• 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!

Scott Walker Backs Down, Will Comply With Judge's Ruling On Union Law

Sgt Meowenstein

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
1,497
Reaction score
757
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
He has backed down for now. But given the sleazy way Republicans passed the law in the first place, I wouldn't be surprised if they try to go around the judgement again.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/31/wisconsin-judge-declares-_n_843024.html

MADISON, Wis. — A Wisconsin judge on Thursday did what thousands of pro-union protesters and boycotting Democratic lawmakers couldn't, halting Republican Gov. Scott Walker's plans – at least temporarily – to cut most public workers' pay and strip them of most of their union rights.

Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued a declaration stating in no uncertain terms that the collective bargaining law that led to weeks of large protests at the state Capitol had not taken effect, contradicting Republican arguments that it had because a state office published it online. Hours later, Walker said his administration would comply, despite misgivings about the order.

"In my mind it's not a matter of if the law goes back (into effect), it's just a matter of when," Walker said.

Democrats and union leaders said Sumi's declaration showed the arrogance that Walker and his allies, including top aide, Department of Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch, have shown in trying to push through the polarizing law.

"Mr. Walker and Mr. Huebsch chose to ignore her warning that they were jeopardizing the finances and stability of state government, apparently believing they are above the law. This morning with her added order she has taken away their last excuse," Assembly Democratic Leader Peter Barca said.

Republicans had bulldozed through every attempt to stop the law, including the ear-splitting protests, the Senate Democrats' attempt to prevent a vote by fleeing the state, and an earlier order from Sumi meant to stop its implementation while she considered a challenge to its legitimacy. But Sumi's declaration on Thursday put Walker and his legislative allies on the defensive, leaving them to decide between waiting for the legal challenge to be resolved and trying to pass the measure again.

The Republican leaders of the Senate and Assembly have said they don't plan to try passing the bill again after the Legislature resumes its session on Tuesday, but in a saga that has already included several strange twists, a change of heart wouldn't be surprising.
 
He has backed down for now. But given the sleazy way Republicans passed the law in the first place, I wouldn't be surprised if they try to go around the judgement again.

I bet he's getting pretty worn out fighting this long hard battle. If I was him, I'd throw in the towel now and start mailing out the 1500 lay off notices.
 
I bet he's getting pretty worn out fighting this long hard battle. If I was him, I'd throw in the towel now and start mailing out the 1500 lay off notices.

Why? State Workers already agreed to the proposed cuts. If he did that, it would be out of spite, not in an attempt to balance the budget.
 
I bet he's getting pretty worn out fighting this long hard battle. If I was him, I'd throw in the towel now and start mailing out the 1500 lay off notices.

Start laying off hostages. That'll show he means business.
All depends on the "frame"
 
I bet he's getting pretty worn out fighting this long hard battle. If I was him, I'd throw in the towel now and start mailing out the 1500 lay off notices.

Yeah... he hasn't been using that threat anymore
 
"He made his ruling now let him enforce it" -- Andrew Jackson.

Not saying anything except that I was reminded of this quote.
 
He has backed down for now. But given the sleazy way Republicans passed the law in the first place, I wouldn't be surprised if they try to go around the judgement again.
Whatever, when the state goes broke then there should be absolutely no bailouts from the fed for Wisconsin...time to sink or swim. This country is broke and the states are insolvent or will be soon.
 
I bet he's getting pretty worn out fighting this long hard battle. If I was him, I'd throw in the towel now and start mailing out the 1500 lay off notices.
Yes, that will do it. That will make it a his being recalled next year a certainty. Go Scott, go!!!
 
Yes, that will do it. That will make it a his being recalled next year a certainty. Go Scott, go!!!

You work for a union, don't you?
 
He has backed down for now. But given the sleazy way Republicans passed the law in the first place, I wouldn't be surprised if they try to go around the judgement again.

Interesting that you call obeying the law backing down.
 
Why? State Workers already agreed to the proposed cuts. If he did that, it would be out of spite, not in an attempt to balance the budget.

Read the link. If it's not there it's somewhere else and I'll find it. The cuts are not allowed to go into effect. Nothing has changed for teachers.
He said from the start he needed to do this to keep from laying anyone off. The Union thugs don't give a **** about those jobs. They just want to make sure they keep getting those union dues. A few hundred or a few thousand jobs won't make that much difference to them. What they needed to stop, was workers being given a choice. Maybe they succeeded. Good for the Union, bad for the layed-off teachers, bad for the students, bad for non-union tax payers.
 
yeah. He really backed down there, huh libs...:rofl:
They violated the Wisconsin open meeting law, so why don't they just give the proper notice and vote again? It's that simple.
 
Read the link. If it's not there it's somewhere else and I'll find it. The cuts are not allowed to go into effect. Nothing has changed for teachers.
He said from the start he needed to do this to keep from laying anyone off. The Union thugs don't give a **** about those jobs. They just want to make sure they keep getting those union dues. A few hundred or a few thousand jobs won't make that much difference to them. What they needed to stop, was workers being given a choice. Maybe they succeeded. Good for the Union, bad for the layed-off teachers, bad for the students, bad for non-union tax payers.

I would agree with you barb if Walker hadnt given a large tax break to corporations as soon as he got elected, before he started screaming about having to layoff. You dont give revenue away then say you dont have enough coming in and have to layoff workers and cut pay and pensions. He could have waited and gave the tax after dealing with public employees.
I wonder if people realize how many public workers are republicans and vote republican no matter what their union does. I think the number would be startling to some.
 
They violated the Wisconsin open meeting law, so why don't they just give the proper notice and vote again? It's that simple.

That will be determined by a judge later. YOU saying it doesn't make it reality, regardless of how much importance you put in your own word.
 
They violated the Wisconsin open meeting law, so why don't they just give the proper notice and vote again? It's that simple.

Greta Van Sustern has tried to beat that idea into Walkers peoples heads several times. They kept saying, no, things are going along fine. We'll get there, we just need to be patient, blah blah blah. Wonder what they're saying now?
 
Read the link. If it's not there it's somewhere else and I'll find it. The cuts are not allowed to go into effect. Nothing has changed for teachers.
He said from the start he needed to do this to keep from laying anyone off. The Union thugs don't give a **** about those jobs. They just want to make sure they keep getting those union dues. A few hundred or a few thousand jobs won't make that much difference to them. What they needed to stop, was workers being given a choice. Maybe they succeeded. Good for the Union, bad for the layed-off teachers, bad for the students, bad for non-union tax payers.

Interesting.

Like I said, the government employees all agreed to the cuts, the reason this is going on is because Walker insisted on the removal of collective bargaining.

If he had passed the two issues separately, then he wouldn't be able to make this argument that removing collective bargaining = hurting the budget.
 
I would agree with you barb if Walker hadnt given a large tax break to corporations as soon as he got elected, before he started screaming about having to layoff. You dont give revenue away then say you dont have enough coming in and have to layoff workers and cut pay and pensions. He could have waited and gave the tax after dealing with public employees.
I wonder if people realize how many public workers are republicans and vote republican no matter what their union does. I think the number would be startling to some.

The difference between liberals and conservatives, is conservatives look at tax breaks and tax cuts as job creaters, not lost revenue. Should he have waited. Probably, but they don't go into effect until later anyway. It wouldn't make a difference to the lay-offs.
I realize many public workers are Republicans, that's why it's disgusting that almost all the union money goes to Dems.
 
That will be determined by a judge later. YOU saying it doesn't make it reality, regardless of how much importance you put in your own word.

Greta Van Sustern has tried to beat that idea into Walkers peoples heads several times. They kept saying, no, things are going along fine. We'll get there, we just need to be patient, blah blah blah. Wonder what they're saying now?

Like I said they are accused of violating the Wisconsin open meetings law - that's the reason the 'law' on hold. The solution would be to just take another vote giving the proper notification. The problem doing this, is that they may not have the votes to get it passed again.
 
Interesting.

Like I said, the government employees all agreed to the cuts, the reason this is going on is because Walker insisted on the removal of collective bargaining.

If he had passed the two issues separately, then he wouldn't be able to make this argument that removing collective bargaining = hurting the budget.

Removing part of the collective bargaining is the only guarantee the other things will stick and the same problem won't come up again.
 
Like I said they are accused of violating the Wisconsin open meetings law - that's the reason the 'law' on hold. The solution would be to just take another vote giving the proper notification. The problem doing this, is that they may not have the votes to get it passed again.

Really? You've already forgotten what you said?
They violated the Wisconsin open meeting law, so why don't they just give the proper notice and vote again? It's that simple.

You did NOT say they were accused... you SAID they were guilty.

Big difference... one even you should comprehend.
 
As I understand it, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has ruled before that the courts may not interfere in a law until it goes into effect. The judge may be in the wrong by trying to restrict the law before it is published.
 
Greta Van Sustern has tried to beat that idea into Walkers peoples heads several times. They kept saying, no, things are going along fine. We'll get there, we just need to be patient, blah blah blah. Wonder what they're saying now?

Its called being overly cocky barb...look I dont doubt for a second that the law will get passed eventually but I think Scott Walker was quite surprised at the opposition he ran into...I think he believe it was going to be much smoother. I think it could have been if he had approached it differently
 
Really? You've already forgotten what you said?


You did NOT say they were accused... you SAID they were guilty.

Big difference... one even you should comprehend.
Okay, I was not precise enough, give me 40 lashes with a wet noodle.:roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom