Wisconsin Republicans Step Up Pressure on Dems Who Fled State - Polidicks

FOX Wisconsin Republicans Step Up Pressure on Dems Who Fled State [release]Wisconsin Republicans on Sunday upped the pressure on Democrats who fled to Illinois to return home and vote on an anti-union bill, with the governor calling them obstructionists and a GOP lawmaker threatening to convene without them. Gov. Scott Walker said the 14 minority Democrats who left Madison on Thursday were failing to do their jobs by "hiding out" in another state. And Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald said his chamber would meet Tuesday to act on non-spending bills and confirm some of the governor's appointees even if the Democrats don't show up -- a scenario that should outrage their constituents. Senate Democrats acknowledged that the 19 Republicans could pass any item that doesn't spend state money in their absence. The budget-repair bill they have been blocking requires a quorum of 20 senators to pass, while other measures require only a simple majority of the chamber's 33 members. Nonetheless, Democrats said they were standing firm in their opposition to the budget-repair bill, which would take away the right of most public employees to collectively bargain for their benefits and working conditions. Hundreds of protesters filled the Capitol for a sixth straight day, noisily calling on Walker to drop the plan they consider an assault on workers' rights. Protesters are pledging to remain in the Wisconsin Capitol while Senate Democrats are committed to staying out of state until a compromise can be found with Gov. Scott Walker on collective bargaining rights for public sector employees. Snow that turned to freezing rain Sunday considerably reduced the protest activity in the capital of Madison as hundreds gathered inside the Capitol building. That's significantly fewer than the estimated 68,000 who demonstrated on Saturday. But Phil Neuenfeldt, president of the state AFL-CIO, said another large protest was expected Monday, when many state workers are being furloughed to save money. Walker has been targeted by protesters for nearly a week for negotiating a bill now in the state Senate that would require workers to increase their contributions to pensions and health care coverage, would limit collective bargaining rules and tie raises to inflation. Senate Democrats fled Wisconsin to avoid voting on the legislation. The Republican governor said that while the state enjoys a lower-than-average unemployment rate -- about 7.5 percent compared to 9 percent nationally -- about 5,000-6,000 state workers and 5,000-6,000 local government workers will find their jobs on the chopping block as the state looks to close a $3.6 billion biennial budget gap. "I don't want a single person laid off in the public nor in the private sector and that's why this is a much better alternative than losing jobs," Walker told "Fox News Sunday." The state's nearly 300,000 public sector employees are being asked to give up benefits worth about $300 million over two years, or less than 10 percent of the deficit total. "If we're going to be in this together, (cut) our $3.6 billion budget deficit, it's going to take a whole lot more than just employee contributions when it comes to pensions and health care," Walker said. "But it's got to be a piece of the puzzle because as I saw at the local level, it's like a virus that eats up more and more of the budget if you don't get it under control." Protesters and Democratic lawmakers have likened Walker to a dictator, and demonstrators protesting the budget bill have waived signs comparing him to ousted Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak and Adolf Hitler. But some lawmakers are looking for a way out. Sen. Dale Schultz, R-Richland Center, has proposed suspending collective bargaining rights temporarily to get through the state's two-year budget, but then restoring them in 2013. That idea was endorsed Sunday by the Wisconsin State Journal, the state's second largest newspaper. Sen. Jon Erpenbach, D-Middleton, who was staying in a Chicago hotel, called Schultz brave for bucking Walker's administration with the proposal. Asked whether Democrats could accept Schultz's plan, Erpenbach said workers should not lose their rights since they have agreed to make concessions on contributions. He said Democratic senators aren't likely to come back to the state until the governor was willing to compromise but claimed Walker's administration has not returned their phone calls. "It's trying to slow this train down," Erpenbach said. "It's making sure that obviously everybody in the state knows what we're dealing with here. It's an opportunity for the governor to calm down, take a step back, realize what he's asking for with this legislation and hopefully come to his senses." Walker said he hoped "cooler minds will prevail" and lawmakers will come back to vote. "Those senate Democrats should realize, if you want to participate in a democracy, you got to be in the arena. And the arena is right here in Madison, Wisconsin. It's not hiding out in Rockford, Illinois, or Chicago, or anywhere else out there. Democracy means you show up and participate. And they failed to do that. They're walking out on their job," he said. On Sunday, Green Bay Packers cornerback Charles Woodson, a member of the NFL Players Association, became the latest player to back the public employees' cause. NFL owners and the players' union are locked in their own fight over a collective bargaining agreement. Along with Woodson, seven other current and former Packers have expressed support for the protesters. While union workers say they've been blindsided by the governor's plan, which he campaigned on through the midterm election, they also say Walker has unfairly targeted public employees while giving tax breaks to businesses worth about $117 million. "We expected concessions, but we just didn't think there was a mandate for this. We didn't see him getting rid of collective bargaining," said Gary Steffen, president of the Wisconsin Science Professionals, the union that represents state scientists, including crime lab analysts, biologists, chemists and foresters. Walker called that a "red herring," one he repeatedly witnessed while serving as the Milwaukee County executive before becoming governor. "If you want to have democracy, if you want to have the American way, which is allowing people to have a choice, that's exactly what we're allowing there. People see the value, they see the work, they can continue to vote to certify that union and they can continue to voluntarily have those union dues, and write the check out and give it to the union to make their case, but they shouldn't be forced to be a part of this if that's not what they want to do," he said. President Obama, whose group Organizing for America, has bused in some of the nearly 70,000 protesters Saturday, last week called the bill "an assault on unions." Walker said the president should stay focused on fixing the federal budget, which is $1.5 trillion in deficit this year. The president's plan, rolled out last week, proposes $1.65 trillion in deficits next year. Under the governor's proposal, unions still could represent workers, but they could not force employees to pay dues and would have to hold annual votes to stay organized. Only wages below the Consumer Price Index would be subject to collective bargaining, anything higher would have to be approved by referendum. [I] The Associated Press contributed to this report.[/I][/release] Source: [url]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/20/12g-state-workers-fired-budget-deal-wisconsin-governor-warns/#ixzz1EZ5eJTUu[/url] So, look like the cowards only stopped the budget related items. Look like they better get back now if they want any influence on the other items.

Let's not call them cowards.

Dammit Glaber, you were on such a good streak of not having Fox as the only or primary source.

He's brainwashed by Fox. Come on up to wisconsin, we'll kick the shit out of you kid.

[QUOTE=Redcow17;28181433]He's brainwashed by Fox. Come on up to wisconsin, we'll kick the shit out of you kid.[/QUOTE] he's 24 lol

[QUOTE=Zeke129;28181464]he's 24 lol[/QUOTE] And we'd still kick the shit out of him. He honestly has no valid backup on anything he's said in this thread or the other thread. Stupid FoxNews spewer.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;28181464]he's 24 lol[/QUOTE] I still call bullshit on this. He's only two years older than me, yet with half the common sense. :colbert:

[QUOTE=Dalndox;28181489]I still call bullshit on this. He's only two years older than me, yet with half the common sense. :colbert:[/QUOTE] So I heard Sarah Palin turned eight years old

[img]http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lgwglyelQm1qbzu7qo1_500.jpg[/img] Spotted at the Wisconsin protests

So Glaber, are filibustering senators cowards too? What about governors/senators who try to rush non-emergency legislation through as emergency legislation?

[QUOTE=Thy Reaper;28181740]So Glaber, are filibustering senators cowards too? What about governors/senators who try to rush non-emergency legislation through as emergency legislation?[/QUOTE] Noble cowardice.

do we need another thread for this oh wait we don't

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;28181824]do we need another thread for this oh wait we don't[/QUOTE] GlaberLogic: Fox news is blathering about something I better post it on Facepunch because I know those guys love it so much!

The only coward here is you glaber. Really, I am sincere. You're a coward. You can't possibly face up to the fact your beliefs violate others rights, trod on people, that your beliefs are all done before failures. Glaber, you know what man? you're the proof I need to know that right wing media is trash. [editline]20th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Thy Reaper;28181740]So Glaber, are filibustering senators cowards too? What about governors/senators who try to rush non-emergency legislation through as emergency legislation?[/QUOTE] well no, they're doing their jobs by simply being at work and not doing their jobs. BUT THEIR AT WORK

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28182806]The only coward here is you glaber. Really, I am sincere. You're a coward. You can't possibly face up to the fact your beliefs violate others rights, trod on people, that your beliefs are all done before failures. Glaber, you know what man? you're the proof I need to know that right wing media is trash. [editline]20th February 2011[/editline] well no, they're doing their jobs by simply being at work and not doing their jobs. BUT THEIR AT WORK[/QUOTE] Really, what qualifies as rights simply falls up to who is making the claim. Its honestly an opinion question. I disagree entirely with him, but the point still stands that rights are only such so long as someone with power says they are. It falls down to a personal, philosophical point of view. Its no more possible to call something as an actual, legitimate right than it is to say that something is legitimately Good or Evil. Its all opinion.

You guys do of course realize that the Dems aren't in some kind of heroic defense of truth and justice by fleeing their own state and expressing some kind leadership in doing so. In fact it's pretty pathetic and childish not to participate and vote. What is this, elementary school? Regardless of your political stance, elected officials take an oath to serve the people and fulfill their duties, so abandoning your post if you hold a place in office is, yes, against the law. You can't just up and leave if things aren't going your way, and it certainly doesn't solve anything. They have an obligation to participate in the Democratic system and this is just a slap in the face to those who elected them in the first place. How the fuck can anyone defend this reprehensible behavior in the system? Secondly, in the state of Wisconsin, it IS illegal for teachers to go on strike, including almost every other state for that matter. So they're in no position to make these ridiculous impositions on families and children who have gone nearly a full schoolweek without school thus far simply on the basis that this affects their vested interest in not doing their goddamn job anyway. I'm really surprised anyone with any knowledge about law or politics are actually defending these morons.

And as such, the fact stands that regardless of what you say you're both right and you're both wrong. Its just a matter of opinion. He believes that people are entitled to certain concepts as rights, and that others are not rights. Just in the same way that you believe people are entitled to different concepts as rights, and that others are not rights. He has just as much authority to say what you have said about him but back on you, and he is just as correct as you are.

Yeah and to add to the other point that Zeddy made is just because someone has a differing viewpoint doesn't make it immediately irrelevant or invalid simply because it doesn't conform to your way of thinking. Most of you have become so blinded by party lines that it's like you don't even see how ridiculous you sound in defense of your own views, to the point you somehow think your political affiliation is flawless and untainted and is the only correct viewpoint in any matter, ever. That's not educated, free-thinking or informed. That's just childish.

[QUOTE=ItchyBarracuda;28183000]You guys do of course realize that the Dems aren't in some kind of heroic defense of truth and justice by fleeing their own state and expressing some kind leadership in doing so. In fact it's pretty pathetic and childish not to participate and vote. What is this, elementary school?[/QUOTE] According to the article, the 19 Republicans need a quorum of 20 legislators to actually vote. However, they only need a simple majority of 17 to pass the law. The Democrats obviously have no power to prevent the bill from passing if at least 17 Republicans will vote for it. So, as the individuals they represent don't want their rights taken away, the Democrats have decided to not show up to vote, so the Republicans can't take any action. It's not about childish acts. This is a calculated decision to prevent what is seen as an injustice from occurring. It is also functionally equivalent to a filibuster, so I hope you hate those too.

The only thing I've posted about in this topic is my opinion on unions, can someone (not glaber) explain to me why the democrats couldn't vote against this instead of leaving? Do they not have enough power to block this from passing? [editline]21st February 2011[/editline] Well, that was fast. Answered before asked. Thanks. [editline]21st February 2011[/editline] Now that I have the full picture, I don't think what they're doing is wrong. Not morally wrong, anyway. I see it as a form of protest.

[QUOTE=Thy Reaper;28183124]According to the article, the 19 Republicans need a quorum of 20 legislators to actually vote. However, they only need a simple majority of 17 to pass the law. The Democrats obviously have no power to prevent the bill from passing if at least 17 Republicans will vote for it. So, as the individuals they represent don't want their rights taken away, the Democrats have decided to not show up to vote, so the Republicans can't take any action. It's not about childish acts. This is a calculated decision to prevent what is seen as an injustice from occurring. It is also functionally equivalent to a filibuster, so I hope you hate those too.[/QUOTE] So you're defending fleeing the state in a tantrum because they can't get their way? Isn't this politics as usual? How the fuck is it taking their rights away? The people voted the Reps into power, no one was complaining on this board before when the Dems had a majority in congress for instance. They abandoned their post, it's against the law. Would you feel the same way if Republicans did the same thing in a similar situation? Given this board's political lean I think everyone would have a field day with how it was unconstitutional, illegal etc etc

The democrats ran away because the republicans aren't going to do ANYTHING to even listen to them. They'll force the legislation through without a fight. Running away is the only thing you can do sometimes. Either way, the real problem is that the republicans are happy to ignore the process of democracy/republics and just do what the fuck they want to. [editline]20th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=ItchyBarracuda;28183157]So you're defending fleeing the state in a tantrum because they can't get their way? Isn't this politics as usual? How the fuck is it taking their rights away? The people voted the Reps into power, no one was complaining on this board before when the Dems had a majority in congress for instance. They abandoned their post, it's against the law. Would you feel the same way if Republicans did the same thing in a similar situation? Given this board's political lean I think everyone would have a field day with how it was unconstitutional, illegal etc etc[/QUOTE] Which assumes the people that voted them in wanted this. We have no idea if they did or didn't because it's being rushed through so fast to avoid any real discussion or conversation about it.

[QUOTE=ItchyBarracuda;28183157]So you're defending fleeing the state in a tantrum because they can't get their way? Isn't this politics as usual? How the fuck is it taking their rights away? The people voted the Reps into power, no one was complaining on this board before when the Dems had a majority in congress for instance. They abandoned their post, it's against the law. Would you feel the same way if Republicans did the same thing in a similar situation? Given this board's political lean I think everyone would have a field day with how it was unconstitutional, illegal etc etc[/QUOTE] For one in the federal congress you have the ballast of the Senate, and you don't have that in a state government. And if the Democrats were trying to force through legislation with no opposing voice whatsoever, i'd have a problem with it too.

You can't talk about how the republicans are in the right here, when they're not valuing the democratic process, just shoving their shit around. I didn't know union busting was defendable. [editline]20th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28183193]For one in the federal congress you have the ballast of the Senate, and you don't have that in a state government. And if the Democrats were trying to force through legislation with no opposing voice whatsoever, i'd have a problem with it too.[/QUOTE] It's funny how everyone always thinks that if you're on the dems side, you're ok with them being as bad as the republicans. I don't fucking think so.

[QUOTE=ItchyBarracuda;28183157] Would you feel the same way if Republicans did the same thing in a similar situation?[/QUOTE] If they were doing it to prevent something that is detrimental to the people they were elected to represent, absolutely not.

[QUOTE=ItchyBarracuda;28183157]So you're defending fleeing the state in a tantrum because they can't get their way? Isn't this politics as usual? How the fuck is it taking their rights away? The people voted the Reps into power, no one was complaining on this board before when the Dems had a majority in congress for instance. They abandoned their post, it's against the law. Would you feel the same way if Republicans did the same thing in a similar situation? Given this board's political lean I think everyone would have a field day with how it was unconstitutional, illegal etc etc[/QUOTE] If the majority of white people decided to strip all black people of their personhood, would that be acceptable simply because it's a majority voting for it? Would the protesting black people just be childish for trying to defend their rights? Obviously it's not so clear cut in this situation, but simply giving up your rights due to a technicality of law is insane. If Democrats decided that people's rights should be stripped, and Republicans had the opportunity to save those rights, I would see it as a necessity that they do that.

I'm still kind of at a loss with this whole argument about rushing things through and that it's now unfair because Republicans have a majority. Tell me, for instance, when the Healthcare bill was rushed through Congress and the Dems had the majority, and no one had read the thing in it's entirety, did you see that as a problem? Or did it not matter because of your political lean? The reason I ask is because this argument seems two-faced. The only reason anyone on this board is kicking up such a fuss about the whole deal is because it doesn't conform to their political affiliation, and the lot of you are merely protesting something you supported whole-heartedly when it benefited your political belief.

[QUOTE=ItchyBarracuda;28183222] Tell me, for instance, when the Healthcare bill was rushed through Congress and the Dems had the majority, and no one had read the thing in it's entirety, did you see that as a problem? Or did it not matter because of your political lean?[/QUOTE] Don't even try that argument, the democrats let the republicans gut the shit out of that bill. The thing that passed isn't even close to what they originally wanted or what the American people need. Are you a republican, itchy?

[QUOTE=ItchyBarracuda;28183222]I'm still kind of at a loss with this whole argument about rushing things through and that it's now unfair because Republicans have a majority. Tell me, for instance, when the Healthcare bill was rushed through Congress and the Dems had the majority, and no one had read the thing in it's entirety, did you see that as a problem? Or did it not matter because of your political lean? The reason I ask is because this argument seems two-faced. The only reason anyone on this board is kicking up such a fuss about the whole deal is because it doesn't conform to their political affiliation, and the lot of you are merely protesting something you supported whole-heartedly when it benefited your political belief.[/QUOTE] You'd have a point if you weren't totally wrong. The dems gave more than their fair chance and because of that, the bill just became useless and gutted.

[QUOTE=ItchyBarracuda;28183222]I'm still kind of at a loss with this whole argument about rushing things through and that it's now unfair because Republicans have a majority. Tell me, for instance, when the Healthcare bill was rushed through Congress and the Dems had the majority, and no one had read the thing in it's entirety, did you see that as a problem? Or did it not matter because of your political lean? The reason I ask is because this argument seems two-faced. The only reason anyone on this board is kicking up such a fuss about the whole deal is because it doesn't conform to their political affiliation, and the lot of you are merely protesting something you supported whole-heartedly when it benefited your political belief.[/QUOTE] Christ, I've heard this for a few years now, how was the healthcare bill rushed at all? How many months did you hear about amendments to it and futilely trying to appease the right? This thing is going though in a matter of days/weeks with no room for discussion or opposing views. That's way not how the healthcare bill went, it's not even close to a valid comparison.