of a doubt, is going to pass. It's just a show at this point. Show your position by voting No, not by leaving the state.

Very well put, Kehama.

Kehama wrote:

As I've stated before, I consider myself a democrat and even I'm not thrilled with how the democratic senators responded to this. I understand the logic behind it but I don't agree with it. If I'm going to complain about Republicans using procedure to block "the will of the people" then I have to be honest and complain about the Dems when they do it.

The union busting bill certainly doesn't appear to be supported by the majority of the people of Wisconsin, though I'm sure this could be debated, but it is supported by the majority of their elected officials.

This is how a republic works. The people vote representatives in office to cast votes for them. The side with the most votes wins. If the Republican representatives go off the tracks and start passing legislation that the people truly hate then the people can vote them out of office on the next go around and hopefully put new people in to change the laws. Let the people protest, hold rallies, march, write their representatives, etc. But don't hold up every single piece of legislation in the state simply to delay one item that you know, without a shadow of a doubt, is going to pass. It's just a show at this point. Show your position by voting No, not by leaving the state.

Very principled view. But I disagree. The minority has just as firm of a mandate as the majority to do what they feel is in the interest of their constituants. A majority doesn't and shouldn't mean that the winning party completely owns government. I'm not a fan of the filibuster, but sometimes, you have to whatever it takes to use the rules in place to force the other side to compromise. Not on everything, but I think this is worth fighting for; Walker got what he wanted to help balance WI's budget, what he's doing now is nothing short of a power grab.

I get more and more fed up with the hypocrisy and the BS arms race with each step.
Short list:
Lame duck democrats should not "force" legislation through before elected republicans take office.
People have the right to carry assault rifles at rallies, teachers should be shot for peaceful protests.
Republicans should not filibuster or "spoil" legislation for the sake of being contrary.
Democrats are being bullies with a super majority.
Why can't democrats pass legislation with a majority?
We need to have contrary arguments in congress.
Let's restructure committees and remove contrarians.

We live in a time where elected officials can call the president a baby killer. Where shooting at the windows of a congressperson is a legitimate sign of distaste. We would prefer wasteful spending by the private sector to conservative public options. Go to your Fox news of MSN fantasy world, but for f*ck sake someone needs to look at the very real problems here on terra firma; rather than keeping down the same track to hell.

MattDaddy wrote:
goman wrote:

The futility is not having a discussion. The point is not to convince the other side, but to find common ground and work from there.

And yet your posts have consisted of "The GOP are greedy bastards" and a list of Koch Industries ties for boycotting.

If that is all I posted than you have a point but it is not. I have posted about that your notion of shared sacrifice is bunk. You chose to ignore that or even put me into place.

You do realize that corporations are making record profits now. How are they sacrificing?

KingGorilla wrote:

I get more and more fed up with the hypocrisy and the BS arms race with each step.

I think Tom Clancy had it right in one of his books. After a fairly cataclysmic event, while special elections were being held to determine an entirely new Congress after the death of most of its sitting members, the new president essentially said to the public: Please, send me actual, real people for this congress, and not career politicians. People who make a living doing something other than just trying to get re-elected, people who aren't beholden to special interests on one side or another.

Every time I hear politicians speaking out about how term limits are bad because we need experienced people to understand how the system works, I think to myself that the problem is not that the people are too inexperienced, but that the system is too complicated by all the lobbying and grandstanding and partisanship.

The Republicans in the Wisconsin Senate are on the verge of stripping certain unions of their collective bargaining rights, despite the fact that the unions were willing to make voluntary concessions to the same degree. I wonder how many of those Republicans are voting that way because they feel this is the right thing to do and don't think the unions deserve that degree of power, how many of them are voting that way because they personally or politically have a grudge against the unions and want to break them, and how many of them are voting that way simply because that is what their party and their governor want them to do.

And yes, I am aware that this situation is not restricted to Republicans alone. I think voting for a bill that you don't believe is in the best interests of the people is a violation of the oaths these people take when they take office, and the same goes for voting against a bill that you feel is a good one, no matter what party you belong to and no matter who pays the bills for your campaign and the campaigns of those running against you.

In an attempt to pre-empt this being used as justification for WI GOP behavior I've cited as shameful upthread: Governor Walker was asked to leave a Madison restaurant last night, after his presence caused a disruption (the accounts I've seen are that the patrons all began booing him loudly).

While I understand the anger and frustration that were being vented, I think that's a terrible way to behave towards an elected official, and that it reflects poorly on our side. In my view, the protests have been successful in no small part due to a dedicated refusal to give the right wing the talking points they're looking for: "protestors are primarily from out of state" (most are from the madison area) / "protestors are threatening and violent" (have dedicated peace marshals as a resource, and also handed out de-escalation strategies to the crowd) / "protestors are trashing the capitol" (volunteers have been cleaning the floors and gathering up trash and recycling for disposal). To the degree that the protests stoop to the behavior Fox News is dying to ascribe to us, they will fail. I feel that mostly, we've succeeded on that front - which is why the report that our Governor was unable to eat at the place of his choosing is so personally disappointing.

Do you guys think that the Democrats have missed their optimal window of opportunity?

I feel like the longer this drags the more damage it does for the cause. The general public is a fickle beast; while I'm sure those close to the issue will stay dedicated I feel like as this saga continues the public will start to feel the "issue fatigue". That is, they just get so tired of hearing about it that they want it done and over, regardless of the outcome. I can only offer anecdotal evidence, but public opinion is waning as far as supporting the teacher's union.

Every day the teachers are absent from school is another day that parents have to find and pay for day care, burn a vacation day, or otherwise reschedule their lives. Right, wrong, or indifferent, if that keeps up the union will quickly lose the support they thought they were accruing by the delaying the vote.

Agree/disagree?