The People vs. Scott Walker

For the record, I am actually okay with the financial concessions Walker asked for in his budget repair bill - and actually were agreed upon by public sector unions. Even with Walker's concessions, they are paying less than the national average. Even after they agreed to the concessions, Walker still went after collective bargaining.

It's not about the money; it's about the rights.

It takes a majority of people to agree to be a union; they all chip in their fair share; they elect their representatives; they sink or swim together... I'm sorry, but that's what you call democracy in the workplace.

It's not about the money; it's about the rights.

Say you don't take my word on that. We know that our Constitution allows for the right of assembly, the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, the right of individuals to enter into contracts... Unions are built upon a foundation of rights previously granted to the people, and to take them away is wrong. I've mentioned before that people fought and died for labor rights. It's also in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of which the United States is a signatory. Labor rights are human rights.
I, for one, do not want to be represented by any government that tries to roll back any rights. Doesn't matter if they're my personal rights or not... if someone were trying to rescind women's suffrage, I'd be out there raising hell too. If women aren't the prime civilizing and democratizing influence in this world, I have no idea what is...

^ Reading your posts is just a painful activity. Partly to the horrific spelling and grammar, which your hurts your arguments because of the highly likelihood of a lack of education and or sheer laziness. Partly to the fact you're spouting off a lot of Tea Party arguments, which time and time again have been proven to have been created by large corporate interests to screw over the lower and middle classes.

As a business owner, you should support a single payer non-profit health care system rather than the private for-profit system we currently have. Vermont is in the process to creating just that.

I really shouldn't waste more time on this. I'll just say that you have right to be upset, but your focus is misguided.

For someone who rails on and on about greedy people, you sure do seem, well, greedy.

Greed is taking more than you earn. Greed is expecting me to pay for you.

I do care about my employees but if I cant afford it for me why do you expect me to afford it for them?

It comes down to respect. Bottom line.

Your basically saying to each employee that if you could legally fuck them anymore then you would.

I mean the total amount of electricle work available here in the north country will not allow me to bill out a journeyman any higher than 55dollars an hour. People expect to see you as a journeyman never stop working because they are paying the bill. Now I pay a man 18dollars an hour and it actually cost's me 42dollars an hour for that man. At 42dollars an and collecting only 55dollars an hour that leaves me 13dollars an hour which I have to pay vehicle insurance, gas, taxes on my shop, insurance for the shop, electricity for my shop, heat. So I defnitely don't make millions. I scrape on by.

D'oh! Accidentally posted this in the Obama thread because I had multiple tabs open. This should've gone here.



The Fighting Bob Fest organizers had a free event a the Barrymore Theater (capacity 980) on the day of one of the 100K rallies.
Speaking besides Kucinich were Madison's Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin, Texas populist Jim Hightower, and Wisconsinite former politician/columnist/FBF organizer Ed Garvey.
The place was packed. I didn't actually get inside to see this speech. The event was being broadcast live on Madison's community radio station, so they brought a stereo out for those of us in the overflow crowd. I was in the box office area, waiting for someone to leave. I finally did get inside at the end of this speech and saw Hightower.

Just another one of the things I keep meaning to share but forget.
Hope it's worth it to someone out there.

Gotta give credit to Kucinich. His wife is a fox.

Thursday recap before I get to today - read the nutshell and skip the longer more legalese bit if you like:

In a nutshell: the State of Wisconsin is being sued for rushing the bill they passed through, with allegations that there was not enough advance notice to meet the legal minimum. The judge hearing the case has ordered involved parties not to enact or implement the law until this case has been heard. One of these parties is Secretary of State Doug La Follette, who has the constitutional authority to publish bills. A lawsuit in progress has a judge's restraining order preventing La Follette from publishing the bill until the case has been decided.

Longer explanation (scroll past if above was enough): The Wisconsin Constitution states that a law officially goes into effect when it has been published by the Secretary of State and in the official state paper of record, the Wisconsin State Journal. Our state constitution also requires Secretary of State to designate dates of publication for bills and publish them into law within ten days of governor's signature - which would be March 25th.
On March 16th, Dane County (Madison's county) district attorney filed a lawsuit challenging the legality of the bill's passing, alleging violations of state open meetings law. Notice for the 6pm session which passed the bill were put up in the proper venue around 4:20pm that day; state statutes require 24-hour notice under normal conditions and 2-hour notice under emergency conditions - neither standard being met in the passing of this bill. The judge in the case (Maryann Sumi) had issued a March 18th restraining order preventing further execution of the bill until she could hear and rule on the merits of the case.
Secretary of State Doug La Follette (amongst other officials) has a restraining order preventing him from publishing the bill, either through his office and the official state paper (both are required for enactment.) La Follette complied with the judge's request, rescinding his then-standing declaration to publish the bill on March 25th.
In the meantime, Wisconsin's Attorney General is appealing the restraining order, claiming to be acting on behalf of a Secretary of State who did not request the AG's involvement. That court of appeals refused to issue a ruling, leaving the restraining order intact and sending two questions up to the Wisconsin Supreme Court:
1. Is a circuit court striking down of the bill/law the appropriate remedy for violation of open meetings law?
2. If so, does the circuit court have the authority to prevent the Secretary of State from publishing a bill.
This case has not yet been taken up to the state supreme court. For that to happen, four of seven Wisconsin Supreme Court justices must agree to take the case. As it stands, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has a 4-3 "conservative" majority (a consequence of selecting judges by election is that those elections are partisan even when they pretend they're not...) Speaking of which, one of these Supreme Court justices - one of the conservatives - is up for reelection next Tuesday in the most hotly-contested spring races I can recall. (There, gave you brainiacs some extra info. Let's join the rest again.)



...all back together now, whichever route we took.
Either way, that's a summation of the state of things as they were on Thursday.

On Friday the 25th, Republican Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald ordered the legislature's reference bureau to post a copy of the bill on its website near the end of the business day. State Republicans consider this to be the official "publication" necessary to begin enforcing their bill, despite lack of involvement from the constitutionally-specified Secretary of State. Republicans state that they view the law as having gone into effect as of Saturday. The head of the reference bureau that printed it concedes that even he does not think the online posting of the bill constitutes "publication" and that he does not believe the law to be in effect - he was just following orders.
By Monday, the Walker administration was already altering the next round of public workers' paychecks to reflects its changes - amongst other ways that Republicans acted as if this bill had passed.

Today, Tuesday, the first round of the initial case alleging violations of open meeting law began. The courthouse was packed and an overflow room was set up for people wishing to view proceedings. The judge repeated her insistence that the state refrain from implementing this (bill/law) until the open meeting violations in the lawsuit have been decided on. She also expanded the restraining order to include include Democratic leaders, both houses of our legislature and the conference committee between them.
Judge Sumi reiterated that "no further implementation" of this law is legally allowed and threatened sanctions against those violating her order. Comments made later Tuesday by the Walker administration made it sound as if they still were going to proceed with implementation despite the judge's order. Expect all of this to get more interesting and more ugly in the coming days and weeks as challenges to this law wind their way through the court system.
And these days, there is more action in the courthouse than in the state house.

Oh, but that's not all. There's still plenty of house-to-house action collecting signatures. The recall effort has its own ad:


Forward!

Going for the triple post again:

Rachel Maddow devoted about ten minutes of her show tonight to highlighting the differences between Authoritarian Conservative and Libertarian Conservative. I recommend it if you have time.
Watch it here: www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/42331193#42331193
I feel a bit more vindicated for my earlier posts in this thread about the political compass ;D

I'm also going to note that Prof. William Cronon mentioned within was head of the dorm in which I lived freshman year of college. He deserves some linkage, at the very least:
Prof. Cronon first began to attract national attention because of a post on his blog in which he discussed the role of the American Legislative Exchange Council in state legislation. ALEC in a nutshell is a group that makes sample legislation for Republican state legislators to tailor to their own states. Remember when I pointed out that all the various states seemed to have such similar wording? That's because ALEC is one of the ways the man behind the curtain does his thing without public notice.
Within a week, Cronon's blog post had generated much attention and two million hits. He was invited to author an Op-Ed piece in The New York Times the next week. State Republicans took notice, and are trying to use their leverage over UW-Madison to make public his email. I think now would be a good time to remind everyone that Wisconsin is (sadly) the state which gave Joe McCarthy to the nation, because it is (sadly) relevant once again.

I find it fitting to highlight the University of Wisconsin mission statement, as it appears on a century-old plaque that still hangs near the main entrance to the Bascom Hall administration building in the heart of campus:

Updates from Wisconsin:
1. Today, the Walker administration finally (albeit temporarily) ceased and desisted in their implementation of their law bill... after not one, not two, but three restraining orders since March 18th (and two this week alone) preventing them from doing so.
2. I earlier postulated that Republican Senator Randy Hopper was most likely the first official to face a recall over this; I was incorrect. Organizers for the recall of Senator Dan Kapanke have announced they are prepared to turn in upwards of 20K signatures at noon today. The number necessary to recall Kapanke is just under 15,600... sounds like they have five thousand additional names for buffer room.
Sen. Kapanke represents the district of fellow Inforooster suspendedzen, who was at the very least eligible to sign one of these recall petitions... I'd be giving the La Crosse area two thumbs up if we still had the requisite smilies for it. An update from you would be appreciated.
3. My mother, a union worker in the kitchens of my hometown's school district for 25 years, asked her boss if she would have a job this time next year... and her boss said he could not give her an answer


Updates from labor struggles around the country:
Indiana: Indiana House Democrats returned from walking out to prevent quorum, during which time they spent more than five weeks in Illinois - in similar fashion to the Wisconsin 14. Their legislative protest seems to have come with some gains that were not realized here in Wisconsin: Gov. Mitch Daniels achieved his goal of stripping collective bargaining rights - temporarily; Daniels had to do it via executive order in their absence, meaning his proposed changes were not enacted into law beyond his term in office. It is a small victory, but it is something.

Ohio:

This was the scene after the Ohio Senate passed Senate Bill 5 to send to Gov. John Kasich for his signature - which occurred on Thursday. It reminds me of the scene I witnessed within my own state legislature after the Wisconsin Assembly rammed through their (initial) bill while I was staying in the capitol. The Ohio Republicans' approach is notable in that they were willing to throw one of their own under the bus to achieve their goals: in order for this bill to pass out of committee, one Republican Senator was forced out of his committee seat in favor of one friendly to the bill. The bill passed the Ohio Senate by a single vote.
Opponents here have recourse through a ballot-repeal initiative. Organizers have ninety days to gather slightly more than 230K signatures representing at least half of the state's counties in order to have a chance to repeal the bill. Should their attempts prove successful, Senate Bill 5 will go on the November ballot for an up-or-down verdict rendered by citizens. This development surely cannot be a welcome development for state Republicans whose opponents are energized by the bill. Gov. Kasich, elected in November, currently has an approval rating of 30%.

New Hampshire:

Thousands gathered outside the state capitol in Concord to protest yet another bill proposing to strip workers' collective bargaining rights. This bill is still working its way through the state legislature.
I already asked my man Tim out there where I can send a pizza during the occupation of their state capitol.

Florida:
Republican Gov. Rick Scott, the Tea Party favorite who upset the GOP establishment candidate in the primary and won a three-way general election by a single point, has plenty of privatization plans up his sleeve. He wants to steer state Medicaid patients exclusively into private for-profit managed-care groups. He has commissioned studies to privatize the state's prison system.
Scott also has a substantial investment in drug-testing clinics. He claims he avoided conflicts of interest when, after his election, he transferred his holdings... to his wife. A dubious claim, indeed. Also curious is that Scott aims to institute NO NO WORD!!! testing on state workers and possibly welfare recipients. In the case of the state workers, the tests come randomly and regardless of position - and at least quarterly. His proposed program would increase the number of NO NO WORD!!! testees in his state by tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands... in a business where he and his family stand to see a major increase in their profits despite a questionable avoidance of conflict of interest.

I would also like to note that crazy is in the eyes and this guy has it in spades.

Maine:
Gov. Paul LePage won election with 38% of the vote in a four-way race, less than 1.5%/7,500 votes, over an Independent candidate in second with a Democrat placing a distant third. He proclaimed on the campaign trail that headlines during his governorship would read "LePage Tells Obama To Go To Hell." When, as governor, he was asked by a reporter about his refusal to meet with NAACP representatives who had requested a meeting, his response was "Tell them they can kiss my butt." The most controversial aspect of Republican-led efforts (I refuse to use the term "reform" here) in his short time in office has centered around child labor laws.

Specifically, LePage and his allies in the state legislature seek to:
Remove restrictions prohibiting employment by children 14 and under.
Extend the number of hours an employer may require a minor to work.
Eliminate the maximum number of hours underage employees 16+ may work on school days.
Institute a six-month period where workers under age 20 may work for $5.25, which is lower than the federal or state minimum wage.
I hope that most of us can imagine what will ensue when/if such provisions are enacted...

LePage has also drawn national attention for his decision to remove what he deems as a controversial mural. Said mural, previously located in a conference room in the state Department of Labor and currently "in storage," depicted labor history throughout the decades. He claims that the mural might be considered offensive to business leaders who may conduct business there.

A section of the "offensive" mural depicts, amongst other things, child laborers.
Also deemed offensive and removed by Gov. LePage:

Rosie the Riveter.
Feminist. Patriot. Laborer.
I hope I am not the only one who is offended by the fact that she is now deemed offensive.

Speaking of removing offensive objects... Democrats in the Maine legislature have proposed tasking a committee to draft legislation instituting recall procedures in the state, which currently do not exist. Maine only allows impeachment as a means of removing elected officials. Even this moderate measure, which did not require divisive debate/action in the state legislature, was immediately tabled by majority Republicans.

Washington, D.C.:
While massive protests at state capitols around the country go largely unnoticed, "a couple hundred" people showed up to Michelle Bachmann's Tea Party rally on Thursday. According to the media sign-in sheet, at least fifty of those roughly 200 were reporters covering the event.
I wish I were making this up.
(Courtesy of the ever-so-liberal Washington Post)

These are but a few snapshots of the new America.
Russ Feingold calls it "The Gilded Age on Steroids."
I personally refer to it as a hostile corporate takeover.

It's late, and I feel dirty for just having written about all this... but I refuse to end this post on such a down note. Time for me to get cathartic.

Enjoy some Scott Walker parody song dedications, both classic and contemporary:

Nancy Sinatra parody "This Walker's Made for Bootin'"


"(NSFW) You" Cee-Lo hipster ukelele parody:


Last, but certainly not least... we have Easter on the horizon:


Solidarity Forever.

You missed the silver linings in that post.

2011 Wisconsin Act 10 is under judge's restraining order until the case against it is settled. It was just today that Judge Sumi gave lawyers in the case three legal questions to settle, and outlined a seven-week process for the case. That is the earliest Walker's bill would go into law - if the administration wins that suit without anyone appealing the ruling.

Today is Day Two of a 90-day period for Ohioans to gather signatures to repeal the bill signed on Thursday. 230K signatures in ninety days is entirely plausible... it is a foregone conclusion that Scott Walker will face recall - and his recall requires 550K signatures in a shorter 60-day span.

Our fate has not yet been sealed.
Victory is possible and our fate is winning.

Forward!

Here in Wisconsin last November, the big races on the ballot were senatorial and gubernatorial. The seats had been held by Democrats Jim Doyle (who declined to run for a third term) and Sen. Feingold. Republicans Scott Walker and Ron Johnson both won by a 52-47 margin.
Polls done about a month ago showed Walker losing a rematch to Milwaukee mayor Tom Barrett by seven points, an opinion swing greater than Walker's original margin of victory. I can imagine there is also a similar as-yet-unquantified level of voter remorse over Feingold's ouster.
Republicans have always had it out for Feingold when he'd been up for reelection. They somehow managed a smear job where they made him look like a typical career politician when he was anything but. He was used to having millionaire businessmen thrown at him, and always won close wins in this swing state... he probably would've won just about any other biennial here, but 2010 was a good year for the Tea Party.
I guess the upside is that the state is going to have an opening for governor next year, and I've heard only one other name (barely) mentioned besides Feingold's as a potential Walker recall opponent.

As for where we have our other trustbusters...

I think we had a good one in Eliot Spitzer before his scandal. Wall Street had to have loved his disgrace and resignation.

My best bet for our best hope in a trustbuster these days is Elizabeth Warren. She is a Harvard law professor, chair of the bank bailout Congressional oversight panel, currently is a special advisor setting up the newly Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and is the favorite candidate to head this new agency once established. That is expected to be a summer recess appointment, because corporate-owned politicans would raise hell over her appointment. Her name has previously been thrown around for Supreme Court nominations and there's some support for her challenging Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown next year. I think appointing her could be one of the smartest things Obama does.

Beyond that... we could definitely use some more trustbusters.