• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights withou

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

The police and fire departments do not make up all of Walkers voters and generally republicans are anti-union while democrats are pro-union. So yes the republicans are supporting and enacting legislation their voters want and opposing and preventing legislation their voters do not want. I said the same thing when the democrats fled to prevent a quorum.



How so?



Unless it is stated in the constitution then you can not call something a right. you and I have the right to keep and bear arms without the government infringing on that right because it says so in the 2nd amendment. Where does it say that you have the right to join a union (or some cases forced to join a union if you want a certain job,which is the opposite of something being a right)?

Amendment 1 -
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


That's where.

What's more important is that the Constitution does not allow anyone to compel membership in any non-military organization, and that would include trade unions.

However, no one has lost any rights in Wisconsin except the union leaders' right to someone else's paycheck.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Absolutely! And now that Collective Barganing is off the table we will see if all that talk of unions already agreeing to the financial aspects were genuine or just a slimy tactic.

j-mac

that's an excellent point that i had not thought of.

another thing that i am going to be very curious to find out is what percent of Wisconsin Teachers discover that they would rather not pay union protection racket fees dues.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

1. The police and firefighters made up some of the GOP's constituents and I imagine they were not the only ones upset about this. People who join unions because they want the rights and protection won't support someone who is clearly going after them next.

What about the people who feel forced to join the union because that's a requirement for the job? How many of those are in the public sector?

2. Overreaching is pissing off your constituents and much of the country. The GOP is usually much better about being sneaky with their anti-working class policies and fashioning themselves as champions of all Americans. They're getting sloppy.

Overreaching is the act of attempting to do more than can be accomplished. It can't be defined as overreaching when it's been done.

3. People call rights whatever they want to call them. We could add a right to the constitution if we felt like it- see the Civil Rights and Women's rights movements. The point is, whatever people 'perceive' as rights, they'll fight for them and get angry when someone takes them away esp. when there is a history based on fighting for them.

People are usually wrong.

People do not have a right to have their wages taken by the state and handed to a union boss. The people have the right to pay their own union bosses themselves.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

collective bargaining isn't being forbidden, it is being restrained.

in the week I have seen the left argue on this subject, I don't think I have seen an intellectually honest argument out of one of you yet.

exactly. i've heard alot of hollering about rights (civil rights? really? being able to force people into a union and coercing them to pay dues is a right?) and accusations of conspiracy (is it a conspiracy if you don't try to hide it?).

but i haven't heard alot of solid, policy-driven analysis about why this is a bad idea. i especially haven't seen anything remotely providing backing for the "extremist" charge that keeps getting tossed around.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

I am really surprised by this, actually. It's almost unbelievable. I think that Republicans probably dotted their i's and crossed their t's on this....so it'll probably stand. Now we wait to see if unions can convince enough average Wisconsinites to recall some of the Republicans.....and if the Republicans recall less Dems...and roll back the legislation. Personally, I don't think that's going to be particularly easy. Democracy in action, I guess.

As for the tactic, I say, Good for them. Governor Walker, you rock.

As usual, this will all depend on which judge the Democrats shop for.

However, as was said, as soon as ONE Democrat Senator steps into Wisconsin, he should be arrested and immediately brought to the state capital where legislation pending his august presence has been held in abeyance. It can then be passed, and the issue of what appears to be a perfectly legal non-budgetary bill becomes moot, as it's terms will have been included in the bill the Senator's presence finally allowed passage of.

The problem with the Democrats' game of hookey has always been that they can't stay away for their full term. They're looking more ridiculous every single day.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Attorney Robert Dreps, an expert on the state open meetings law, said he did not believe the conference committee could meet with such short notice.

State law generally requires a 24-hour notice for public meetings, but can be called with just two hours notice when more notice is impossible or impractical, said Dreps, who has represented the Journal Sentinel in the past.

“I can’t imagine how they can meet that standard,” he said.

GOP rams anti-union bill through Wis. Senate - Politics - More politics - msnbc.com


There were something like ten thousand members of the public in the capitol when the meeting was held, right?

Mayor Snorkum would say that the open doors intent of the law was satisfied.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Can you name one Clinton Policy that was responsible for the Economic boom of the 90's?.
.
.
.........down goes another.
.
.
.

Hillarycare.

Hillarycare persuaded to voters to replace Democrats with Republicans, and thus the Democrats lost control of the House.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

As usual, this will all depend on which judge the Democrats shop for.

true.

The problem with the Democrats' game of hookey has always been that they can't stay away for their full term. They're looking more ridiculous every single day.

one of them applied for an absentee ballot, sent to her address in illinois.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

one of them applied for an absentee ballot, sent to her address in illinois.

Wait...am I missing something here? Last I knew a state representitive had to live inside the state that they ran in? Is that law not around in Wisconsin?
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Wait...am I missing something here? Last I knew a state representitive had to live inside the state that they ran in? Is that law not around in Wisconsin?

they do have to maintain their permanent residence there. however, whether or not they have to actually physically "be" there is more dependent upon local law. for example, several state representatives (and i think even a couple of national ones) have taken leaves of absence to go serve overseas with their Reserve or Guard Units.


but in this case i think it was more of a political stunt. the election is a couple of months away; she was signaling her willingness to stay out of the state "as long as it takes" etc.
 
Last edited:
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

If they wanted media attention all they had to do was call the media. I'm sure that each one of em has the media's number on a speed dial.

That isn't how it works. A state Congressman does not get national attention by calling up Rachel Maddow and saying, "Look at me!"

As it was they refused a quorum call, which is against the law, and those politicians fled the state. I don't know how you were raised but my folks taught me that fleeing from your responsibilities is the cowards way out.

Really? What law did they break? Could post the specific one?
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

That isn't how it works. A state Congressman does not get national attention by calling up Rachel Maddow and saying, "Look at me!"

Are you trying to tell me that a news media outlet would deny a state representive an interview on air?

Really? What law did they break? Could post the specific one?

Link Already got it documented in post #14 along with a link to Wisconsins statutes. Enjoy.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

There were something like ten thousand members of the public in the capitol when the meeting was held, right?

Mayor Snorkum would say that the open doors intent of the law was satisfied.

Prior to taking the vote, the republicans asked for 3 opinions from non-partisans, including the guy who sets the rules for the senate. So, i'm pretty certain that you are correct.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

I read the entire thread. Tax cuts are an expense in that, if we want a balanced budget, we need to cut spending by the corresponding decrease in revenue - that's it.

And yes, you should not have made the blanket statement. Some liberals you could maybe make a case for. "Many" I find highly doubtful and you'd have to back up your claims.
The word "many" doesn't need any backup because it's common knowledge. Unless you've been a hermit in a cave, you would know this. So yes, many think tax cuts are an expense because the govt owns all wealth.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

I'm not going to play silly games here with you. What I said still stands - if you want to discuss this in detail, make a new thread.

Your question is answered in parts.
Revenue directly decreased after the tax cuts, not increased.
It increased later, as it always does in time because of two reasons:
A) an inflating dollar
B) an expanding workforce

I know you won't accept these because you do everything in nominal rather than real dollars, or my favorite "80's dollars", so I'm not expecting anything.

Expanding work force? Hmmm, wonder what caused that? Couldn't have anything at all to do with people having and spending more of their own money? Guess the Treasury Dept got it all wrong.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

What really bothers me is how this whole argument stemmed from people shouting back and forth about whether or not the unions had a damaging effect on the state economy. I never saw the numbers made available anywhere. I never heard impartial experts give their opinion. All I heard was political wrangling, and no actual facts.

What I do know is that workers now have less ability to check their employers. That was the point of unions, to be a check on the power that employers already possess. The playing field is no longer level. And now we can expect to see the newly strengthened party using that power. And abusing it. Because that's what people do with power. They abuse it. Every single time. That's what checks and balances are for. And that's what we have just lost.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

What really bothers me is how this whole argument stemmed from people shouting back and forth about whether or not the unions had a damaging effect on the state economy. I never saw the numbers made available anywhere. I never heard impartial experts give their opinion. All I heard was political wrangling, and no actual facts.

