Unions lost the referendum.

[Dan Moadus]

Of course there are the "Haves", and there are the "Have Not's". Those protesting in Wisconsin and Ohio are the "Have Your's".


Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.

W. Churchill

[irishbobcat]

WI Update: "It's Not About the Budget; It's About the Power," Weak Compromise Offered by Republicans
Amid much excellent coverage of the Wisconsin union protests, Paul Krugman's column in the Times yesterday is worthy of a close read:



[W]hat's happening in Wisconsin isn't about the state budget, despite [Wisconsin Governor Scott] Walker's pretense that he's just trying to be fiscally responsible. It is, instead, about power. What Mr. Walker and his backers are trying to do is to make Wisconsin — and eventually, America — less of a functioning democracy and more of a third-world-style oligarchy. And that's why anyone who believes that we need some counterweight to the political power of big money should be on the demonstrators' side.



Indeed. He goes on:



t's not about the budget; it's about the power.

In principle, every American citizen has an equal say in our political process. In practice, of course, some of us are more equal than others. Billionaires can field armies of lobbyists; they can finance think tanks that put the desired spin on policy issues; they can funnel cash to politicians with sympathetic views (as the Koch brothers did in the case of Mr. Walker). On paper, we're a one-person-one-vote nation; in reality, we're more than a bit of an oligarchy, in which a handful of wealthy people dominate.



Given this reality, it's important to have institutions that can act as counterweights to the power of big money. And unions are among the most important of these institutions. You don't have to love unions, you don't have to believe that their policy positions are always right, to recognize that they're among the few influential players in our political system representing the interests of middle- and working-class Americans, as opposed to the wealthy.



The news out of Wisconsin today is that the state's moderate Republicans have tossed out something of a compromise to the protesters. The proposed compromise "calls for most collective bargaining rights of public-employee unions to be eliminated—per Mr. Walker's bill—but then reinstated in 2013." The state's Democrats are rejecting the offer, noting that they unions have already compromised enough, having made concessions on their pension and healthcare. As Sen. Jon Erpenbach noted, "If it's OK to collectively bargain in 2013, why isn't it OK today?"

Meanwhile, Governor Walker continues to be a tool, releasing three bogus reasons why "collective bargaining is a fiscal issue." Here's FireDogLake on why his reasoning is so weak:



One concerns what health care plan teachers sign up for, which is mainly an issue of the Governor seemingly wanting to strip the health care choices of workers (if you like what you have, you can keep it!). The next is some gotcha issue about Viagra in Milwaukee, which state courts ruled against a few years later. The third, and the only state issue, is overtime rules for corrections officers. Somehow I'm not convinced that this is such a scourge. The President of the Wisconsin State Senate didn't do the job on that either today.



Grasping at straws, that.

[Dan Moadus]

No, I guess not "soul" man. I've had enough of trying to straighten you out for one night, I'm turning in. 

[irishbobcat]

Again, We see Dan support crippling the middle class by union busting....

Have you no soul, Dan?

[Dan Moadus]

The article is wrong about there not being a budget crisis in Wisconsin. Anyone would be crazy to think otherwise. But he's right about the so called union busting.  The public sector can no longer be allowed to unionize. Their role and responsibilities are too important to jeopardize, and it's clear that bargaining and mediation has failed to curb the fleecing of the taxpayers, and reductions of services. Their time is up.

[irishbobcat]

The Madison Protests Are About Union Busting, Not Budget Cuts
By Matthew Rothschild, February 18, 2011
I'm fed up with the corporate media's coverage of the great fight-back in Wisconsin.

This is not about a budget crisis. Actually, the current budget is in surplus to the tune of $54 million, according to the Legislative Research Bureau.

And to the extent that the budget may get worse later, Gov. Walker has no one to blame but himself because he kissed goodbye $800 million in federal money for high speed rail, and he gave the rich tax breaks worth $117 million.


And this is not about whether public sector employees would be willing to pay more for health care or pensions. Their unions have said they'd be willing to negotiate on this.

But Walker doesn't want to negotiate.

He wants to bust unions.

That's why he is demanding the defunding of public sector unions by prohibiting employers from deducting union dues. This wouldn't save the state a cent.

That's why he is demanding annual recertifications for every public sector union.

That's why he is trying to make it easier to fire union
organizers.

That's why he refused, on Thursday, to take off the table the anti-union parts of the bill and leave open the question of negotiating cuts in benefits and pensions.

I'm sick of seeing headlines about Wisconsin workers reacting to budget cuts.

They're reacting instead to union busting.

Let's hear the truth for a change.

[Dan Moadus]

A little common sense gets aired on Meet the Press by Lindsey Graham.  Despite the nonsense on union placards in Madison, the budget-repair bill wasn't some diktat from an entrenched governor; Scott Walker won the election less than four months ago with this specific plan on the agenda.  Not only did Republicans win the top spot by putting this proposal in front of voters, the GOP won control of both chambers of the legislature as well.  Elections have consequences, which everyone but the unions seem to acknowledge.
In a democracy, the losing side in an election has an obligation to allow the legislature to conduct business by the rules.  Filibusters in the US Senate are part of those rules, and both parties value the filibuster enough to keep it in place.  Running out of the state to bring business to a halt isn't giving the minority a voice, as Wisconsin Senate Democrats argued this week — it's an illegitimate and immature attempt to deny a majority their ability to govern, a duty the voters entrusted to them.  It's a repudiation of democracy.