The mess in Wisconsin has happened before. In 2003, faced with a new Republican majority intent on redrawing an electoral map that preserved power for Democrats that the voters no longer gave them, the Texas Democrats fled the state. And in 2009, rather than allow a vote on an election security bill that they didn’t want, the Texas Democrats brought the state legislature to a halt — killing the voter ID bill and everything on the calendar that followed it.
That in mind, here’s the scene in Madison on Friday.
In the Wisconsin Assembly on Friday, Republican leaders had called lawmakers to the floor at 5 p.m. to take up Walker’s bill to fix a budget shortfall by cutting public worker benefits and bargaining rights. But they began business just before that hour, when Democrats were not yet on the floor.
Democrats charged into the chamber and shouted to stop the action as Republican staff urged their leaders to “keep going, keep going.” Republicans took the voice vote, putting the bill in a stage that prevented it from being amended in that house. Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca (D-Kenosha) called the move an “illegal vote” and demanded that Republicans rescind it.
“Unbelievable!” Barca screamed. “Unprecedented! Un-American! Not in keeping with the values of the state! You should be ashamed of yourselves.”
Minutes later, Republicans agreed to effectively cancel the vote by allowing the bill to return to a stage in which Democrats can offer amendments. Democrats may have dozens of them, and the debate on the bill – whenever it happens – is expected to take hours. The Assembly adjourned until Tuesday.
So the Democrats are trying to bring both houses of the legislature to a full halt to kill the union bill. It may work, at least temporarily, just by running out the clock. But if what has happened in Texas is any guide, it will be a pyrrhic victory. Democrats in Texas have won very little since the 2003 run to the Red River. And after they filibustered the voter ID bill in 2009, which a heavy majority of the voters supported, they suffered an unholy beating in 2010. The Republicans now have a super majority in the House, and the man who led the filibuster, state Rep. Jim Dunnam, was defeated. He didn’t lose just because of that filibuster, but having that on his record certainly didn’t help him.
I don’t see how a majority who wants to reduce spending can lose. If the opposition interferes with the legislative process then in the “worst” case no budget gets passed, no funding authorized, and no money gets spent – which ought to be a satisfying victory for the majority.
As far as democrats going undemocratic and losing more that is the story of the 2010 elections. All the name calling about violence and racism targeted to those who wanted to control spending worked against the democrats. They were so out of touch with reality and the american public that their rancor was alienating a majority and they didn’t realize it.
A majority of people wanted to get spending under control, and the democrats insulted them as racist, as tea baggers, and violent, so guess what happened during the elections? The majority didn’t vote for people who insulted them.
It doesn’t seem like the liberals have gotten any more in touch with reality which is a good thing for the conservatives’ prospects in the 2012 elections.
A majority of people wanted to get spending under control, and the democrats insulted them as racist, as tea baggers, and violent, so guess what happened during the elections? The majority didn’t vote for people who insulted them.
So very, very true. The Dems don’t realize how repulsive and repugnant their behavior towards their own constituency really is. Great post!
Yeah, the slimeball Democrats pass a POS healthcare bill at midnight with a bunch of bs tricks (“deem and pass”) because they couldn’t get their own stupid party to buy the rotten cheese they were selling. Now they run like a bunch of weasels out of Wisconsin to prevent a vote they believe might hurt their union cronies. What is it about these people that makes them think every cheap trick they can devise to get their way is justified? From Obama and his crony capitalism to Holder and his “see no evil to whites” Justice Dept (there’s a laugh) these people are all crooks. The DemocRATs ain’t a political party, they’re a damn RICO investigation waiting to happen.
The cheap trickery is what you get from those who believe that ends-justify-the-means moral relativism is a feature, not a bug.
One side of the great political divide embraces this, far more than the other … while the other side at least pays lip service to objective principle.
Bon, they do this sort of thing because they believe that democracy means rule by Democrats. Rule by Democrats is, to their minds, the only legitimate form of government.
The fly in the ointment is the fact that Republicans can never really name what they want to cut. Senior care, education, head-start, all are off limits.
Crusader you’re not paying attention. The Republicans want the unions to pay for part of their pensions and health care. They also want to reduce the bargaining power of the unions. That’s why the democrats fled the state. That’s why the unions are bussing in goons in an attempt to intimidate the Republicans. None of this is secret.
Simply put, “When the Democrats see they are losing, they cheat.”
Win or lose, Democrats cheat. It’s a constant, not a variable, in American politics.
The fly in the ointment is the fact that Republicans can never really name what they want to cut.
Uh, duh, Scott Walker has named what he wants to cut. Or, more precisely, he has specified that he wants the teachers to start contributing to their own pensions and healthcare, instead of expecting the taxpayers to foot it all. And the response to Walker’s very modest proposal? “Oh, noes!! Walker is just like -Hitler!!!”
The real fly in the ointment? To mix metaphors, it’s that pigs really squeal loudly when someone gets between them and the trough.
From what I heard Gov. Walker say, if the bill doesn’t pass the State will lay off about 5500-6000 state employees, and the reduced State aid to local governments and schools will leave them with no alternative to similar actions. The State will simply not appropriate money to keep everyone employed at current rates—either the compensation per employee or the number of employees will decline, and there’s no getting around that.
This is really all about the unions running the Democratic Party. The unions nationwide care deeply about the rpecedent of a State acting to narrow the scope of collective bargaining; care enough to sacrifice many of their own employees and many Democratic officeholders, because the stakes for the unions qua unions (read: membership due) outweigh any other concern.
At the end of the day, if the Democrats and anti-Walker demonstrators win, a whole lot of them will be laid off, but no one is telling them that is the real choice—well, Walker is trying but they aren’t listening.
The union leaders are looking out for themselves and their institution (the unions) at the expense of their members.
Politically-active public-employee unions have an inherent conflict of interest. Where else do employees get to legally buy off those who write their paychecks (with other peoples’ money)?
excellent submit, very informative. I ponder why the opposite specialists of this sector do not understand this. You should continue your writing. I am sure, you have a huge readers’ base already!