Scott Walker bitch-slapped

Duff Miver

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 29, 2009
6,521
55
0
Right behind you
That's what happens when you violate the law.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110318/ap_on_re_us/us_wisconsin_budget_unions_lawsuit

images
 

Mags

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 8, 2000
2,813
27
48
Might be jumping the gun a bit here.....

It's a non-issue. The non partisan guy in the Senate gave his ok to the meeting, saying it met all rules.

Worst case - they have another vote. Big deal.

Done deal.
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
It's a non-issue. The non partisan guy in the Senate gave his ok to the meeting, saying it met all rules.

Worst case - they have another vote. Big deal.

Done deal.
An illegal vote is hardly a non-issue. The vote was illegal on two counts: It violated the open meetings law it failed to meet the 20 member senate quorum rule.

It's easy to say it won't change the outcome of the vote, but if just 2 Republicans change their vote, the budget reform bill fails. It's not out of the realm of possibility.
 

Mags

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 8, 2000
2,813
27
48
An illegal vote is hardly a non-issue. The vote was illegal on two counts: It violated the open meetings law it failed to meet the 20 member senate quorum rule.

It's easy to say it won't change the outcome of the vote, but if just 2 Republicans change their vote, the budget reform bill fails. It's not out of the realm of possibility.

You are not even close on either of these.

Only needed 17 members for a non fiscal bill - which the Senate Parlementarian confirmed.

Only needed 2 hours notice for the meeting - again, the Senate guy confirmed.

This is just judicial activism from the bench. Just plain stupid.

Yea, I guess we'd be better off laying off 1500 people instead. I know the greedy unions would much rather see that instead. Because they don't care about their people, just the dues they collect and the bloated salaries they have.
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
You are not even close on either of these.

Only needed 17 members for a non fiscal bill - which the Senate Parlementarian confirmed.

Only needed 2 hours notice for the meeting - again, the Senate guy confirmed.

This is just judicial activism from the bench. Just plain stupid.

Yea, I guess we'd be better off laying off 1500 people instead. I know the greedy unions would much rather see that instead. Because they don't care about their people, just the dues they collect and the bloated salaries they have.
You're wrong on all 3 counts, Mags.

1. If stripping the unions of collective bargaining rights is a non-fiscal issue, why has Walker been screaming from the top of the Capitol rotunda that collective bargaining IS a fiscal issue. He and his leg-humping Republican dough-boys can't have it both ways.

2. Spin it any way you want Mags but the open meetings law is clear: 24 hours notice is required.

3. No layoffs were ever necessary. Walker created the 2011 budget shortfall with his $140 million tax cuts to businesses, then began his Chicken Little sky-is-falling routine declaring "The state of Wisconsin is broke". In giving away $140 million, then announcing a $137 million budget shortfall and threatening to begin massive layoffs across the state, could Walker's duplicitous maneuvering possibly be any more obvious??

Seriously Mags, you've gotta be the only guy left in Wisconsin still falling for Walker's shell game... :142smilie
 
Last edited:

ssd

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 2, 2000
1,837
53
48
Ohio
Trench:
Interesting point of viewing on 'giving away $140 million" - if it was tax cuts, it was not giving away anything, it was taking less.
How much less tax revenue would be collected without those tax cuts? Were businesses threatening to leave and take the jobs to a less-taxed state?
I do not know - I am not in Wisconsin.

You will probably say that the tax cuts were purely to benefit the Koch brothers. I have a hard time believing that was the only reason. I am skeptical that ANY politician would purposely cut taxes to create a budget deficit and think that the business environment was the cause and that in doing so, the measure probably saved jobs in Wisconsin.

I'm happy to read the links if you guys have any info supporting or refuting my thoughts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UGA12

Skulnik

Truth Teller
Forum Member
Mar 30, 2007
21,413
692
113
Jefferson City, Missouri
Trench:
Interesting point of viewing on 'giving away $140 million" - if it was tax cuts, it was not giving away anything, it was taking less.
How much less tax revenue would be collected without those tax cuts? Were businesses threatening to leave and take the jobs to a less-taxed state?
I do not know - I am not in Wisconsin.

You will probably say that the tax cuts were purely to benefit the Koch brothers. I have a hard time believing that was the only reason. I am skeptical that ANY politician would purposely cut taxes to create a budget deficit and think that the business environment was the cause and that in doing so, the measure probably saved jobs in Wisconsin.

I'm happy to read the links if you guys have any info supporting or refuting my thoughts.

Soros doesn't allow links, they like to spread falsehoods.


JMO
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
Trench:
Interesting point of viewing on 'giving away $140 million" - if it was tax cuts, it was not giving away anything, it was taking less.
SSD, I have no problem with any Governor attempting to make his or her state more business-friendly. Do I believe there's abuse and excess among unionized executives? Yes, I do. But it's pocket change when compared to the amount of taxpayer dollars funding the corporate welfare state and every move that Walker makes is further proof of that.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top