Scott Walker WI governor vs the Packers & teachers (2 Viewers)

[The Kerminator]

Sale of power plants removed from budget bill

New budget-fix bill is silent on sale of energy plants

By Thomas Content of the Journal Sentinel

March 30, 2011 6:39 p.m. |(1) Comments

The latest version of the Walker administration's proposed budget repair bill that, released Wednesday, dropped a proposal to sell off or outsource the operation of energy plants that provide heating and cooling to state facilities.

The planned sale of the energy plants, which Gov. Scott Walker sought earlier as part of the public-sector workers bargaining and budget-repair bill, drew fire from opponents because of a no-bid clause that allowed the state Secretary of Administration to sell the facilities without competitive bidding.

Opponents had expected the proposal to resurface, either in the new version of the budget repair bill -- or during the Joint Finance committee's deliberations on the 2011-'13 budget. One factor driving interest in selling the plants is environmental liability associated with burning coal and air pollution violations that have been alleged at some of the plants. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is looking into the state's power plant fleet.

The no-bid controversy involving up to 37 heating and cooling plants was a side issue during the Madison controversy over collective bargaining rights for public-sector employees.

How will Walker pay off his buddies the Koch brothers now?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

And this is the reason that union busting is so popular in the us right now...

Because a group of like-minded people decide to not make use of bushiness based upon their practices. Lots of like-minded people decided not to buy Citgo gas because of its Hugo Chavez connection, which is pretty damn reasonable and perfectly acceptable.

It's not based upon their practices. It's based upon forcing the businesses to support the union.

They are NOT forcing anyone to do anything.They are choosing to shop at "pro-union" stores. That's their choice. Just as it would be your choice to shop at only "non-union" stores.That's not blackmail or thug or strong-arm. That's the CUSTOMER making a decision.

 

[sho nuff]

And this is the reason that union busting is so popular in the us right now...

Because a group of like-minded people decide to not make use of bushiness based upon their practices. Lots of like-minded people decided not to buy Citgo gas because of its Hugo Chavez connection, which is pretty damn reasonable and perfectly acceptable.

It's not based upon their practices. It's based upon forcing the businesses to support the union.

They are NOT forcing anyone to do anything.They are choosing to shop at "pro-union" stores. That's their choice. Just as it would be your choice to shop at only "non-union" stores.That's not blackmail or thug or strong-arm. That's the CUSTOMER making a decision.

Except they are doing the blackmail of "support us with this sign or else".

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Except they are doing the blackmail of "support us with this sign or else".

Or else what? Or else we wont shop at your stores.

That's up to the customer. Just like not buying "made in china" items.

That's how you show your support (or non support), and its not blackmail or strong-arm.

 

[sho nuff]

Except they are doing the blackmail of "support us with this sign or else".

Or else what? Or else we wont shop at your stores.

That's up to the customer. Just like not buying "made in china" items.

That's how you show your support (or non support), and its not blackmail or strong-arm.

That you can't see the difference in "we will support X" and "support us or we will cost you money" is interesting.Not sure you want to see it and what it looks like.

 

[bakes]

Except they are doing the blackmail of "support us with this sign or else".

Or else what? Or else we wont shop at your stores.

That's up to the customer. Just like not buying "made in china" items.

That's how you show your support (or non support), and its not blackmail or strong-arm.

As has been stated before, people have the right to boycott stores and vote with their dollars. If a business has practices that you find unacceptable, it's your right as a consumer to not shop there and tell others, including the business owner, why you won't shop there. Just as it's the business owner's right to decide whether he wants to support your cause or not, change his practices or not, or simply tell you to go get bent and take your business elsewhere.

None of the above are blackmail and calling it blackmail is ridiculous and alarmist.

 

[bakes]

Except they are doing the blackmail of "support us with this sign or else".

Or else what? Or else we wont shop at your stores.

That's up to the customer. Just like not buying "made in china" items.

That's how you show your support (or non support), and its not blackmail or strong-arm.

That you can't see the difference in "we will support X" and "support us or we will cost you money" is interesting.Not sure you want to see it and what it looks like.

"Support us or we'll shop elsewhere" is somehow blackmail??? No. "Give us money or we'll shop elsewhere" is extortion. Give us money or we'll air your dirty laundry is blackmail. Nowhere are they asking for payouts.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Except they are doing the blackmail of "support us with this sign or else".

Or else what? Or else we wont shop at your stores.

That's up to the customer. Just like not buying "made in china" items.

That's how you show your support (or non support), and its not blackmail or strong-arm.

That you can't see the difference in "we will support X" and "support us or we will cost you money" is interesting.Not sure you want to see it and what it looks like.

They can choose to not shop anywhere, for any reason. (You aren't arguing this are you?)Because they make it clear by stating that business without a "pro-union" placard won't be utilized is not blackmail. Its tactical, its influential, its also honest about how they intend on making their personal business decisions.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Except they are doing the blackmail of "support us with this sign or else".

Or else what? Or else we wont shop at your stores.

That's up to the customer. Just like not buying "made in china" items.

That's how you show your support (or non support), and its not blackmail or strong-arm.

That you can't see the difference in "we will support X" and "support us or we will cost you money" is interesting.Not sure you want to see it and what it looks like.

"Support us or we'll shop elsewhere" is somehow blackmail??? No. "Give us money or we'll shop elsewhere" is extortion. Give us money or we'll air your dirty laundry is blackmail. Nowhere are they asking for payouts.

^^^Look at that. Someone actually understands "blackmail", "extortion" and probably "strong-arming".

 

[sho nuff]

Except they are doing the blackmail of "support us with this sign or else".

Or else what? Or else we wont shop at your stores.

That's up to the customer. Just like not buying "made in china" items.

That's how you show your support (or non support), and its not blackmail or strong-arm.

That you can't see the difference in "we will support X" and "support us or we will cost you money" is interesting.Not sure you want to see it and what it looks like.

"Support us or we'll shop elsewhere" is somehow blackmail??? No. "Give us money or we'll shop elsewhere" is extortion. Give us money or we'll air your dirty laundry is blackmail. Nowhere are they asking for payouts.

Giving the or else is most certainly a form of blackmail.

 

[sho nuff]

Except they are doing the blackmail of "support us with this sign or else".

Or else what? Or else we wont shop at your stores.

That's up to the customer. Just like not buying "made in china" items.

That's how you show your support (or non support), and its not blackmail or strong-arm.

That you can't see the difference in "we will support X" and "support us or we will cost you money" is interesting.Not sure you want to see it and what it looks like.

They can choose to not shop anywhere, for any reason. (You aren't arguing this are you?)Because they make it clear by stating that business without a "pro-union" placard won't be utilized is not blackmail. Its tactical, its influential, its also honest about how they intend on making their personal business decisions.

I agree that they are allowed to shope wherever they want.I am arguing that if you tell a business to do something "or else" you are engaging in a strong arm like tactic. You can argue the technicalities of it all you want...but that "or else" makes it look awful.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Except they are doing the blackmail of "support us with this sign or else".

Or else what? Or else we wont shop at your stores.

That's up to the customer. Just like not buying "made in china" items.

That's how you show your support (or non support), and its not blackmail or strong-arm.

That you can't see the difference in "we will support X" and "support us or we will cost you money" is interesting.Not sure you want to see it and what it looks like.

They can choose to not shop anywhere, for any reason. (You aren't arguing this are you?)Because they make it clear by stating that business without a "pro-union" placard won't be utilized is not blackmail. Its tactical, its influential, its also honest about how they intend on making their personal business decisions.

I agree that they are allowed to shop wherever they want.I am arguing that if you tell a business to do something "or else" you are engaging in a strong arm like tactic. You can argue the technicalities of it all you want...but that "or else" makes it look awful.

Strong-arm? When you get "strong-armed" there isn't any need for the -like or -esque addition.You simply don't like the strategy. Fair enough. But dont try to make into something it isn't. Which is all I ever argued against starting with KingPrawns post.

>>>But let me point out, that this tactic could have some ANTI-Union people, who fully support hard line Republicans who want to crush the unions for nothing more then political gain... posting up Pro-Union placards just to get additional business.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

I'm with Steel on this one. It's a doosh move but not blackmail.

 

[The Kerminator]

I'm with Steel on this one. It's a doosh move but not blackmail.

Call it whatever you want. Arguing the technical definitions of the terms blackmail, strong arm, etc. are just changing the argument.It is hypocritical of the union and democrats to accuse Walker of trying to kill the middle class when they call for boycotts of small businesses who are are owned by members of that same middle class and employ members of that middle class.It is also a tactic that is likely to backfire on the union and how the union is viewed by the public.Or should we argue about the technical definition of hypocritical, backfire or middle class?

 

[snogger]

And this is the reason that union busting is so popular in the us right now...

Because a group of like-minded people decide to not make use of bushiness based upon their practices. Lots of like-minded people decided not to buy Citgo gas because of its Hugo Chavez connection, which is pretty damn reasonable and perfectly acceptable.

It's not based upon their practices. It's based upon forcing the businesses to support the union.

They are NOT forcing anyone to do anything.They are choosing to shop at "pro-union" stores. That's their choice. Just as it would be your choice to shop at only "non-union" stores.That's not blackmail or thug or strong-arm. That's the CUSTOMER making a decision.

They are telling these companies.. Either put up our signs to show you support us or we will make sure we don't support you.Therefore costing you money and possibly your business.Threat + Action = Bullying.Now, if they just went out and said "These companies didn't support us, so we are not going to support them" that is fine and I'd have no problem.It is the way they are doing it that is bullying, not the end result of what they are doing.

 

[snogger]

Except they are doing the blackmail of "support us with this sign or else".

Or else what? Or else we wont shop at your stores.

That's up to the customer. Just like not buying "made in china" items.

That's how you show your support (or non support), and its not blackmail or strong-arm.

As has been stated before, people have the right to boycott stores and vote with their dollars. If a business has practices that you find unacceptable, it's your right as a consumer to not shop there and tell others, including the business owner, why you won't shop there. Just as it's the business owner's right to decide whether he wants to support your cause or not, change his practices or not, or simply tell you to go get bent and take your business elsewhere.

None of the above are blackmail and calling it blackmail is ridiculous and alarmist.

The Bold part is Correct.. But telling them "Hang up these signs or we will do our best to shut you down" is, by definition bullying/strong-arming or whatever you want to call it.

 

[sho nuff]

Strong-arm? When you get "strong-armed" there isn't any need for the -like or -esque addition.

You simply don't like the strategy. Fair enough. But dont try to make into something it isn't. Which is all I ever argued against starting with KingPrawns post.

>>>But let me point out, that this tactic could have some ANTI-Union people, who fully support hard line Republicans who want to crush the unions for nothing more then political gain... posting up Pro-Union placards just to get additional business.

You are arguing complete technicalities on what to call this.I don't like a tactic where anyone tells a business to do something "or else".

As for "nothing more than political gain"...I think there are plenty who want to crush them for that...just as there are plenty who want to save them for nothing more than political gain.

 

[snogger]

I find it interesting that this thread, as well as National Media coverage continues to be about Wisconsin, yet ignoring what else is going on around the country in regards to Public Unions:

The controversial legislation would weaken collective-bargaining rights by barring Ohio's 360,000 public employees from striking and allowing state workers to decline to pay union dues.

State workers and others planned to rally at the New Hampshire capitol Thursday after the state House approved a package that would make changes to collective bargaining laws.

My understanding is some of these changes in other states is even more restrictive then Wisconsin's and yet

 

[ElGatoLoco]

Educating people so they are smart enough to work those jobs. Every dollar spent in education has a considerable multiplier effect in the larger economy. A good education has also been shown to reduce crime and health care costs down the road.

(Side note: cool it on the personal attacks on peoples' intelligence. I am trying to ignore it, but it is really getting old fast. There is no call for it.)

Really? That would be a good link for everyone to see showing dollars per capita spent on eduation and the unemployment rate and overall ranking of the states economy.

Most larger universities do some sort of economic impact report these days. Others are studies that get done in journals and such. Plenty of policy research out there on this.2002 University of Wisconsin Economic Impact

2011 University of Wisconsin Economic Impact

K-12 doesn't really have the resources to do this sort of report on their own, but sometimes you can find studies done by the non-partisan legislative agency (most states have a research department) in the state government.

 

[ElGatoLoco]

It's obvious Johnny and El gatogrecko don't understand that adding good jobs and keeping jobs is a good thing.

I've missed chunks of this thread but from what I've seen ElGatoLoco seems to be keeping a relatively open mind and is simply asking questions. johnnymac is in a special world with cr8f. I figure it will be another two pages of his 'facts' getting thoroughly destroyed then he'll vanish for awhile...and in another 10 or so pages he'll rehash the same arguments.

From what I have seen I agree about johhny. Gato seems to think somewhat the same way about creating jobs and he's wrong about TARP but he definately is not at a level of johnny and cr8f.

Not wrong in theory about TARP I don't think. My understanding is that there is a hope those funds get recovered, so that it funds itself again. Now you may be correct in thinking in practical terms those troubled assets never have any value, so that money gets lost.

 

[ElGatoLoco]

Ok, so we have 1197 new and or existing jobs. Only another 248803 to go. I wonder how much Scott is going to have to give away to get those jobs???

You are not counting the 137500 jobs he saved...

Can you be a little less vague?

 

[ElGatoLoco]

who cares if the state gives companies that relocate here a two year tax break?They already weren't paying taxes here. So they go two more years without paying any taxes here.so...500k for 100 jobs and some future tax revenue?Sounds like jonnymac didn't really think this through...

It is an opportunity cost. It just needs to be figured into the calculus of a cost/benefit. In the short term the lost revenue might hurt them, especially if they are in a budget crisis. The Governor is counting on a long-term benefit. It is future-value though.

 

[snogger]

Ok, so we have 1197 new and or existing jobs. Only another 248803 to go. I wonder how much Scott is going to have to give away to get those jobs???

You are not counting the 137500 jobs he saved...

Can you be a little less vague?

Pretty sure that was a at Obama and his teams claim that their "Stimulus" plan Saved MILLIONS of jobs.. With no proof other than.. Well, the car was being driven into the ditch and we steered it out of that ditch with our plan.Truth is we have no idea what would have happened without the "stimulus" plan and therefore they cam claim whatever they want and leave it to others to disprove something that can't be proved.

 

[snogger]

I'm in here..The same judge that ignored the constitution and barred implementation of the law is now stating the law is not in effect..

MADISON, Wis. – A Wisconsin judge has ruled the state's explosive new collective bargaining law is not in effect.Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued a restraining order earlier this month preventing the secretary of state from publishing the law, typically the last step before it takes effect. Republicans pushing the bill convinced another state office to publish it and declared the law was in effect.Sumi issued a declaration on Thursday morning saying the law wasn't properly published and isn't in effect.

WOW.. Compelte here..

 

[LAUNCH]

I'm in here..

The same judge that ignored the constitution and barred implementation of the law is now stating the law is not in effect..

MADISON, Wis. – A Wisconsin judge has ruled the state's explosive new collective bargaining law is not in effect.

Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued a restraining order earlier this month preventing the secretary of state from publishing the law, typically the last step before it takes effect. Republicans pushing the bill convinced another state office to publish it and declared the law was in effect.

Sumi issued a declaration on Thursday morning saying the law wasn't properly published and isn't in effect.

WOW.. Compelte here..

Judges should have to lay out their cases like programmers or people who create flow charts up until the point there is precedent to the case they are "judging".

Special Session Rules

1. Can Scott Walker call a special session?

Yes he can.

Special Session May Be Conducted Concurrently with a Regular Session. The governor

may call for a special session to begin at any time. It is not uncommon for special sessions and

regular legislative sessions to convene during the same floorperiod, even on the same day, although the meetings are separate and distinct. In State ex rel. Groppi v. Leslie, 44 Wis. 2d 300

(1969), the Wisconsin Supreme Court determined that the constitution does not limit special

sessions to days when the legislature is not scheduled to be in session. It reasoned that to deny

the governor the ability to call a special session while the legislature is in regular session would

restrict the governor’s right to focus consideration on specific legislation

2. If they were in special session what notification must they provide?

SENATE RULE 93. Special, extended or extraordinary sessions. Unless otherwise

provided by the senate for a specific special, extended or extraordinary session, the

rules of the senate adopted for the regular session shall, with the following modifications, apply to each special session called by the governor and to each extended or extraordinary session called by the senate and assembly organization committees or

called by a joint resolution approved by both houses:

(1) No senate bill, senate joint resolution or senate resolution shall be considered unless

it is germane to the subjects enumerated by the governor in the special session proclamation and is recommended for introduction by the committee on senate organization

or the joint committee on employment relations.

(2) No notice of hearing before a committee shall be required other than posting on the

legislative bulletin board, and no bulletin of committee hearings shall be published.

Personally I don't think there should be any sessions that aren't available to be seen or heard by the public, but that isn't the current law and it certainly isn't the judges right to apply his/her own political views unless they are judging something that isn't clearly defined in a current law and even then they "shouldn't". This should have taken all of about 5 seconds to determine.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

I'm in here..The same judge that ignored the constitution and barred implementation of the law is now stating the law is not in effect..

MADISON, Wis. – A Wisconsin judge has ruled the state's explosive new collective bargaining law is not in effect.Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued a restraining order earlier this month preventing the secretary of state from publishing the law, typically the last step before it takes effect. Republicans pushing the bill convinced another state office to publish it and declared the law was in effect.Sumi issued a declaration on Thursday morning saying the law wasn't properly published and isn't in effect.

WOW.. Compelte here..

This ruling was probably the single least surprising thing that happened in Madison this week. If this was a WOW/jawdrop moment for you, prepare for your head to explode tomorrow morning when she makes here tro permanent.

 

[snogger]

I'm in here..The same judge that ignored the constitution and barred implementation of the law is now stating the law is not in effect..

MADISON, Wis. – A Wisconsin judge has ruled the state's explosive new collective bargaining law is not in effect.Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued a restraining order earlier this month preventing the secretary of state from publishing the law, typically the last step before it takes effect. Republicans pushing the bill convinced another state office to publish it and declared the law was in effect.Sumi issued a declaration on Thursday morning saying the law wasn't properly published and isn't in effect.

WOW.. Compelte here..

This ruling was probably the single least surprising thing that happened in Madison this week. If this was a WOW/jawdrop moment for you, prepare for your head to explode tomorrow morning when she makes here tro permanent.

Really thought my was as subtle as being hit by a Guess not

 

[Statorama]

Personally I don't think there should be any sessions that aren't available to be seen or heard by the public, but that isn't the current law and it certainly isn't the judges right to apply his/her own political views unless they are judging something that isn't clearly defined in a current law and even then they "shouldn't". This should have taken all of about 5 seconds to determine.

Judges in Dane County are notorius for ignorning the rule of law and making judgements based on their far left political beliefs.What surprises me more is that the appeals court punted it. I thought there was at least a shred of legal integrity in that body.

 

[ElGatoLoco]

Personally I don't think there should be any sessions that aren't available to be seen or heard by the public, but that isn't the current law and it certainly isn't the judges right to apply his/her own political views unless they are judging something that isn't clearly defined in a current law and even then they "shouldn't". This should have taken all of about 5 seconds to determine.

Judges in Dane County are notorius for ignorning the rule of law and making judgements based on their far left political beliefs.What surprises me more is that the appeals court punted it. I thought there was at least a shred of legal integrity in that body.

Or maybe they all know more than you do about the law.They certainly know more about spelling.

 

[FavreCo]

Guess she showed him. I love when egomaniacs like this Gov. Hack get owned. Same thing is coming for Rickhead down here in FL.

 

[Johnnymac]

Personally I don't think there should be any sessions that aren't available to be seen or heard by the public, but that isn't the current law and it certainly isn't the judges right to apply his/her own political views unless they are judging something that isn't clearly defined in a current law and even then they "shouldn't". This should have taken all of about 5 seconds to determine.

Judges in Dane County are notorius for ignorning the rule of law and making judgements based on their far left political beliefs.What surprises me more is that the appeals court punted it. I thought there was at least a shred of legal integrity in that body.

So you are an authority on the judicial system too??

 

[Johnnymac]

Guess she showed him. I love when egomaniacs like this Gov. Hack get owned. Same thing is coming for Rickhead down here in FL.

 

[sho nuff]

Guess she showed him. I love when egomaniacs like this Gov. Hack get owned. Same thing is coming for Rickhead down here in FL.

He got owned?You really believe that?

 

[FavreCo]

Guess she showed him. I love when egomaniacs like this Gov. Hack get owned. Same thing is coming for Rickhead down here in FL.

Rickhead: "If you have any questions, don't hesitate to send me, I don't have e-mail," Scott told a group of state workers at the Department of Elderly Affairs. "It's easier if I never get e-mailed. I get embarrassed by it that way. It's not as easy to communicate." I'll translate. 'I'm a crook and e-mail can get me busted. Let's talk in person behind closed doors.'

 

[snogger]

Funny.. Some here claim Walker is a "Hack" or worse.. Yet the Democrats are lining up behind his budget plan.

Democrats back latest Walker budget planMADISON, Wis. (AP) -- Democratic legislative leaders are getting behind Gov. Scott Walker's latest plan to address the state's current $137 million budget shortfall.Walker introduced his latest plan on Wednesday, which relies heavily on debt refinancing to save $165 million.Walker had previously proposed steps to balance the budget as part of the collective bargaining law that were removed before that measure passed earlier this month.

So, other than the Collective Bargaining crap, the Democrats agree with his budget plan.. Interesting how a "rickhead" can get even the Democrats to align behind him.. I do agree with what this Democrat said.. Collective Bargaining is a BIG part of the budget, but should be, and WAS voted on separately.:

Democratic Senate Minority Leader Mark Miller and Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca both praised the plan, saying it was the approach Walker should have taken from the beginning instead of also going after collective bargaining rights.

Now that the democrats are behind the rest of the Budget plan, on April 5th re-vote on the Collective Bargaining and lets move on.I know there are some here who think that if a re-vote happens a couple republicans will "jump ship".I just don't see any logic in that, it's not like voting against it now will bring the Democrats back into their camp.. How did the

I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.”

work out for Kerry???

 

[cr8f]

News today is they will abide by the judges ruling. Obeying the law is news here?

Walker's adding unions?

Wisconsin Professors Unionize, Defy Walker’s Law on Collective Bargaining

By Mark Niquette - Mar 31, 2011 11:19 AM CT

Lisa Theo cast her vote yesterday to join a union that may not be able to negotiate a contract for her and said, “That felt good.”

Theo, a geography instructor, and her University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point colleagues were voting in a two-day election to be represented by AFT-Wisconsin after the passage of a law championed by Republican Governor Scott Walker that would eliminate collective bargaining for faculty members.

It would be the fourth state campus to vote in favor of representation since Walker introduced the bill Feb. 11, saying it is necessary to mend the recession-battered budget. The measure, which has been challenged in court, touched off weeks of protests. Professors say Republicans are using the budget crisis to attack education with the union bill, by proposing funding cuts and by seeking e-mails sent by a UW-Madison professor who wrote a blog posting and a New York Times opinion piece opposing Walker.

“We’re going to stand up for our rights, and we’re going to keep fighting until we get them,” Theo said in an interview.

The Stevens Point vote, run by the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission, began yesterday and ends at 1 p.m. today, the union said.

Picking Up Speed

The previous decisions in favor of union representation were Feb. 24 at UW-La Crosse, March 9 at UW-Stout and March 24 at UW-River Falls, AFT-Wisconsin said in press releases. The winning margins ranged from 86 percent to 90 percent, according to the union, which is affiliated with the American Federation of Teachers. The federation has 17,000 members statewide.

Faculty at UW campuses in Eau Claire and Superior also voted to join AFT-Wisconsin last year after the Legislature extended collective bargaining to faculty and academic staff in June 2009, the union said.

The new law, which would limit collective bargaining for most government workers, ends it completely for university faculty. posted the legislation on the Internet.

In Stevens Point, which is 110 miles (177 kilometers) north of state capital Madison, work toward unionization began almost a year ago. It gained momentum after Walker signed the law this month, said Eric Yonke, 48, a history professor and organizing committee member.

Standing Ready

The law limits most public employees to bargaining for wages alone; raises can’t exceed inflation unless voters agree. The measure requires increased contributions for health-care coverage and pensions.

In Stevens Point, some faculty members see their votes as symbolic support for collective bargaining, Yonke, a professor for 20 years, said in an interview. Others want the union in place if the law is overturned, he said.

State Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi in Madison today affirmed that the law isn’t in effect as a suit over whether it was lawfully created proceeds. Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne sued to invalidate the measure, arguing that lawmakers who approved it violated the state open-meetings law.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Except they are doing the blackmail of "support us with this sign or else".

Or else what? Or else we wont shop at your stores.

That's up to the customer. Just like not buying "made in china" items.

That's how you show your support (or non support), and its not blackmail or strong-arm.

That you can't see the difference in "we will support X" and "support us or we will cost you money" is interesting.Not sure you want to see it and what it looks like.

"Support us or we'll shop elsewhere" is somehow blackmail??? No. "Give us money or we'll shop elsewhere" is extortion. Give us money or we'll air your dirty laundry is blackmail. Nowhere are they asking for payouts.

^^^Look at that. Someone actually understands "blackmail", "extortion" and probably "strong-arming".

People who want to redefine "blackmail", "extortion" are just looking for a way to make the unions look bad - how trite.

 

[Bogeys]

State Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi in Madison today affirmed that the law isn’t in effect as a suit over whether it was lawfully created proceeds. Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne sued to invalidate the measure, arguing that lawmakers who approved it violated the state open-meetings law.

Question for the attorneys here, how does a local DA have standing to challenge if the state legislature followed state rules/law? I am sure they do since the judge here and the appeals court seemed to let it go forward, just seems like standing is a big deal in a lot of lawsuits that are in the news so this didn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I could see after the law had been published saying it affects people/things in the county, but that isn't what was challenged from what I can tell. TIA

 

[Phase of the Game]

News today is they will abide by the judges ruling. Obeying the law is news here?

Walker's adding unions?

Wisconsin Professors Unionize, Defy Walker’s Law on Collective Bargaining

By Mark Niquette - Mar 31, 2011 11:19 AM CT

Lisa Theo cast her vote yesterday to join a union that may not be able to negotiate a contract for her and said, “That felt good.”

Theo, a geography instructor, and her University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point colleagues were voting in a two-day election to be represented by AFT-Wisconsin after the passage of a law championed by Republican Governor Scott Walker that would eliminate collective bargaining for faculty members.

It would be the fourth state campus to vote in favor of representation since Walker introduced the bill Feb. 11, saying it is necessary to mend the recession-battered budget. The measure, which has been challenged in court, touched off weeks of protests. Professors say Republicans are using the budget crisis to attack education with the union bill, by proposing funding cuts and by seeking e-mails sent by a UW-Madison professor who wrote a blog posting and a New York Times opinion piece opposing Walker.

“We’re going to stand up for our rights, and we’re going to keep fighting until we get them,” Theo said in an interview.

The Stevens Point vote, run by the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission, began yesterday and ends at 1 p.m. today, the union said.

Picking Up Speed

The previous decisions in favor of union representation were Feb. 24 at UW-La Crosse, March 9 at UW-Stout and March 24 at UW-River Falls, AFT-Wisconsin said in press releases. The winning margins ranged from 86 percent to 90 percent, according to the union, which is affiliated with the American Federation of Teachers. The federation has 17,000 members statewide.

Faculty at UW campuses in Eau Claire and Superior also voted to join AFT-Wisconsin last year after the Legislature extended collective bargaining to faculty and academic staff in June 2009, the union said.

The new law, which would limit collective bargaining for most government workers, ends it completely for university faculty. posted the legislation on the Internet.

In Stevens Point, which is 110 miles (177 kilometers) north of state capital Madison, work toward unionization began almost a year ago. It gained momentum after Walker signed the law this month, said Eric Yonke, 48, a history professor and organizing committee member.

Standing Ready

The law limits most public employees to bargaining for wages alone; raises can’t exceed inflation unless voters agree. The measure requires increased contributions for health-care coverage and pensions.

In Stevens Point, some faculty members see their votes as symbolic support for collective bargaining, Yonke, a professor for 20 years, said in an interview. Others want the union in place if the law is overturned, he said.

State Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi in Madison today affirmed that the law isn’t in effect as a suit over whether it was lawfully created proceeds. Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne sued to invalidate the measure, arguing that lawmakers who approved it violated the state open-meetings law.

Why did you title it Walker's adding unions? Did you read the article? I know you didn't but where does it say Walker is adding unions?

 

[Sarnoff]

...cr8f copypasta snipped

Did you read the article?

Have you read this thread? I challenge you to find a single cr8f post where it appears he's read the article he's pasted.I also challenge you to find him replying to anyone who's asked him to explain his driveby spamming. He doesn't read any other posts in here.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

State Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi in Madison today affirmed that the law isn’t in effect as a suit over whether it was lawfully created proceeds. Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne sued to invalidate the measure, arguing that lawmakers who approved it violated the state open-meetings law.

Question for the attorneys here, how does a local DA have standing to challenge if the state legislature followed state rules/law? I am sure they do since the judge here and the appeals court seemed to let it go forward, just seems like standing is a big deal in a lot of lawsuits that are in the news so this didn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I could see after the law had been published saying it affects people/things in the county, but that isn't what was challenged from what I can tell. TIA

The DA in every county in Wisconsin has standing under Wisconsin statutes to enforce the open meetings laws in the county in which a violation is alleged to have occurred. In this case, the Dane county DA received numerous complaints as to the process by which this act was passed and therefore has standing to bring this action.

 

[jonessed]

State Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi in Madison today affirmed that the law isn’t in effect as a suit over whether it was lawfully created proceeds. Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne sued to invalidate the measure, arguing that lawmakers who approved it violated the state open-meetings law.

Question for the attorneys here, how does a local DA have standing to challenge if the state legislature followed state rules/law? I am sure they do since the judge here and the appeals court seemed to let it go forward, just seems like standing is a big deal in a lot of lawsuits that are in the news so this didn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I could see after the law had been published saying it affects people/things in the county, but that isn't what was challenged from what I can tell. TIA

Do judges really even have the standing to stop legislation from becoming law? I know they can stay a law, but prevent it from even being published?And if they can now put a hold on legislative procedings wouldn't they also have the power to stop legislative votes from even occurring? I imagine most anything can be halted for at least a short while based on a process infraction. You could tie up legislation forever. That seems like real mess.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

State Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi in Madison today affirmed that the law isn’t in effect as a suit over whether it was lawfully created proceeds. Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne sued to invalidate the measure, arguing that lawmakers who approved it violated the state open-meetings law.

Question for the attorneys here, how does a local DA have standing to challenge if the state legislature followed state rules/law? I am sure they do since the judge here and the appeals court seemed to let it go forward, just seems like standing is a big deal in a lot of lawsuits that are in the news so this didn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I could see after the law had been published saying it affects people/things in the county, but that isn't what was challenged from what I can tell.TIA

Do judges really even have the standing to stop legislation from becoming law? I know they can stay a law, but prevent it from even being published?

It might not technically be a matter of "standing" as such, but this is definitely a significant question in this case that the supreme court will have to answer. Marquette law prof Rick Esenberg has addressed that question in several of his blog posts at http://sharkandshepherd.blogspot.com/, including in the preliminary paragraphs in his comment in a post a couple weeks ago here: http://sharkandshepherd.blogspot.com/2011/03/sumi-decision-closer-look.html. His analysis is good and I think very well thought out, but I also think a reasonable argument could be made that the Goodland case doesn't apply to this situation and that a circuit court is well within its jurisdiction to enjoin the publication of a law where the law was passed in violation of procedural rules (meaning, if one assumes the allegations are correct, which of course is also a very difficult legal issue).

 

[Bogeys]

State Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi in Madison today affirmed that the law isn’t in effect as a suit over whether it was lawfully created proceeds. Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne sued to invalidate the measure, arguing that lawmakers who approved it violated the state open-meetings law.

Question for the attorneys here, how does a local DA have standing to challenge if the state legislature followed state rules/law? I am sure they do since the judge here and the appeals court seemed to let it go forward, just seems like standing is a big deal in a lot of lawsuits that are in the news so this didn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I could see after the law had been published saying it affects people/things in the county, but that isn't what was challenged from what I can tell. TIA

The DA in every county in Wisconsin has standing under Wisconsin statutes to enforce the open meetings laws in the county in which a violation is alleged to have occurred. In this case, the Dane county DA received numerous complaints as to the process by which this act was passed and therefore has standing to bring this action.

Okay, so it is a state law that gives the DA the power...thanks.

 

[jonessed]

State Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi in Madison today affirmed that the law isn’t in effect as a suit over whether it was lawfully created proceeds. Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne sued to invalidate the measure, arguing that lawmakers who approved it violated the state open-meetings law.

Question for the attorneys here, how does a local DA have standing to challenge if the state legislature followed state rules/law? I am sure they do since the judge here and the appeals court seemed to let it go forward, just seems like standing is a big deal in a lot of lawsuits that are in the news so this didn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I could see after the law had been published saying it affects people/things in the county, but that isn't what was challenged from what I can tell.TIA

Do judges really even have the standing to stop legislation from becoming law? I know they can stay a law, but prevent it from even being published?

It might not technically be a matter of "standing" as such, but this is definitely a significant question in this case that the supreme court will have to answer. Marquette law prof Rick Esenberg has addressed that question in several of his blog posts at http://sharkandshepherd.blogspot.com/, including in the preliminary paragraphs in his comment in a post a couple weeks ago here: http://sharkandshepherd.blogspot.com/2011/03/sumi-decision-closer-look.html. His analysis is good and I think very well thought out, but I also think a reasonable argument could be made that the Goodland case doesn't apply to this situation and that a circuit court is well within its jurisdiction to enjoin the publication of a law where the law was passed in violation of procedural rules (meaning, if one assumes the allegations are correct, which of course is also a very difficult legal issue).

If a judge can stop a law from being published couldn't they stop a vote from occurring? If the basis for intervention is that a procedural fraction has occurred it seems like a handful of judges could tie up the legislature indefinitely.

 

[Statorama]

"Judge" Sumi is really embarrassing herself here, basically ruling that non-parties are bound to her determination of the law.

She's alarmingly ignorant of the law.

 

[Statorama]

"Judge" Sumi bringing the funny

Before wrapping up a brief hearing Wednesday, Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi offered a word of caution to attorneys involved in high-profile lawsuits over collective bargaining in Wisconsin.

Sumi said emotions are running high over two cases she is hearing regarding Gov. Scott Walker's plan to eliminate most collective bargaining for public workers. That "spirited debate" is important in a democracy, but attorneys must keep in mind their professional ethics, Sumi said.

"They all have a responsibility to promote and not denigrate the judicial branch and, more importantly, the rule of law," she said.

She advised lawyers to review state Supreme Court rules that say: "A lawyer shall not make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge...."

She referred to public comments made by attorneys after a Tuesday hearing, but did not elaborate.

Such a warning necessarily is one-sided, since only the attorneys unhappy with a court's rulings would comment negatively. Such a warning allows the winning side, so far the Democrats, to crow all day long about the court rulings, while muffling the ability of the Republicans to explain why such rulings were unjustified.

 

[cr8f]

Kapanke recall to be filed today(took about half the time needed)

2 others are supposed to be close.

Democrats: We have the signatures in Kapanke recall effort

La Crosse area Democrats say they will file petitions today with enough signatures to trigger a recall election of Sen. Dan Kapanke, one of eight Senate Republicans targeted over votes to curtail collective bargaining rights for public workers. If approved, it would be just the fifth recall election of a Wisconsin legislator.

Recall organizer Pat Scheller said volunteers have gathered more than the 15,588 signatures needed and that they plan to take them to Madison after a noon rally today at La Crosse City Hall.

It is expected to be the first completed of 19 active recall efforts registered between Feb. 24 and March 2 against 16 senators

Kapanke did not return messages Thursday, but has said the recall is “part of the process.”

“I love campaigns. I just didn’t think I’d do one every year,” Kapanke said Saturday at the opening of a La Crosse County GOP headquarters.

He has defended his vote for the bill, which stripped most collective bargaining rights from state, municipal and school workers, as a necessary step in balancing the state’s budget while minimizing layoffs.

The filing comes just before the halfway point in the 60-day window the recall committee had to gather signatures in the district.

The state Democratic Party provided infrastructure support but “not a single paid canvasser was needed to trigger the recall versus Dan Kapanke,” said party spokesman Graeme Zielinski, who credited volunteers for collecting more than 20,000 signatures in less than 30 days.

“It took on a life of its own,” said Scheller, who filed the original paperwork to launch the recall effort.

Scheller, a banker who describes himself as a “middle of the road” guy who isn’t a member of the party, said Kapanke “is a decent person, but I think he showed a lack of fortitude in supporting the bill without questioning any of it.”

Eight Democrats who fled to Illinois for several weeks in an effort to prevent Senate Republicans from passing the bill are also targeted for recall — some by more than one committee. The other six senate Democrats, including Kathleen Vinehout of Alma, are not eligible for recall until 2012.

University of Wisconsin-La Crosse political scientist Joe Heim said he was surprised by the speed with which the signatures were collected but cautions that it doesn’t mean Kapanke will lose his seat.

“I don’t think it automatically determines the outcome of the election,” he said. “There’s a certain intensity of the people favoring the recall. ... Whether or not that intensity stays through is another question.”

There have been just four recall elections of Wisconsin legislators, according to the Government Accountability Board; only two were successful.

Next steps

Today’s filing will trigger a 31-day review period during which the GAB determines that all signatures are sufficient. Kapanke can challenge signatures during the first 10 days.

Either party can petition a judge for an extension.

Spokesman Reid Magney said the GAB may ask for more time in order to minimize the number of special elections.

“We’re hoping for maybe a couple instead of 16,” he said.

The GAB would order an election on the sixth Tuesday after determining the petition is in order. If there is more than one challenger, that election would be a primary followed by a general election four weeks later.

Once an election is ordered, challengers can begin circulating petitions to get their names on the ballot. They would have 10 days to collect 400 signatures.

Both parties have opened local offices in recent weeks. Republican chairman Bill Feehan said his party’s decision was in reaction to the recall effort, which he called a “foregone conclusion.”

Democrats need three additional senate seats to gain a majority. Kapanke is one of three targeted Republicans who won the last election with less than 52 percent of the votes. In 2008, he defeated Democratic challenger Tara Johnson by just 2,507 votes.

Despite a March 11 poll commissioned by the liberal website The Daily Kos that showed Kapanke trailing a generic Democrat opponent 55 to 41 percent, Heim says an actual election — held sometime in the summer — is another matter entirely.

For one, Democrats have to run an actual candidate.

“It’s easy to say you favor a generic Democrat,” Heim said. “Once it becomes a person they don’t necessarily get the support.”

Charles Franklin, a UW-Madison political scientist and co-founder of pollster.com, warned that poll at best indicates a tight race.

Kapanke had about $9,000 in his campaign funds as of Jan. 30, according to his last finance report filed with the state.

Heim doesn’t expect either party to have trouble raising money.

 

[cr8f]

Is it legal to pay for recall sigs as the GOP appears to be doing?

I have screen shot in case they take this down.

green bay craigslist > jobs > et cetera jobs

please flag with care: [?]

miscategorized

prohibited

spam/overpost

best of craigslist

Avoid scams and fraud by dealing locally! Beware any deal involving Western Union, Moneygram, wire transfer, cashier check, money order, shipping, escrow, or any promise of transaction protection/certification/guarantee. More info

Political Canvasser (Green Bay)

Date: 2011-03-30, 3:09PM CDT

Reply to: see below

Receive 50 cents per signature as a circulator for Recall Dave Hansen. Call 9206728513. Start today! Have money in your pocket by dark! Unlimited short term earning potential!

Location: Green Bay

Compensation: 50 Cents per signature obtained within the 30th Senate District

This is a part-time job.

This is a contract job.

Principals only. Recruiters, please don't contact this job poster.

Phone calls about this job are ok.

Please do not contact job poster about other services, products or commercial interests.

PostingID: 2295767549

No contact info?

if the poster didn't include a phone number, email, or

other contact info, craigslist can notify them via email.

 

[snogger]

Nice to see our Copy & Paste artist hard at work.