The Wisconsin Cheese Showdown

[cinyc]

What sheer nonsense. The most valuable people of society are the private sector who pay taxes into the government, not the people who take money out.

No, you've got that backwards - the rich exact their privileges from a gencide upon the poor.  Even if one prefers to be an exploiter (who wouldn't?), the whole system rests upon the back of the tortured worker, so he is absolutely necessary, and hence 'valuable'.  Happily 'poor people spring up out of the ground like mushrooms', as the old Thai saying goes, and so there are always more to use.  But there's the rub - they are useful, something a rich person by definition cannot be.

Your over-the-top socialist propaganda makes no sense.  There is no genocide on the poor.  That is, unless in socialist doublespeak, genocide means ever-increasing life expectancy and living standards.

And how can you see no difference between a government that takes money from its citizens at gunpoint and a the private sector, which only takes money from those willing to spend it?

The day of reckoning has arrived.  Those who pay the bloated salaries and pensions of public sector employees are sick and tired of it.  That's what Wisconsin voters said in 2010.  The governor is doing the work of the people who voted for him.

[cinyc]

Your over-the-top socialist propaganda makes no sense.  There is no genocide on the poor.  That is, unless in socialist doublespeak, genocide means ever-increasing life expectancy and living standards.

Their lives are used up to pay for the privileges of their owners, cinyc.  They're only killed immediately if they get out of line.

And how can you see no difference between a government that takes money from its citizens at gunpoint and a the private sector, which only takes money from those willing to spend it?

Private property is enforced at gunpoint, kinyc, with all the prisons to back it up.

The day of reckoning has arrived.  Those who pay the bloated salaries and pensions of public sector employees are sick and tired of it.  That's what Wisconsin voters said in 2010.  The governor is doing the work of the people who voted for him.

Of course, but the point is that those people are know-nothing dupes.

Yes, the people who don't believe your glorious socialist propaganda are know-nothing dupes.   Glorious socialists like you know-it-all!  Which is why every glorious socialist paradise implodes on itself like the Soviet Union or becomes a craphole like Cuba.   Glorious socialists and socialist governments do not know best.

[cinyc]

Oh give it a break. As Px said, there's no budget issue in Wisconsin except of the Governor's own creation by deliberately causing a budget shortfall. I seriously doubt the voters went to the voting booth with public employee salaries on their minds. Give the dishonesty a rest.

Because a self-interested left-wing interest group's analysis on an ultra left-wing website states there is no Wisconsin budget shortfall, there must not be a budget shortfall in Wisconsin except because of that no-good, evil Republican governor.   Let's ignore reality and believe budget projections from self-interested interest groups.   Who cares that almost every state has a budget deficit - Wisconsin must be special because the special interest groups decreed it so.  And who cares that more impartial sources have said yes, Wisconsin has a huge deficit.   And who cares if even the outgoing DEMOCRATIC governor said Wisconsin had a huge deficit?  

Talking Points Memo is ALWAYS right because it's so "progressive"!  And "progressives" can't be wrong!

[cinyc]

That argument is so tired and bloated.  You can easily go without paying taxes.  Just don't work or buy anything or own property!

The same could be said about the private sector.... where purchasing food from a grocery store is "voluntary"... but if you didn't do it.. like not working, owning property, or buying anything at all... would make life much harder.

So just because you get to choose which grocery store you go to... doesn't make it any more voluntary.

Yeah, it's so easy to dodge paying any taxes - I just have to not earn, buy or own anything.  I guess I could just die - but wait... there's a tax on that too.

I get to choose what groceries I want to buy at the store I want at the time I want.  Or I can choose to buy seeds and grow my own food.  I can choose which private actors to deal with.  I can't choose which federal taxes to pay, short of leaving the country or going to jail for not paying them.

[cinyc]

Really with the way this is played, this is just going to really bite Walker and the Republicans in the ass. As noted most people know at least one public sector and know how ridiculous the "overpaid" nonsense is, especially with teachers. I have a tough time seeing Wisconsin being to the right of North Dakota on this where the vast majority of people would find that claim rather comical.

Republicans should only hope that Democrats misunderstand the optics like you and continue their little political games, like abdicating from their responsibility to govern by leaving the state.  Your average private sector employee sees public employees acting like thugs, protesting the horror of having to do things like *gasp* pay for part of their health insurance, like practically everyone in the private sector.  They see some public employees retiring with bloated, unsustainable pensions that those in the private sector no longer get.  But yet, they are paying for public employees to live higher off the hog than they are.

And when they see their kids' schools closed by "sick" teachers who are miraculously well enough to drive to Madison and protest, the first thing they think of is how those teachers are making them have to scramble to find someone to watch their kids at the last minute, not how underpaid those teachers supposedly are.

[cinyc]

Well, it's good to know which side you are on.

This thread has shed light on that.

All that matters in politics, is if you're on the side of the haves, or the have nots.

That's awfully simplistic.  Who are the have-nots here?  Unionized public employees or those who make substantially less than them yet pay their salaries?

[cinyc]

The state troopers told to go after the dems refused and the capital police ignored the governors order to clear out the protesters, union solidarity is strong here.
As for teachers getting the "Blue Flu" i would prefer they wait until the strike is officially called.

Refusing to enforce the law eh, assuming that it is the law? If so, the next step is the national guard. The state troopers work for the state right?  I wonder how they should be dealt with, they are refusing to follow orders.

If Walker tries to call out the guard he has no future in politics no matter how heroic it seems to conservatives, Americans do not enjoy the sight of the military beating up peaceful protesters, some of us learned a thing or two from the sixties.
And if he does end up paying us like they pay teachers in Mississipi or some other anti worker state Wisconsin will get the same low quality education they get, not everyone can afford to send their kids to a fancy private school like Walker and his rich buddies who will end up getting the money they take from the teachers in another tax break.

Let's make one thing clear: Governor Walker NEVER threatened to call out the national guard if government workers protested his proposed changes to bargaining laws.  That's an extremely dishonest meme pushed by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.  PolitiFact calls is a pants-on-fire lie.  And the Wisconsin National Guard hasn't been called up for anything.

But we here on the Atlas Forum all know that Talking Points Memo is always right and "progressives" can't lie - so they must just be making that up.

[cinyc]

Talking Points Memo for your information is a much more credible source of news than your beloved FOX. They have gotten numerous journalistic awards, and for a good reason.

As for the budget numbers you so cavalierly dismissed as an "evil liberal plot", they were posted by the Wisconsin budget office which is a non-partisan state organization, like the CBO is for congress.

Better luck next time you try refuting facts with lies cinyc.

You and your liberal friends can keep on spinning, claiming Wisconsin would have no budget deficit but for those evil Republicans and their reckless spending.  But you begin to sound like Baghdad Bob when folks recognize that almost every state is racking up a huge deficit, and even the outgoing DEMOCRATIC Wisconsin governor told his successor that he would be facing a deficit of $2.2 BILLION - and that estimate was rosy.  The Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimated the deficit to be $2.7 billion, and an economist at the University of Wisconsin at $3.1 billion.  

In fact, according to the state's comptroller, Wisconsin has run in the red for over a decade, and the size of Wisconsin's structural deficit has increased every year during that period but one.  But now that a Republican is in office, Wisconsin's deficit would have magically disappeared but for their reckless spending and/or tax cuts.  Sure.

Governor Walker must be a miracle worker to close a $2 to $3 billion deficit in just a few months!  The liberal sources from which you get your "facts" should be lauding him for such a remarkable fiscal turnaround!  But they're not - instead, they are attacking him for not lavishing as much of the public fisc on public employees as they would like.

[cinyc]

The closed schools are in MADISON. People in Madison aren't going to vote Republican over that.

Schools in other districts were closed yesterday, too - including Racine, Glendale-River Hills, Watertown and Beaver Dam in Southeastern Wisconsin.

[cinyc]

You should check your sources because they are rather spotty. Then again like your beloved FOX you care more about creating narratives rather than telling the truth.

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/opinion/editorial/article_61064e9a-27b0-5f28-b6d1-a57c8b2aaaf6.html

In fact, like just about every other state in the country, Wisconsin is managing in a weak economy. The difference is that Wisconsin is managing better -- or at least it had been managing better until Walker took over. Despite shortfalls in revenue following the economic downturn that hit its peak with the Bush-era stock market collapse, the state has balanced budgets, maintained basic services and high-quality schools, and kept employment and business development steadier than the rest of the country. It has managed so well, in fact, that the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau recently released a memo detailing how the state will end the 2009-2011 budget biennium with a budget surplus.

In its Jan. 31 memo to legislators on the condition of the state’s budget, the Fiscal Bureau determined that the state will end the year with a balance of $121.4 million.

(snip)_

Here is the document. Enjoy reading.

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lfb/Misc/2011_01_31Vos&Darling.pdf

Funny.  I haven't cited Fox News once in this debate.

You are conflating a surplus that the state may or may not end up with at the end of the current two-year fiscal period (2009-2011) with what every observer I've read, partisan or otherwise, sees as a projected deficit at the end of the NEXT two-year fiscal period (2011-2013).   They might not agree whether that deficit is going to be $2.1 billion or $3.6 billion, but nobody I know of, even the legislative report you linked, denies there will be a deficit that the current government needs to close.  In fact, the legislative report you linked expects 2011-2013 general fund tax revenues to be LOWER than their last forecast, meaning the expected budget gap would likely be higher than they last forecast.

If you bothered to read my links, you'd know that while Wisconsin's budgets may have been balanced on paper, they (like most states) have relied on gimmicks and one-shot deals to do so.  The state's comptroller, using generally accepted accounting principles, has noted that Wisconsin's budget has been out of balance every year for the past decade - and the amount of that structural deficit has been growing.   The day of reckoning has arrived.

At best, you can make the argument that but for the Republicans' tax cuts, these particular public employee givebacks wouldn't be required or could have been more limited.  But then you'd have to explain why public employee benefits are so sacrosanct that they can't be cut while other areas of the government are being slashed, too.  What makes public employee pay so special that it cannot be cut, even if doing so averts massive layoffs?  And why is requiring a vote of their ultimate employer - Wisconsin's taxpayers - before hiking public employee pay more than the rate of inflation such a terrible idea, anyway?

But you don't seem to want to have this debate.  Instead, you want to stick your head in the sand and pretend that a problem that exists in almost every state doesn't exist in Wisconsin because it is temporarily politically expedient to do so.

[cinyc]

Actually no.  More than 1/2 the deficit is caused by Walker's programs.

That, quite simply, isn't true.  As I've said numerous times with supporting links, even the outgoing DEMOCRATIC governor estimated the deficit for the next biennial period to be $2.1 billion.  Please cite ANY estimate of Wisconsin's 2011-2013 budget gap as $4.2 billion. And that $2.1 billion figure was highly optimistic and unrealistic.  Every other estimate was higher.  So to double the deficit, the evil Republicans would likely have had to raise it to about $6 billion.  That simply hasn't happened.  The highest estimate I've seen is $3.6 billion.

Walker and the evil Republicans caused the deficit to double about as much as Jim DeMint started the recession.

[cinyc]

Wow, when even Rasmussen is showing numbers like that, you know the jig is up.

The Pubbies cannot afford to back down, and won't.

They may not have to. Recall petitions are already circulating on the eight GOP Senators who currently qualify for a recall. Of them, two were reelected by a combined margin of less than 2,000 votes in 2010--a rather ominous sign for a recall election--while a couple of others also represent marginal seats.

Recalls can work both ways, you know.  Cowards who flee the state to avoid doing their jobs are subject to recall, too.  

It would be quite a shame if the two DEMOCRATS who won by less than 2,000 votes in 2010 were subject to recall, especially the Democrat who won 401 votes.  Oh, and by the way, if the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel's numbers are right, NO Republicans won by less than 2,000 votes in 2010.  Maybe 2008?

[cinyc]

1 year salary for 30 days of work..... Can someone explain to me what the purpose of an 'emeritus' program is?

You are being inconsistent.  They aren't being a full year's salary under your usual method of calculating their salary, which includes benefits.  Since they are already getting those benefits as "retirees" and don't get double benefits, they are being paid considerably less than a year's salary to be available as emeriti.

As for what the purpose is besides gouging money from their employer, one reason might be to encourage older teachers to retire, tho I agree getting paid at that rate seems excessive for that purpose.  Another would be to have a pool of experienced teachers available to either mentor new teachers or act as substitute teachers who can do more than just babysit a class for a day.

If the retired teachers made $75,000 per year, they are getting paid $25,000 each year over three years to retire.  As long as the new hires make $25,000 less per year in pay and benefits than the retirees (i.e. salary is below $50,000 or salary plus benefits is $25,000 less than the cost of an experienced teacher), the district is better off financially.  New hires might also be in a different pension benefit level with a lower required employer contribution.   Or there might not be a new hire replacement at all, saving money.

FICA taxes and other benefit payments might skew the math a bit to make the $25,000 in my hypothetical, $30,000 or $35,000 - but you get the point.  It sometimes makes economic sense to pay senior employees to retire.

[cinyc]

Using public policy for political purposes. Republicans do it better than anyone.

At least the Democrats put up a good fight.

Nope. Not quite as well as the Democrats did to create public sector unions in Ohio in 1983.

Yeah, because it couldn't possibly have been about a longstanding Democratic belief that unionization improves the lives of regular people. Compare to this incident, which has absolutely positively nothing to do with the budget, just a simple stripping of rights and an attempt to weaken political opponents. Exempting unions that supported Walker? And the threats to try and tighten voter registration rules while the Democrats were gone? That helps the budget in what way, exactly?

You are a frightening authoritarian cheerleading poster that engages in all sorts of false equivalencies, selective reading, and twisting of words. You'll get along with the others just fine.

At the end of the day, this was put in place so that LOCAL and COUNTY governments can more easily deal with the massive state aid cuts that are going to be passed along with the budget.  So, yes, it is about the budget, but not necessarily the state budget except to the extent it would allow the state government to more easily get concessions from its own workers.

[cinyc]

At the end of the day, this was put in place so that LOCAL and COUNTY governments can more easily deal with the massive state aid cuts that are going to be passed along with the budget.  So, yes, it is about the budget, but not necessarily the state budget except to the extent it would allow the state government to more easily get concessions from its own workers.

You lost the right to whine about union concessions when they offered to give up any of the cuts demanded of them as long as they could keep their ability to bargain collectively. Abolishing collective bargaining is a rights issue, not a budget issue. The fact that they had to split it apart from the budget bill just to pass it is a tacit admission of exactly that.

You're telling me that the unions representing Sheboygan teachers or Wausau public works employees were all completely bound by whatever talking points you heard on MSNBC or read on Talking Points Memo?  Not bloody likely. 

Walker was a county exec.  He knows what happens when the state cuts aid while the county's hands are tied - county taxes go up.  This bill is an attempt to avoid that situation.

[cinyc]

No matter how this went, the result was going to be the same, Republicans have stepped in it in Wisconsin. Next election, they are going to have zero credibility for overreaching and swing voters aren't going to be perceptive to them. What reason would they have to be?

Because they acted like adults and fixed the state's fiscal mess without raising taxes?

The next scheduled state election is over a year and a half away.  That's an eternity in politics.  Things that are important today may be forgotten.  Or not.

Remember - recalls work both ways, too.

[cinyc]

Oh yes because there are so many Senate Democrats in Wisconsin in such vulnerable seats.

Say goodbye to that piece of sh!t asshole representing La Crosse. I'd bet anything he is done.

Democratic Senator Jim Holperin, Class of 2008, won with just 51% of the vote in one of the best cycles for Wisconsin Democrats in a long time.  And there are more vulnerable Wisconsin Senate Democrats in the Class of 2010 than Republicans.  But let's not let facts get in the way of the typical Democrats rule, Republicans drool analysis.

[cinyc]

The polls were already against the Republicans.

They were also already against the Democrats - an inconvenient fact missed by many partisans.

[cinyc]

The polls were already against the Republicans.

They were also already against the Democrats - an inconvenient fact missed by many partisans.

With majority favorable opinion of teacher's unions and 57% disapproval for Walker?

No.  Please read what I said and stop confusing politicians for teachers.  A majority with a negative opinion of the Democrats who are currently hiding out in Illinois.

[cinyc]

51-47 is a lot less than Walker's disapproval.

Because a 51% disapproval versus a 53% one is statistically significant in a poll with an MoE of +/-4, right?

The fact is Wisconsin voters are pretty much divided on the issue and question wording matters.  But the majority disapprove of political actors on both sides.  

[cinyc]

Not to mention its clear as day this was NEVER about the budget, this was NEVER about the deficit, this was about Union Busting and union busting only, Walker lied his ass off and its clear as day.

This IS about budgets, particularly state and local ones.  It always has been:

http://walker.wi.gov/journal_media_detail.asp?locid=177&prid=5675

[cinyc]

Not to mention its clear as day this was NEVER about the budget, this was NEVER about the deficit, this was about Union Busting and union busting only, Walker lied his ass off and its clear as day.

Maybe i don't get where you are coming from here, but how on earth is this true?  Republicans are using a procedural gimmick to pass controversial legislation.  It doesn't mean that collective bargaining doesn't affect state and local budgets IMMENSELY, and seriously reduce their budget flexibility when the have a deficit to close.

Any legislation that has any budgetary or fiscal impact whatsoever can't be passed through this procedural gimmick, and must first have a quorum present.  By going around the quorum requirements the GOP is admitting that CBR has no budgetary impacts or any fiscal impacts of any kind, otherwise they could not have held the vote.  Not to mention the vote was illegal anyway since it broke open meetings laws.

Incorrect.  The supermajority requirement applies to "any law which imposes, continues or renews a tax, or creates a debt or charge, or makes, continues or renews an appropriation of public or trust money, or releases, discharges or commutes a claim or demand of the state".  

It does not apply, for example to a revocation of an appropriation - which has a budget impact, or a law that foists or removes an unfunded mandate on a county or local government - which has a budget impact on those municipalities, or a law that changes the collective bargaining process so that, down the road, it has a budget impact when work rules are changed.

[cinyc]

To the point on the ultimate legal issue of whether a supermajority quorum is required for all bills fiscal in nature or just some, there is a 1971 formal opinion from the Wisconsin attorney general stating that a bill altering collective bargaining rights isn't fiscal as it is narrowly defined by the relevant Wisconsin constitutional provision and therefore not subject to the supermajority quorum.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1773153

Game.  Set.

[cinyc]

To the point on the ultimate legal issue of whether a supermajority quorum is required for all bills fiscal in nature or just some, there is a 1971 formal opinion from the Wisconsin attorney general stating that a bill altering collective bargaining rights isn't fiscal as it is narrowly defined by the relevant Wisconsin constitutional provision and therefore not subject to the supermajority quorum.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1773153

Game.  Set.

Game set??  So its game set that Walker and the Republicans lied the entire time with the comment that this was about anything fiscal or budgetary in nature.  This has nothing to do with the deficit whatsoever.  So thanks for proving Walker and the Republicans lied their asses off.

Not to mention the whole breaking the open meetings law.

The full bill IS fiscal in nature, within the meaning of the constitution's super-majority quorum requirement.  The collective bargaining piece of the bill potentially affects budgets, especially county and local ones, down the road, but isn't swept up by the super-majority requirement.  Wisconsin courts have taken a narrow view on what is fiscal for those purposes.  Even incurring short-term debt isn't.

How is this so difficult to understand?

[cinyc]

Remember kids: Unfettered corporate and millionaire money flowing unchecked into the GOP coffers = good . A fraction of that amount flowing from middle class union members to the Democratic Party to counteract corporation and millionaire money = undermining the political system.

Here's a list of the top political donors from 1989-2010.  10 of the top 20 are unions.  But of course, their contributions are just "a fraction" and that paltry amount "flowing" from "middle class union members" - who are forced to join or pay the union regardless of whether actually want to do so.

And, of course, we all KNOW that "corporation and millionaire money" flows solely into GOP coffers.  Who cares if, as the chart shows, that's actually not true.  They fund both sides.  You have Soros.