The People vs. Scott Walker

Interesting pictures. It does help give some insight into what these folks stand for. I really like the sign. "stop attacks on immigrants equal rights for all"!!! How about illegals please come to our nation in a lawful legal manner. So therefore you and your family dont die in the desert? Is he suggesting any illegal should have the same rights as american citizens?? That would cost a lot of money to give a young man in pakistan social security and FMLA

Either way I like the effort however I feel they are directing their protests to wall street which is wrong. Why would they do that? Could they be funded by pro union democrats? I hope not. We need to keep the corrupt powerbrokers on both sides out of this

In the end LAW makers in congress pass Laws. The people we elect have the power to reform wallstreet. They have no interest in reforming wallstreet as they are being paid by wallstreet. Our leaders interest are self centered and to only bolster their powerbase

We need to rerform the LAW makers then this will translate into wallstreet reform and down the line

Don't worry the power brokers will be out in full force to discredit these people. I am sure these people will be called ancharists, disgruntled WHITE youth. Racists lawbreakers..Fools, rednecks, Their spelling is poor and they are radical in nature..the list will grow and grow. The media will pick up on it and SNL may do skits and john stewart will make a couple laughs..In the end the group will be marginalized. If that fails the powerbrokers will join their ranks. They will blend in THEN launch racists attacks and hold crazy signs to discredit the movement.

We seen this play out first hand with the tea party group. We will see it again..We must together see passed this clutter and reform Congress at once

Updates
Walkergate
The list of people who have been granted immunity in the John Doe investigation is apparently up to twelve. Just making it clear that you aren't granted immunity unless you're in danger of being charged with a crime. Charges aren't guaranteed, but that's still curious. Not yet certain on who those twelve are besides those already known.
Wisconsin Democracy Campaign executive director Mike McCabe says he was interviewed by the FBI in January. He said the interview focused on the role of campaign donations and legislative staff in the caucus scandal about a decade ago, but that he did not know at the time that there was an ongoing investigation into Milwaukee County. Curious.

Capitol Crackdown
Back in August, if you'll recall, there was a rally which ended with thirteen protesters remaining after closing time and being taken out by the police. No official charges were filed in that incident until this past week. What I read said that six people were arrested and seven received citations. I haven't checked in with who'd know about that since I heard, but I think the pair from the beer dumping incident remained in the capitol that day. Since the beer got dumped on Rep. Vos, there's been pressure from the statewide right on Capitol Police Chief Charles Tubbs. I think the delayed action might be related.

Wisconsin Legislature
Since the state senate recall elections, the last of which was August 19th, both houses of the state legislature have met only once. It is still going to be about two weeks before any bills are debated. Things are expected to begin October 18th with a special session on jobs bills.
Democrats have a series of bills they were prepared to introduce when they had the one-day session last month. That wasn't allowed to happen by Senate leadership. Rep. Peter Barca, Assembly Minority Leader, said about a week ago when Scott Walker called him to plan for the upcoming session and during the conversation Walker said the GOP was still deciding what they were going to introduce. (Weren't jobs the top priority of the last elections? Aren't they nine months into this administration already? How low is the voters' top priority on their priority list?)

Republicans finally announced the bills that they intended to introduce for the special jobs session. Here's some of what they have in mind:
A bill seeking to set up a $500M venture capital fund (A Walker proposal this spring was eventually shot down when it was revealed half the money would go to out-of-state entities.)
A bill limiting the ability of the Wisconsin Department of Revenue to audit, penalize, adopt administrative rules for enforcing tax collection, as well as revoking transparency requirements.
A bill which deregulates mining practices and repeals permit requirements (Native Americans up north are rather opposed to a particular proposed mine.)
A bill to allow for wetlands removal (likely linked to the mining bills.)
A bill to exempt liability for any manufacturer or seller of medicine, medical supplies or devices for anything which meets FDA approval. (I don't exactly think FDA approval is fail-safe enough to justify this.)
A bill to limit the amount plaintiffs' attorneys may spend (making certain cases prohibitively expensive, prosecuted with fewer resources, and with no similar cap on defense fees.)
A bill which limits the interest received on judgements in types of cases more likely to be filed by individuals (personal injury, consumer cases) to 4-5% while maintaining the present 12% interest rate for other types of lawsuits (creditors, landlords) which are more likely to be filed by corporations against citizens.
A bill which allows those wishing to sue the state of Wisconsin to do so in the county of their choosing, as opposed to Dane County where state government resides. (This brings up jurisdictional and judge-shopping issues.)
A bill to lower electricity rates for manufacturers and other large businesses by increasing the rates for citizens and small businesses.

Most of these bills have nothing to do with job creation, and the few that ostensibly do are based on the myth that giving rich people more money turns them into "job creators." These aren't jobs bills, they're corporate giveaways.
The mining bills and the electricity rates clearly benefit Koch subsidiaries. The medical liability immunity also reeks of corporate giveaway (Pfizer is one of the bigger names in the list of ALEC members, btw.) The lawsuit restrictions make it harder to hold corporations accountable in the courts, and creates a double standard between judgements against citizens and corporations.

Another thing worth mentioning: You know how on your tax returns there is a checkbox with the option of donating to the public elections financing fund? We have those on our state tax forms as well. That option was previously eliminated by this legislature, and the legislature has raided the fund - specifically set aside by citizens for that purpose - to fill holes elsewhere. A Democratic Assembly representative, Andy Jorgensen, is trying to get through a bill which would order the state to reimburse the election fund. It's worth noting that Walker and many other Republicans campaigned against the previous administration's use of the same practice of fund raising.

The number of Democratic amendments approved by this Republican legislature? 1 in 376.

Recall 2012
The Recall Walker effort looms on the horizon. Seeing as there is not much precedent, statewide or nationwide, there are a lot of things which are still up in the air.
The first issue is who. We know Scott Walker will headline Recallapalooza 2012, but he's likely not to be the only one. Depending on the GAB ruling as to whether Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch gets automatically recalled as his running mate or has to be recalled herself is still in question. Also likely to be targeted are a handful of Republican state senators in more moderate districts. We haven't forgotten that we didn't Flip The Senate, but we realize we still have that chance. Other names being floated around are Attorney General JB Van Hollen and a couple of supreme court justices - the few who won in increasingly big-money campaigns in the elections leading up to 2010.
The bigger issue is when. The earliest signature collection can begin is sixty days before he has been in office for one year, with a review/certification process lasting another 31 days (with possible extension.) That brings things to the beginning of February at the earliest. Elections occur six weeks after certification without a primary, but ten weeks after certification with a primary. Either one of these scenarios overshoots the February election date, making a Recall Walker vote most likely to happen during April elections.
Most likely not coincidentally, Scott Walker recently signed the bill that moved the Wisconsin Republican primary to coincide with April elections. The legislature's thinking in doing so is that the maximized GOP turnout in a presidential primary will help Walker's chances in a recall.
I hear rumors that the Democratic Party, We Are Wisconsin, United Wisconsin, and wisconsinrecall.net intend to stand united in seeking to wait until January to begin collecting signatures. This would extend the process beyond the Republican primary into its own special election. These groups believe that, in making a coalition of the largest pro-recall groups, they may be able to make the later scenario a greater possibility. There has been no ruling on whether these groups' preferences would preclude action taken at the earliest possible moment.

These conversations are taking place, though. Each side has its reasoning, advantages, and disadvantages. I know there's a series of a dozen meetings this month, put on by one of the recall groups, for public input on just when this should proceed. One of our Democracy Addicts brought fliers for this meetings to our meetup a couple weeks ago, and this sparked one of these discussions. A small majority of our group seemed to agree with the January approach as we were discussing it, but we're not sure all the opposition will see it that way.
There are already a few lesser-known groups whose backgrounds who haven't been vetted which seem rather gung-ho about starting the process in November. I suspect there's a man behind the curtain involved with that situation.


Closing thought:
As we were discussing the benefits of a later recall date, we were suddenly interrupted. Diane slapped her palm on the table, catching us off guard. The conversation stopped, and she spoke briefly and with more conviction than I'd heard from anyone in some time:
"I want to be around to see him leave."

You really don't have your eye on the prize here.

Corporations' actions don't affect everyone?
Are.
You.
Fucking.
Serious?

BP cut some corners in pursuit of their prime directive, profit, and look what happened in the Gulf of Mexico.
Wall Street did not crash in 2008 by accident. That, again, was in pursuit of their prime directive of profit - or at the very least, avoiding risk/loss.
Are you telling me these don't affect you (whether you realize it or not,) any of your fellow citizens, or the commons? That's just willful ignorance.

So what if most of what Wall Street does is legal? If I were totally law-abiding with the exception of only committing rape and/or murder after sundown on the 24th of each month, you know what? Most of my activities would be legal, but I'd still be a rapist and/or murderer.

For you to say there is zero corruption between Wall Street and Congress is, quite simply, false. Wall Street in and of themselves don't have the power to pass laws, true. They sure spend a hell of a lot of money lobbying our officials, both to act and to avoid acting. Congress is corrupt, yes, and their campaign donations sure as hell enable that. There is no corruption without personal gain.

Wall Street, the special interests, the wealthy... for you to say that they don't write legislation is another obvious false view you have. If you'd been paying attention, you'd have heard me say a thing or two about the American Legislative Exchange Council - ALEC for short. It is the modern-day equivalent of the smoke-filled back room in which shady deals are made. Corporate interests (250+ corporations are members) invite all the officials they paid to get elected to a retreat, and give to them legislation to introduce in their home states. It's how corrupt politicians earn their campaign cash. Special interests don't introduce the legislation, true, but they certainly write legislation.

If you think there is corruption in the system, which there is, you have to subsequently admit that as a result there are things that shouldn't be illegal which are - as well as things which should be illegal which aren't. That's precisely how corruption distorts the system.

The market didn't crash in 2008 by pure accident. It was a result of big-time campaign contributors having existing laws rescinded and no longer having to apply to them.

If the stock market crash were truly treated like the epic crime that it was, there would be individuals who would be treated as the accomplices that they are.
I believe that chief among them would be former Texas Sen. Phil Gramm, one of Wall Street's favorite Senators and (not coincidentally) one of the biggest champions of deregulation our times have seen.
This nation had a major economic crisis caused by faulty practices, and in response to these faulty practices we had what we call The New Deal. Parts of The New Deal were aimed at putting America back to work and investing in our infrastructure (TVA, Hoover Dam) but equally important were new banking regulations. For one of the few times in our nation's history, we went fifty years without a major banking crisis. This is a direct result of New Deal legislation.

One piece of New Deal legislation which proved essential in preventing crises of this sort was the Glass-Steagall Act, which created a wall of separation between savings banking and investment banking, between banks and securities companies and insurance companies. This wall of separation was removed by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999.
Gramm was also crucial in the passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. A crucial aspect of this law prevented federal regulation over derivatives trading - including the credit default swaps. It was these very derivatives and credit default swaps which created the toxic assets that brought our economy to a screeching halt eight years later.

Were the favors done for Wall Street and special interest money leading up to the big market crash here legal? Yes.
Should they have been? Hell no.
Corruption distorted our system - and it affected us all.

Which is exactly why attributing blame to Wall Street is correct.
With fault should come accountability... that is the demand.

My only question is - as the protests get bigger:
- how will the media portray them as, since they can't keep it under the radar anymore?
- how will the wealthy and powerful try to manipulate this?

I can't believe I wrote that whole thing without mentioning one more recent development.
Though still underway, there is already a sequel to Occupy Wall Street in the works.
Who's up for Occupy Congress 2012?


Also, Democracy Addicts was pathetically attended tonight. The latter half of the evening overlapped with the Brewers in the playoffs. I had to leave for work before the game anyway, so it didn't cramp any of my plans. But it was just myself and a handful of older women tonight. Occupy Wall Street was heavy in the discussion.

They had seen this mask - modeled here by Lady Forward on the capitol square this winter - in Occupy Wall Street coverage (NYPD cracked down on protesters partly on the grounds of a 19th Century law restricting masked gatherings) and recognized seeing them around the capitol, but had no idea what it meant. I got to explain to a table full of women my mother's age the revolutionary symbolism of that mask in association with Guy Fawkes, V For Vendetta and Anonymous... and it was actually pretty fun.
I might have learned a thing or two about menopause, too, but that's not nearly as fun.

If there was any revolutionary symbolism left in the concept of wearing a guy fawkes mask, "anonymous" suffocated it with a plastic bag and tossed it in the dumpster.

I had to log on to say too roofan you have been spending way to much time in the sun and on inforoo. Have you ever heard of a lobbyist? ya know these are people paid by certain groups to speak to members of congress to try and get them to vote a certain way. Yes courting them and encouraging them to vote a certain way on certain laws. I am very surprised a man of such high IQ was unaware that this is a very common and needed practice in america. No congress person has the breath of knowledge on every topic so lobbyist play a very important role in informing congress on the ins and out and the viewpoints of what some believe in a specific industry. Hope this civic lesson helps

SAid it before but you really don't come here to talk about music or the festival do you Chicagorooer?

Effective reform is only going to come through congress. I wholeheartedly support OWS not because I think it is going to change Wall St., but because I think it is raising awareness and pushing people into action. Wall St will never initiate any self-imposed change as long as it's profiting from it's current practices, no matter how many people are in the streets. The last thing it cares about is the people.

I am hoping that people are beginning to see the light!

The tough immigration laws in the South, particularly AL and GA are starting to have a big effect. One GA farmer lost 75 workers over the period of a week. He even went to the GA employment services office %to try to FILL those 75 positions and...they told him they had nothing. In Alabama, it's the poultry industry and ethnic restaurants that are suffering. The poultry production plants had to hold a job fair last week to replace workers. Lots of people showed up but having grown up with relatives that actually worked in Poultry processing I would gurantee that 65% of ANY recruited workers will leave withing two months and they will be right back where we started. The problem isn't illegal immigrants taking jobs away from US citizens, it is that the average US citizan, whether they graduated high school, college etc expects a certain standard of wages and living....and some industries just don't fit that bill. If we want the jobs back in America, the American Work ethic and expectations have to change to understand that there is no job that is BENEATH them or that thay are OVER-Qualified for and start working. Period. There are lots of jobs out there...just not high paying, cozy corner office jobs. If you have to work the breakfast shift at Burger King, Lunch shift at McDonalds and dinner shift at Wendys then do it! I was at a point in mhy life where that was a VERY real consideration to support my kids. Luckily it didn't come to that but if more people would realize that it may be the ONLY way to get the economy back on track and get themselves out of the problem and into the solution then that's a big step forward!

Amen! Have not seen him in the Draft Punk thread.

Bama, I think you bring up a good point. If we do not want to work the non-cushy jobs, like cleaning toilets, flipping burgers, or separating the chicks from each other down at Scratch and Peck's Chicken farm, do we sit at home and collect Welfare? My point, is having that safety net of 'unemployment checks' hindering us a society, making it less likely for some to work for their money? I would think if someone had nothing, no food, no water, no shelter, they would work to get that, no matter what the job was.

In Wisconsin, we were pissed off in the streets in February.
Six months later, we made six incumbents face immediate reelection. We only ended two careers, but the fact is we did it. That was just the beginning, but there's your definite concrete results, for starters. I could launch into a lengthy rant arguably less-tangible results we achieved, but I'm going to restrain myself.
I will tell you this, though...
Scott Walker formally introduced the budget repair bill on February 11th, which happened to be the same day Hosni Mubarak resigned in Egypt. It wasn't very good timing on his part.
Our protests began with a couple thousand on the 14th, ten thousand on day two, thirty thousand on day three... day six had 70k, day thirteen had 100k...
I created this thread in the wee hours of the morning on day thirteen. Look at the title. It captures a moment. It's defiantly declarative.
While we were out there on the friendly streets of Madison, we were keenly aware that Hosni Mubarak resigned after eighteen days. There were signs depicting Scott Walker in a pharaoh hat; we counted down to our own day eighteen, hoping he'd be gone.
Day eighteen came and went.
Walker remained.
That didn't stop us.
We didn't just pack it up and go home just because we didn't do it as fast as they did in Egypt.
We kept going. We forced recalls, we ended careers, we fought back... and we intend to continuing to do so. The only reason we haven't gotten Scott Walker yet is because it's too early to legally begin the process. His time is coming. There was a time in the early pages where I debated renaming this thread. I decided against it. Though he wasn't going down in eighteen days as in the Arab Spring, he is going down.
Now might be a good time to point out that today, I celebrated Day 100 of wearing my Recall Walker bracelet. It has been on my wrist constantly since June 29th. It could be the closest thing to a wedding ring I'll ever wear. I'm not going to lie here, the only comparable anticipation I've had in my entire lifetime to recalling Scott Walker was that of losing my virginity.
It's going to happen, it just won't happen as quickly as people like it. That's just the facts of life when it comes to matters of change.

So when you look to Occupy Wall Street in fall of 2011 and say they're just a bunch of angry people who won't produce concrete results, think of Wisconsin winter 2011 and what we've accomplished in under a year.
We were ground zero for a new breed of activism in this country, and we're just getting started. We're not just marching on seats of power, we're taking them over. Believe me, there's no subtle symbolism in the fact that we took over our state capitol. It speaks to what we can achieve at such an early point in the movement, and it speaks to our ultimate aims.
Could there be an Occupy Wall Street if there were no Occupy Wisconsin Capitol? Would that model of activism have evolved independently here, had Wisconsin not imported and adapted to American politics? Would another state have taken the lead if we hadn't, considering the intensity of our response in relation to other states under similar conditions?

What happens when the Wisconsin model goes national?
I'm not entirely certain, but I know it won't be for naught.
I'm sure enough that something will come of it that I'll make a Bonnaroo beer bet with you that there's something I can point to as a concrete result coming out of Occupy Wall Street by the time we're on the farm next June.
I'll take something hoppy.



Funny. I've thought about the cancer parallels myself... mine seems more of a cancer upon the economy itself Our tax & trade policies etc seem to have caused wealth to grow in a highly rapid and isolated matter, much like the disease itself.



*Ahem* ...start? What is Russ Feingold, chopped liver?
He did more to reform campaign finance laws than pretty much any of his counterparts in the Senate. There were elections, before Citizens United, where he restricted his campaign fundraising/spending to one dollar per Wisconsin resident. Every bill he introduced was deficit-neutral at worst. He was near the bottom of the chamber in terms of the amount of pork spending he brought back to the state. He wouldn't even take a Congressionally-approved pay raise above his salary at the beginning of a term, returning the balance to the U.S. Treasury. He was, in many ways, the change we need to see in our future leaders.

I can rival you there, I live within 1000 yards of a cotton and soybean farm...and believe it or not the army base I work on is ALSO a working cattle and sheep farm. There is too much land for the Army and Nasa to utilize to the full extent so they rent it out to cattle farmers to grow hay and let the cattle/sheep graze! I get it. And my point about the low paying positions NOT being filled is exactly in line with what Chavez was trying to point out.






LMAO!! You KNOW that is not what I am saying. But....this country cannot sustain an abundance of high paying jobs without the exports and consumers to pay the high wages. All I am saying is that if you are REALLY depeserate for a job...to feed your family and supply basic needs, you will take ANY job until you can find a better one. That is how most of us started....it stinks that so many people find themselves back to the beginning of that line after having given so much to industries and companies, but I really can't see HOW we get more high paying jobs for people when we can't even get people to work what is actually available? It's like people think that having to move 100 miles for a job that pays less is an insult. No, it's just culture change. If you live in an area with high unemployment, then move to an area with LOWER unemployment if you are able to. Or get re-trained in one of the growth sectors if you can afford it. But at all cost DO NOT just sit around and beeyatch about the economy and the way things are when you are sitting home printing out resumes on your laptop and wireless printer and then going out to eat at those same establishments that are BEGGING for employees. And I know you are not one of those people, but honestly I think that stereotype is what the Big Money people use against the working class....and it is often valid!

Now might be a good time to spin this rant off into a new post.

Things are a bit tense at the pizza place lately. We delivery drivers aren't too happy with a situation. In response to our complaints that the per-delivery reimbursement rate (fifty cents per run) no longer covered the cost of our gasoline, the boss lady's solution was to implement a $1 delivery charge. Fifty cents of that dollar shifts the reimbursement cost onto the customer, the other fifty cents goes to the business, and the initial problem of fifty cents not being enough to cover gas has been completely ignored. You all should know me well enough that I haven't been quiet about it.
I worked there the summer after high school graduation and living in the dorms; I worked there a summer during my dropout years in the middle of the decade; I went back to it again about a year and a half ago.
I never received a write-up at this job in all my various stints there.
I make some noise about this issue, particularly a phone call on my break last night discussing something resembling a drivers' strike until our initial concern is addressed - which was overheard by my manager - and I've gotten written up twice since. I have a feeling I have put myself into one of those "we're going to ride your ass for every last little thing until you leave" situations.
Part of me thinks my days could be numbered there.
Another part of me really doesn't give a damn.

I think I may be of greater value as a homeless unemployed activist at Occupy Wall Street than I am at this job.

I read a lot of press coverage from afar, in addition to seeing what those I know already there have been sharing. One of the biggest critiques I've seen of the OWS movement is that it is unorganized, lacking focus and a clear message. (It's kind of hard to ask "What is our one demand?" when the problem is so big there is no single silver-bullet solution.) I read a rather lengthy piece of citizen journalism written by a libertarian dissatisfied with the press he'd read who decided to visit himself.

One of his observations particularly spoke to me. He said he spent all day wandering, observing and talking to people, and that the only person he ran into with a political science degree was a police officer. I have a political science degree, and I think I that gives me some specialized knowledge that your average pissed-off American doesn't have.
I have what I feel are experience and expertise from the Wisconsin protests which could be of use there. The critique that there is no focus/message also speaks to me as a man who made & distributed dozens of "Kill The Bill" signs on the capitol lawn.
I think I could bring something more uniquely beneficial to Occupy Wall Street than I could my job (if I even do that at all.) Just about any layman can fill my pizza delivery shoes. Having done what I did out here to inspire things out there I feel as if I have an obligation to (not to mention rooting interest for) the success of this movement. Ground Zero for the movement is no longer Madison, it's Wall Street (and the fifty American states hosting Occupy events and General Assemblies in solidarity,) and I think rightly so. Occupying Wall Street is a big step forward toward finishing what began here.

I've been fantasizing about being at Occupy Wall Street since day one. Lately, I find this fantasy increasingly giving way to plotting.

I have a little over $300 in the bank, $750 cash - my Bonnaroo ticket fund, and enough of an idea of what I'll need that I think I can fit what I'd need in a suitcase & backpack. I'm willing to pawn some possessions for more funds, leave return ticket money behind for safekeeping, arrange a ride to the station and Amtrak it out there.
I don't know how quite how far that plan would take me and how long it would last, but it's been brewing in my mind. If I could squeak it out on $25/day, I would probably be able to last about three weeks as it is.
Sure, my return would involve being totally unemployed, but I would be coming back from someplace I would rather be than here. It would also mean completely depleting my Bonnaroo fund.

Here's where some of you might really think I'm crazy... I think I'd rather take part in Occupy Wall Street than attend Bonnaroo VIP.

Having bounced this idea off y'all... thoughts?