What I do know is that workers now have less ability to check their employers. That was the point of unions, to be a check on the power that employers already possess. The playing field is no longer level. And now we can expect to see the newly strengthened party using that power. And abusing it. Because that's what people do with power. They abuse it. Every single time. That's what checks and balances are for. And that's what we have just lost.

You are missing the point entirely and confusing private sector unions with public sector unions. Public sector unions work for the taxpayers and are taxpayers as well. The checks and balances are the elections with public sector employees. Notice what collective bargaining rights Federal Union Employees have and why aren't those good enough for the states?
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Yeah right, it those rich teachers, firefighters and cops that are bringing the country down, its not the millionaires, who since 2003 have been getting more in annual tax breaks ($91,000 on average) than a teacher makes in a year, but sure, for sure go after the teachers and give up and see how much better your life gets.

Yes, right. The partnership of Democrat and unions has brought down many cities and states and now it is threatening the nation itself. What kind of "fundamental change" do you think Obama is talking about? Who are the most frequent visitors to the Obama White House?
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Yes, right. The partnership of Democrat and unions has brought down many cities and states and now it is threatening the nation itself. What kind of "fundamental change" do you think Obama is talking about? Who are the most frequent visitors to the Obama White House?

its_a_conspiracy1_Uber_Awesome_Randomness-s400x300-51761.jpg
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Is it too early to for a Governor Walker monument to be erected in Washington, D.C.?

What a great event this is, soon to be followed elsewhere across the country. Unions are a tremendous drag to federal, state, and local budgets both in capital and in lack of productivity.

I heard yesterday there are 4,000 teachers in New York that are so bad, they are kept out of the classroom; yet, they still receive full salary because their union membership makes them virtually unfireable. That is why this is so important.

And if this allows Wisconsin to balance its budget and create more jobs, Walker might end up being Governor for life.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Public sector unions do not share the same history with private sector unions.

Public-sector workers were already earning good salaries in 1962 when President Kennedy issued an executive order lifting the federal ban on government unions. Thanks to civil service regulations and similar laws, government workers had enjoyed good working conditions for generations.


The earliest unions in both the U.S. and Great Britain consisted of skilled workers, as it was widely believed that unskilled laborers were not suited for union organization.

But over time, in Britain and elsewhere in Europe, unions for unskilled or semi-skilled workers grew into viable entities. This trend eventually came to America as well, when, in 1935, the AFL expelled a small group of member unions that were attempting to organize unskilled laborers. The expelled unions joined forces to form the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO), which successfully organized the steel and automobile industries.


During the latter years of the Depression, the U.S. labor movement was infiltrated by members of the Communist Party. Soon after World War II, however, unions generally began a process of purging their ranks of Communist influences. That process was given particular urgency in 1947 when Congress passed the Taft-Hartley Labor Act, which stipulated that unions would be required to file financial reports and affidavits affirming that none of their officers were Communists.


From the 1950s through the mid-1990s, union leadership tended generally to be politically centrist. This trend was personified by such figures as Albert Shanker, who served as president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) from 1974 to 1997; George Meany, who led the AFL-CIO from 1955 to 1979; and Lane Kirkland, who succeeded Meany as AFL-CIO president from 1979 to 1995.

When Shanker and Kirkland's respective tenures ended in the 1990s, however, they were replaced by leftists like Sandra Feldman (AFT), and John Sweeney (AFL-CIO). These individuals, along with other leftist ideologues at the helm of powerful unions, quickly transformed the labor movement into a “progressive” crusade.


Another major figure in the labor movement was Andrew Stern, the former New Leftist who served as president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) from 1996 to 2010. As Ryan Lizza, associate editor of The New Republic, notes, today’s SEIU leaders "tend to be radical, even socialist."


The leftward ideological shift of the unions brought with it a dramatic increase in political activism by union leaders and foot soldiers alike.

In 1996, for instance, Andrew Stern told SEIU officials that he expected “every leader at every level of this union, from the international president to the rank-and-file member, to devote five working days this year to political action” in support of the Democratic Party and its candidates.

Meanwhile, another major union, the National Education Association (NEA), has assembled a permanent, paid, full-time staff of at least 1,800 United Service (UniServ) employees who function as political operatives -- more than the Republican and Democratic Parties combined.

Beyond this, leftwing unions like the SEIU and NEA contribute huge sums of money to Democratic candidates during every election season.

Government (public-sector) unions have become major players in the American political process, providing a strong base of support for the left.

As of 2010, fully 36.2 percent of government employees were unionized.

This is virtually the only sector of American society where unions have been growing.


In the mid-20th century, nearly half of private-sector workers were union members.

By 2010, that proportion had plummeted to a mere 6.9 percent of private-sector workers.





One reason for this decline is that unionized private-sector companies, forced to pay wages higher than the law of supply-and-demand warranted, became uncompetitive in the global marketplace and went out of business.





Public-sector unions, by contrast, have suffered no such consequences because their success depends upon their ability to siphon up taxpayer dollars, rather than upon their fiscal responsibility and the realities of the market. Public employees earn approximately 45 percent more, on average, in wages and benefits than comparable private-sector workers. In addition, public employees, as compared to their private-sector counterparts, pay less for their health care and receive pensions that are far more generous -- often without contributing any of their own money to those benefits. Rather, American taxpayers foot the bill.

Because government workers get their money not from a free marketplace but from taxes, their unions have a large incentive to advocate on behalf of political leaders who support higher taxes and bigger government, which can, in turn, produce an ever-greater number of public-sector union jobs.

Indeed, when California voters approved Proposition 13 in 1978, cutting the state's astronomical property taxes by 57 percent, the public-sector unions were enraged. Union leader Ron Coleman said, "We're not going to just lie back and take it."

As pollster Scott Rasmussen explained in the Wall Street Journal, “Public-sector workers want government to grow first, and the overall health of the economy isn’t as relevant to them.” This mindset translates into overwhelming public-sector union support for Democratic politicians who will block efforts to reduce government and to lower taxes. Indeed, public-sector union money constitutes the lifeblood of the Democratic Party.

Union political support for Democrats is a trend that has been in place for decades, and it shows no signs of abating.

In 2010, America's top 20 labor unions gave more than $68 million in campaign contributions to federal candidates -- with 94 percent of the total going to Democrats and just 4 percent to Republicans.

Most of the total -- 88 percent -- came from political action committees (PACs) associated with those 20 unions, and the remaining 12 percent came from individual union members. A similar trend can be seen in state and local political campaigns. Fifteen unions gave at least $1 million to Democrats during the 2008 and 2010 campaigns. Combined, their donations totaled more than $206 million, of which fully 91 percent went to Democrats.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/guideDesc.asp?catId=55&type=group


Despite 40 percent of its union members voting Republican, the AFL-CIO has relentlessly opposed letting rank-and-file workers choose whether or where a portion of their union dues gets spent for political candidates. The AFL-CIO allocated $44 million to support candidates in the 2004 election cycle, with perhaps 95 percent or more of this money going to Democrats. (Same source)
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Public sector unions do not share the same history with private sector unions.



http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/guideDesc.asp?catId=55&type=group


Despite 40 percent of its union members voting Republican, the AFL-CIO has relentlessly opposed letting rank-and-file workers choose whether or where a portion of their union dues gets spent for political candidates. The AFL-CIO allocated $44 million to support candidates in the 2004 election cycle, with perhaps 95 percent or more of this money going to Democrats. (Same source)

Welcome to Debate Politics! Great post.
 
Re: Wisconsin Republicans vote to strip public worker collective bargaining rights wi

Welcome to Debate Politics! Great post.

Thank you! Great forum. Looking forward to debate. And fun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom