Scott Walker WI governor vs the Packers & teachers (1 Viewer)

[badmojo1006]

Turns out Scott Walker does like at least one Union

 

[Jobber]

Turns out Scott Walker does like at least one Union

The difference here being the NFL referees are not a public union.

 

[Topes]

Recall Goodell!

 

[Sarnoff]

Turns out Scott Walker does like at least one Union

Scott Walker has nothing against private unions.

Public employee unions should be illegal.

 

[Fantasy_Freak]

Turns out Scott Walker does like at least one Union

Scott Walker has nothing against private unions.

Public employee unions should be illegal.

Why should public unions be illegal?

 

[snogger]

Turns out Scott Walker does like at least one Union

The difference here being the NFL referees are not a public union.

But hey.. Apples/Oranges.. Public Unions/Private Unions.. Same thing..

 

[urbanhack]

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/wisconsin-private-sector-job-creation-ranking-declines-799bcsa-200435291.html

The Wisconsoin GOP has complete control of the supreme court in WI, the Senate, the Assembly, and the Governor's seat, correct?

 

[Sarnoff]

Still fifty tweets a day. GB cr8f for keeping up the fight

 

[Sabertooth]

Nice. Wonder how this gets spun on Fox.

 

[tommyGunZ]

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/wisconsin-private-sector-job-creation-ranking-declines-799bcsa-200435291.htmlThe Wisconsoin GOP has complete control of the supreme court in WI, the Senate, the Assembly, and the Governor's seat, correct?

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Marquette won.

 

[MaxThreshold]

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!

http://www.jsonline....-200435291.html

The Wisconsoin GOP has complete control of the supreme court in WI, the Senate, the Assembly, and the Governor's seat, correct?

You should have seen the last governor we had.

...it's amusing to hear leading Democrats such as Rep. Peter Barca, D-Kenosha, lament the job creation by Gov. Scott Walker, describing his job growth in Wisconsin as "lackluster."

By their own estimate, Walker has created over 40,000 jobs in what can be described at best as a hostile work environment over the past two years.

I don't recall Barca — or any state Democratic politician — complaining about jobs under Gov. Jim Doyle, and over 150,000 jobs left the state on his watch. Creating 40,000 jobs is better than losing 150,000, isn't it?

Can you redirect me to any of your posts criticizing Jim Doyle who was worse? NO? Didn't think so.Consider yourself OWN3D.

 

[snogger]

I can't believe people are looking at those "growth" stats and blaming the Republican party for it..

Rank State Increase

11. Indiana 2.2%

13. Michigan 2.0%

24. Ohio 1.5%

27. Illinois 1.4%

30. Iowa 1.3%

39. Minnesota 1.0%

44. Wisconsin 0.9%

OMG we are .1% behind the Democrat controlled state of Minnesota

Those Growth numbers are great everywhere but Wisconsin.. FIRE THEM ALL NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[dickey moe]

 

[Sabertooth]

I can't believe people are looking at those "growth" stats and blaming the Republican party for it..Rank State Increase11. Indiana 2.2%13. Michigan 2.0%24. Ohio 1.5%27. Illinois 1.4%30. Iowa 1.3%39. Minnesota 1.0%44. Wisconsin 0.9%OMG we are .1% behind the Democrat controlled state of MinnesotaThose Growth numbers are great everywhere but Wisconsin.. FIRE THEM ALL NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

His whole platform was job creation.

 

[Mario Kart]

I can't believe people are looking at those "growth" stats and blaming the Republican party for it..Rank State Increase11. Indiana 2.2%13. Michigan 2.0%24. Ohio 1.5%27. Illinois 1.4%30. Iowa 1.3%39. Minnesota 1.0%44. Wisconsin 0.9%OMG we are .1% behind the Democrat controlled state of MinnesotaThose Growth numbers are great everywhere but Wisconsin.. FIRE THEM ALL NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

His whole platform was job creation.

Pass the mining bill without any lawsuits so the miners can start mining. I bet some jobs will be "created" with that one, no?

 

[Sabertooth]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

 

[Mario Kart]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

 

[Sabertooth]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

So they don't want to do what they really do want to do because it might not get them re-elected? Is that it? How convenient.

 

[Mario Kart]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

So they don't want to do what they really do want to do because it might not get them re-elected? Is that it? How convenient.

If Repubs pass something, which they can, Dems will file lawsuits to hold it up even though they are legit laws.If Repubs do what government is supposed to do and compromise with the Dems, maybe there won't be any lawsuits if the Dems have some say in the matter.Seems to me the Dems are the ones holding this up, no?

 

[snogger]

I can't believe people are looking at those "growth" stats and blaming the Republican party for it..Rank State Increase11. Indiana 2.2%13. Michigan 2.0%24. Ohio 1.5%27. Illinois 1.4%30. Iowa 1.3%39. Minnesota 1.0%44. Wisconsin 0.9%OMG we are .1% behind the Democrat controlled state of MinnesotaThose Growth numbers are great everywhere but Wisconsin.. FIRE THEM ALL NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

His whole platform was job creation.

Wait.. a Politician ran on a platform and it hasn't happened as they stated it????????I'm I tell you..

 

[Sabertooth]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

So they don't want to do what they really do want to do because it might not get them re-elected? Is that it? How convenient.

If Repubs pass something, which they can, Dems will file lawsuits to hold it up even though they are legit laws.If Repubs do what government is supposed to do and compromise with the Dems, maybe there won't be any lawsuits if the Dems have some say in the matter.Seems to me the Dems are the ones holding this up, no?

Yeah, ummm no. Sounds like a bunch of crap to be honest. But you and I both know I'm not going to convince you of that.

 

[Mario Kart]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

So they don't want to do what they really do want to do because it might not get them re-elected? Is that it? How convenient.

If Repubs pass something, which they can, Dems will file lawsuits to hold it up even though they are legit laws.If Repubs do what government is supposed to do and compromise with the Dems, maybe there won't be any lawsuits if the Dems have some say in the matter.Seems to me the Dems are the ones holding this up, no?

Yeah, ummm no. Sounds like a bunch of crap to be honest. But you and I both know I'm not going to convince you of that.

Not sure what else I can say. Assume the Repubs pass a law, considering they have already, and there are court cases from allowing those laws to go into effect, which is happening. Why pass any further laws before trying to compromise with the Dems? If its all about reelection, like you contended, wouldn't they be passing law after law after law to demonstrate to their constituents that they are passing laws? Again, not sure what you're playing at here.

 

[Sabertooth]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

So they don't want to do what they really do want to do because it might not get them re-elected? Is that it? How convenient.

If Repubs pass something, which they can, Dems will file lawsuits to hold it up even though they are legit laws.If Repubs do what government is supposed to do and compromise with the Dems, maybe there won't be any lawsuits if the Dems have some say in the matter.Seems to me the Dems are the ones holding this up, no?

Yeah, ummm no. Sounds like a bunch of crap to be honest. But you and I both know I'm not going to convince you of that.

Not sure what else I can say. Assume the Repubs pass a law, considering they have already, and there are court cases from allowing those laws to go into effect, which is happening. Why pass any further laws before trying to compromise with the Dems? If its all about reelection, like you contended, wouldn't they be passing law after law after law to demonstrate to their constituents that they are passing laws? Again, not sure what you're playing at here.

If you say you are for x, and then have the power to do x, why not just do it?

 

[sho nuff]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

So they don't want to do what they really do want to do because it might not get them re-elected? Is that it? How convenient.

If Repubs pass something, which they can, Dems will file lawsuits to hold it up even though they are legit laws.If Repubs do what government is supposed to do and compromise with the Dems, maybe there won't be any lawsuits if the Dems have some say in the matter.Seems to me the Dems are the ones holding this up, no?

Yeah, ummm no. Sounds like a bunch of crap to be honest. But you and I both know I'm not going to convince you of that.

Not sure what else I can say. Assume the Repubs pass a law, considering they have already, and there are court cases from allowing those laws to go into effect, which is happening. Why pass any further laws before trying to compromise with the Dems? If its all about reelection, like you contended, wouldn't they be passing law after law after law to demonstrate to their constituents that they are passing laws? Again, not sure what you're playing at here.

If you say you are for x, and then have the power to do x, why not just do it?

Can you read? They have done it...and they don't have the power to just do X...because then you get crap lawsuits (which has been happening for some time in W where the democrats have been challenging nearly everything in court rather than actually working to get crap done.

 

[Rayderr]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

So they don't want to do what they really do want to do because it might not get them re-elected? Is that it? How convenient.

If Repubs pass something, which they can, Dems will file lawsuits to hold it up even though they are legit laws.If Repubs do what government is supposed to do and compromise with the Dems, maybe there won't be any lawsuits if the Dems have some say in the matter.Seems to me the Dems are the ones holding this up, no?

Yeah, ummm no. Sounds like a bunch of crap to be honest. But you and I both know I'm not going to convince you of that.

Not sure what else I can say. Assume the Repubs pass a law, considering they have already, and there are court cases from allowing those laws to go into effect, which is happening. Why pass any further laws before trying to compromise with the Dems? If its all about reelection, like you contended, wouldn't they be passing law after law after law to demonstrate to their constituents that they are passing laws? Again, not sure what you're playing at here.

If you say you are for x, and then have the power to do x, why not just do it?

I think a lot of people were asking Obama and the democrat congress that very question.

 

[Mr.Pack]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

So they don't want to do what they really do want to do because it might not get them re-elected? Is that it? How convenient.

If Repubs pass something, which they can, Dems will file lawsuits to hold it up even though they are legit laws.If Repubs do what government is supposed to do and compromise with the Dems, maybe there won't be any lawsuits if the Dems have some say in the matter.Seems to me the Dems are the ones holding this up, no?

Yeah, ummm no. Sounds like a bunch of crap to be honest. But you and I both know I'm not going to convince you of that.

Not sure what else I can say. Assume the Repubs pass a law, considering they have already, and there are court cases from allowing those laws to go into effect, which is happening. Why pass any further laws before trying to compromise with the Dems? If its all about reelection, like you contended, wouldn't they be passing law after law after law to demonstrate to their constituents that they are passing laws? Again, not sure what you're playing at here.

If you say you are for x, and then have the power to do x, why not just do it?

I think a lot of people were asking Obama and the democrat congress that very question.

But but........ but........It's all the Republicans fault!

 

[Sabertooth]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

So they don't want to do what they really do want to do because it might not get them re-elected? Is that it? How convenient.

If Repubs pass something, which they can, Dems will file lawsuits to hold it up even though they are legit laws.If Repubs do what government is supposed to do and compromise with the Dems, maybe there won't be any lawsuits if the Dems have some say in the matter.Seems to me the Dems are the ones holding this up, no?

Yeah, ummm no. Sounds like a bunch of crap to be honest. But you and I both know I'm not going to convince you of that.

Not sure what else I can say. Assume the Repubs pass a law, considering they have already, and there are court cases from allowing those laws to go into effect, which is happening. Why pass any further laws before trying to compromise with the Dems? If its all about reelection, like you contended, wouldn't they be passing law after law after law to demonstrate to their constituents that they are passing laws? Again, not sure what you're playing at here.

If you say you are for x, and then have the power to do x, why not just do it?

I think a lot of people were asking Obama and the democrat congress that very question.

I agree but one let difference is control of all branches of the government, which Obama never had. Still a valid question though.

 

[The Kerminator]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

So they don't want to do what they really do want to do because it might not get them re-elected? Is that it? How convenient.

If Repubs pass something, which they can, Dems will file lawsuits to hold it up even though they are legit laws.If Repubs do what government is supposed to do and compromise with the Dems, maybe there won't be any lawsuits if the Dems have some say in the matter.Seems to me the Dems are the ones holding this up, no?

Yeah, ummm no. Sounds like a bunch of crap to be honest. But you and I both know I'm not going to convince you of that.

Not sure what else I can say. Assume the Repubs pass a law, considering they have already, and there are court cases from allowing those laws to go into effect, which is happening. Why pass any further laws before trying to compromise with the Dems? If its all about reelection, like you contended, wouldn't they be passing law after law after law to demonstrate to their constituents that they are passing laws? Again, not sure what you're playing at here.

If you say you are for x, and then have the power to do x, why not just do it?

I think a lot of people were asking Obama and the democrat congress that very question.

I agree but one let difference is control of all branches of the government, which Obama never had. Still a valid question though.

The first 2 years of President Obama's first term the Democrats held a majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. And what did we hear from the Dems for a lack of improvement in the economy? It was Bush's fault and things were much worse than they expected. It's funny how this same standard isn't applied to Walker's first 2 years, in which the WI democratic party has done everything possible from fleeing the state to suing over just about every piece of legislation.

 

[The Kerminator]

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/wisconsin-private-sector-job-creation-ranking-declines-799bcsa-200435291.htmlThe Wisconsoin GOP has complete control of the supreme court in WI, the Senate, the Assembly, and the Governor's seat, correct?

Incorrect.Please provide me with a link showing a ® or (D) behind one of the WI Supreme Court justices' names? It is a bipartisan office. And let's assume you can provide a link (which you can't), please explain to me how the WI Supreme Court creates jobs.TIA

 

[Ptomaine]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

So they don't want to do what they really do want to do because it might not get them re-elected? Is that it? How convenient.

If Repubs pass something, which they can, Dems will file lawsuits to hold it up even though they are legit laws.If Repubs do what government is supposed to do and compromise with the Dems, maybe there won't be any lawsuits if the Dems have some say in the matter.Seems to me the Dems are the ones holding this up, no?

Yeah, ummm no. Sounds like a bunch of crap to be honest. But you and I both know I'm not going to convince you of that.

Not sure what else I can say. Assume the Repubs pass a law, considering they have already, and there are court cases from allowing those laws to go into effect, which is happening. Why pass any further laws before trying to compromise with the Dems? If its all about reelection, like you contended, wouldn't they be passing law after law after law to demonstrate to their constituents that they are passing laws? Again, not sure what you're playing at here.

If you say you are for x, and then have the power to do x, why not just do it?

I think a lot of people were asking Obama and the democrat congress that very question.

I agree but one let difference is control of all branches of the government, which Obama never had. Still a valid question though.

The first 2 years of President Obama's first term the Democrats held a majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. And what did we hear from the Dems for a lack of improvement in the economy? It was Bush's fault and things were much worse than they expected. It's funny how this same standard isn't applied to Walker's first 2 years, in which the WI democratic party has done everything possible from fleeing the state to suing over just about every piece of legislation.

And that is the correct answer!

 

[bakes]

Job creation.

It's working.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Job creation.

It's working.

It's obvious you haven't read anything prior to your post.

 

[bakes]

Job creation.

It's working.

It's obvious you haven't read anything prior to your post.

It's obvious that Scott Walker could take a #### on the ground and you would declare it the finest kielbasa ever. I've never seen such a fanboy. By every account I've seen, Wisconsin job creation trails the rest of the midwest. Care to explain why, or are you too busy fellating Scooter?

 

[Sabertooth]

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

Current Repubs want to actually compromise with the Dems. Problem is, the Dems don't want to compromise at all. Instead, the Dems want the Repubs to pass something and the Dems will file lawsuits to "hold up" the laws going into effect in hopes of ousting Walker and other Repubs in a couple of years. Then, if the Dems regain control, they will revert back to pre-Walker days in Wisconsin.

So they don't want to do what they really do want to do because it might not get them re-elected? Is that it? How convenient.

If Repubs pass something, which they can, Dems will file lawsuits to hold it up even though they are legit laws.If Repubs do what government is supposed to do and compromise with the Dems, maybe there won't be any lawsuits if the Dems have some say in the matter.Seems to me the Dems are the ones holding this up, no?

Yeah, ummm no. Sounds like a bunch of crap to be honest. But you and I both know I'm not going to convince you of that.

Not sure what else I can say. Assume the Repubs pass a law, considering they have already, and there are court cases from allowing those laws to go into effect, which is happening. Why pass any further laws before trying to compromise with the Dems? If its all about reelection, like you contended, wouldn't they be passing law after law after law to demonstrate to their constituents that they are passing laws? Again, not sure what you're playing at here.

If you say you are for x, and then have the power to do x, why not just do it?

I think a lot of people were asking Obama and the democrat congress that very question.

I agree but one let difference is control of all branches of the government, which Obama never had. Still a valid question though.

The first 2 years of President Obama's first term the Democrats held a majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. And what did we hear from the Dems for a lack of improvement in the economy? It was Bush's fault and things were much worse than they expected. It's funny how this same standard isn't applied to Walker's first 2 years, in which the WI democratic party has done everything possible from fleeing the state to suing over just about every piece of legislation.

I am applying the same standard. I think it's bogus when anyone does it.

 

[Mario Kart]

Job creation.

It's working.

It's obvious you haven't read anything prior to your post.

It's obvious that Scott Walker could take a #### on the ground and you would declare it the finest kielbasa ever. I've never seen such a fanboy. By every account I've seen, Wisconsin job creation trails the rest of the midwest. Care to explain why, or are you too busy fellating Scooter?

If the Dems would quit suing or threatening to sue any job creation bills that are in the State House, maybe jobs will be created at a faster rate in Wisconsin. But, again, per Max's suggestion, I bet you have not read the previous posts on this page.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Job creation.

It's working.

It's obvious you haven't read anything prior to your post.

It's obvious that Scott Walker could take a #### on the ground and you would declare it the finest kielbasa ever. I've never seen such a fanboy. By every account I've seen, Wisconsin job creation trails the rest of the midwest. Care to explain why, or are you too busy fellating Scooter?

Maybe you're to busy cracking one off to pictures of Obama? Or maybe you're just a union parrot?But, seriously, did you read anything prior to your original post? Several posters have already answered your question. He's added 40K jobs since he's been in office. Your buddy Jim Doyle LOST 150K. What is greater? 40K or -150K?

The climate the lat 2+ years in WI has been horrendous because of the Democrats. Do you even live here?

 

[Cheese and Crackers]

Pass the mining bill without any lawsuits so the miners can start mining. I bet some jobs will be "created" with that one, no?

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

The bill has already been signed.The holdup will occur when they drag it through the courts for a couple years, just like with Act 10.

 

[Mr.Pack]

Pass the mining bill without any lawsuits so the miners can start mining. I bet some jobs will be "created" with that one, no?

Don't they Republicans control all the branches? What is the holdup?

The bill has already been signed.The holdup will occur when they drag it through the courts for a couple years, just like with Act 10.

:crickets:

 

[tommyGunZ]

Job creation.

It's working.

It's obvious you haven't read anything prior to your post.

It's obvious that Scott Walker could take a #### on the ground and you would declare it the finest kielbasa ever. I've never seen such a fanboy. By every account I've seen, Wisconsin job creation trails the rest of the midwest. Care to explain why, or are you too busy fellating Scooter?

Maybe you're to busy cracking one off to pictures of Obama? Or maybe you're just a union parrot?But, seriously, did you read anything prior to your original post? Several posters have already answered your question. He's added 40K jobs since he's been in office. Your buddy Jim Doyle LOST 150K. What is greater? 40K or -150K?

The climate the lat 2+ years in WI has been horrendous because of the Democrats. Do you even live here?

wasn't Doyle Governor during the economic crisis?

 

[The Kerminator]

Bumping this for cr8f. I miss the little guy.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/wisconsin-revenue-grows-500000-more-than-expected-hc9t31c-206761121.html

Wisconsin revenue grows $500 million more than expectedBy Jason Stein and Patrick Marley of the Journal Sentinel
Madison - In a splash of spring sunshine, new projections released Thursday show the state will take in just over $500 million more than expected over the next two years, giving lawmakers the ability to put more money toward schools.

The projections, laid out in a memo from the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau, led Gov. Scott Walker to immediately call for putting some of the $501 million in new revenue toward schools.

"The surplus and increased revenue projections should be invested in aid for our schools, lowering income taxes for middle-class families, holding the line on property taxes, and building our rainy day fund," Walker said in a statement.

Walker's fellow Republicans who control the Legislature have also said they want to put some of the money toward education, but they have differed on the amount. They also called for deeper tax cuts and said they might use the money to lower bonding in Walker's proposed budget.

"We're not going to be spending it willy-nilly," said Sen. Alberta Darling (R-River Hills), co-chairwoman of the Joint Finance Committee.

"It's good news, but it doesn't mean we're going to celebrate and go on a spending binge."

Rep. John Nygren (R-Marinette), co-chairman of the committee, said he wants to increase school funding by $100 per student per year, which would cost $225 million over two years.

Senate President Mike Ellis (R-Neenah) wants twice as much for schools - $200 per student per year. His plan would cost $408 million and would be paid with a mix of state aid and property taxes. The state portion would cost about $245 million.

Walker has not provided specifics on how much he wants to put into schools. The original budget he proposed would provide schools with an increase of $129 million in general aid, but they would have to cut their property taxes by a similar amount - meaning any new aid would go toward property tax relief rather than classroom costs.

GOP lawmakers have differed on that front, saying they want to give schools the ability to spend at least some of the new money they get from the state.

Republicans in both houses increasingly have said they want to increase school funding, though they continue to differ on the amounts.

And Assembly Republicans have loudly backed Walker's plans to expand school voucher programs - an idea that has been met with skepticism from some Republican senators. Under the state's voucher programs, students in Milwaukee and eastern Racine County can attend religious schools and other private schools at taxpayer expense.

Walker wants to allow voucher programs to any district with 4,000 or more students with two or more schools that are failing or not meeting expectations. That would immediately establish voucher programs in nine new districts. Separately, Walker wants to allow special needs students anywhere in the state to be eligible for school vouchers.

"We want to assure our urban and rural communities that their schools will have the funding necessary to carry out their most critical job of educating our future leaders," said a statement from state Rep. Pat Strachota (R-West Bend), a member of the Joint Finance Committee. "We also remain committed to expansion of choice programs as they are a necessary component of improving our education system as they offer parents options to ensure their children succeed."

Assembly Republicans also want to use some of the new money to make more tax cuts.

"Our promise is to give Wisconsin taxpayers the largest possible income tax cut that we can afford. The revenue numbers released today put us one step closer to accomplishing that goal," said a statement from Rep. Dale Kooyenga (R-Brookfield), a Joint Finance Committee member who is spearheading the Assembly's efforts to cut taxes.

Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca (D-Kenosha) said lawmakers should focus on putting money toward schools.

"With new revenue projections, there can be no more excuses for the Republicans continued lack of funding for the education of our public school children and job training for our workers," a statement from Barca said. "With new revenue projections, they can undo some of the damage they did to our public school classrooms and job training for our workers at our technical colleges and other vital training programs."

The memo from the Legislative Fiscal Bureau said more money was expected to come into the state primarily because of higher than projected collections from the individual income tax. Higher business profits and home sales also played a role.

"Our reforms are working," said Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester).

The memo noted that the state will end the current fiscal year on June 30 with $215 million more than expected. Half of that money - $107.5 million - by law must go in the state's rainy-day fund. That fund, which for years critics have said is underfunded, is now expected to have $243 million in it when the fiscal year ends, the memo said.

The state had a roughly $3 billion projected shortfall over two years when Walker took office. Walker and Republican lawmakers fixed it mainly through spending cuts to schools, local governments and other programs rather than through tax increases. Walker and GOP lawmakers also ended most collective bargaining for most public employees to help local officials deal with the cuts, leading to a recall election that the governor won last June.

 

[Lutherman2112]

Fed index ranks Wisconsin 49th in economic outlook

The 50-state Leading Index report for April showed only five states with contraction, assigning Wisconsin an index rank of -0.74%. Wyoming, with a rank of -1.29%, is the only state with a lower index.

The most accurate reading of the state's employment trends show Wisconsin ranks at No. 44 in private-sector job creation in the most recent 12-month period. In the same time frame, also using accurate data, Wisconsin ranks as the nation's fifth worst in terms of the erosion in private-sector wages, in which the state's 2.2% decline is twice the rate of the national 1.1% average.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Fed index ranks Wisconsin 49th in economic outlook

The 50-state Leading Index report for April showed only five states with contraction, assigning Wisconsin an index rank of -0.74%. Wyoming, with a rank of -1.29%, is the only state with a lower index.

The most accurate reading of the state's employment trends show Wisconsin ranks at No. 44 in private-sector job creation in the most recent 12-month period. In the same time frame, also using accurate data, Wisconsin ranks as the nation's fifth worst in terms of the erosion in private-sector wages, in which the state's 2.2% decline is twice the rate of the national 1.1% average.

Did you forget something?

Economists cautioned against reading too much into a single month's data.

And the Philadelphia Fed's report is imperfect. Among the multiple variables used to compile the leading index, a significant component is the monthly state employment report, which is prone to heavy revisions. That's because the government bases its monthly findings on a survey of only about 3% of the state's employers. That creates a wide margin of error when they are extrapolated statewide.

Nice try, though.

 

[Ilov80s]

Fed index ranks Wisconsin 49th in economic outlook

The 50-state Leading Index report for April showed only five states with contraction, assigning Wisconsin an index rank of -0.74%. Wyoming, with a rank of -1.29%, is the only state with a lower index.

The most accurate reading of the state's employment trends show Wisconsin ranks at No. 44 in private-sector job creation in the most recent 12-month period. In the same time frame, also using accurate data, Wisconsin ranks as the nation's fifth worst in terms of the erosion in private-sector wages, in which the state's 2.2% decline is twice the rate of the national 1.1% average.

Did you forget something?

Economists cautioned against reading too much into a single month's data.

And the Philadelphia Fed's report is imperfect. Among the multiple variables used to compile the leading index, a significant component is the monthly state employment report, which is prone to heavy revisions. That's because the government bases its monthly findings on a survey of only about 3% of the state's employers. That creates a wide margin of error when they are extrapolated statewide.

Nice try, though.

You should read thd article more closely and look at the other links it provides.

 

[Rayderr]

Sorry, can't believe anything until cr8f gives us his views from Canada.

 

[snogger]

Fed index ranks Wisconsin 49th in economic outlook

The 50-state Leading Index report for April showed only five states with contraction, assigning Wisconsin an index rank of -0.74%. Wyoming, with a rank of -1.29%, is the only state with a lower index.

The most accurate reading of the state's employment trends show Wisconsin ranks at No. 44 in private-sector job creation in the most recent 12-month period. In the same time frame, also using accurate data, Wisconsin ranks as the nation's fifth worst in terms of the erosion in private-sector wages, in which the state's 2.2% decline is twice the rate of the national 1.1% average.

I'll see your reports and raise youRanked 24th for best state to do business in up from 43rd when Walker took over

Ranked 17th in Top states for businesses up from from 25th and 29th in the previous two years

Ranked #13th.. Top Business Climates .. The first time it has been above #25 since 1998

Ranked 15th for Economic Outlook improved from 32, 30 and 23 the previous years.

It is, as Politifact says, how you "Cherry Pick" the reports

 

[Mr.Pack]

Fed index ranks Wisconsin 49th in economic outlook

The 50-state Leading Index report for April showed only five states with contraction, assigning Wisconsin an index rank of -0.74%. Wyoming, with a rank of -1.29%, is the only state with a lower index.

The most accurate reading of the state's employment trends show Wisconsin ranks at No. 44 in private-sector job creation in the most recent 12-month period. In the same time frame, also using accurate data, Wisconsin ranks as the nation's fifth worst in terms of the erosion in private-sector wages, in which the state's 2.2% decline is twice the rate of the national 1.1% average.

I'll see your reports and raise youRanked 24th for best state to do business in up from 43rd when Walker took over

Ranked 17th in Top states for businesses up from from 25th and 29th in the previous two years

Ranked #13th.. Top Business Climates .. The first time it has been above #25 since 1998

Ranked 15th for Economic Outlook improved from 32, 30 and 23 the previous years.

It is, as Politifact says, how you "Cherry Pick" the reports

Ooooops

 

[Lutherman2112]

How many Walker aides have been convicted?

Now a special prosecutor.

 

[The Kerminator]

How many Walker aides have been convicted?

Now a special prosecutor.

Nice bump. No mention of the large surplus that WI will have this year? No mention of the cut in taxes we are getting?

 

[MaxThreshold]

How many Walker aides have been convicted?

Now a special prosecutor.

Nice bump. No mention of the large surplus that WI will have this year? No mention of the cut in taxes we are getting?

Why would she? She clearly has Walker Derangement Syndrome.