Judge strikes down Wis. law limiting union rights.

MADISON, Wis. — A Wisconsin judge on Friday struck down nearly all of the state law championed by Gov. Scott Walker that effectively ended collective bargaining rights for most public workers.

Good For the people of Wisconsin. At the very least people should have the ability to bargain for better pay and benefits.

Walker issued a statement accusing the judge of being a "liberal activist" who "wants to go backwards and take away the lawmaking responsibilities of the legislature and the governor. We are confident that the state will ultimately prevail in the appeals process.

Wow. Why stop there? Why not call the judge a communist?www.nypost.com...So who is Gov. Walker? Looking into it a little further you begin to see some scary agendas. As expected being a member of ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council), he most certainly is expected to push right ideologies. Such as the elimination of unions (as noted above), the privatization of education and medical fields, and limiting citizens abilities to take legal action against corporations for bad practices. With that being said, there was one truly creepy thing I have come across in my short research of Gov. Walker and ALEC.

He also worked hard to pass "Truth in Sentencing" (1997 AB 351), which would greatly increase the number of inmates in prison at the same time that he attempted to privatize Wisconsin's prison system (1997 AB 634, 1999 AB 176 and AB 519)

HUFF POST If there is one thing I personally don't like, it's intentionally trying to incarcerate more people for profit. I had previously made a Thread discussing the privatization of the prison system.What's really sad is that when the right works together (ALEC) to pass legislation it's good politics. But when the people mobilize or the democratic party tries to push any type of true left narrative they're demonized and called communists, or socialists, or Marxists. As long as it's something that has a negative association to it.

reply to post by GD21D

I'd have to disagree with ya on the truth in sentencing. What a person is sentenced to is what a person should be doing for the time on whatever they got convicted for. If the sentences are too much or too little then lets change them. I'll agree many sentences that became mandatory types on political reaction issues are absurdly out of all proportion while someone can commit a lesser crime in the murder category and be out in a shockingly short time.

Having them serve the actual time given though, seems right from the victim's standpoint, I'm sure...

I suppose we have to live with what the court says on the Union stuff unless options exist to run it up higher and I hope they do. Just as I'm quite happy with other court decisions...can't get picky about what to accept. All this likely did though was give them the power to bargain the state into bankruptcy a bit sooner. I don't know of any pension funds really in good shape and they're going upside down like the rest of the entitlements. States can't print money and budgets are at red line now....so every dollar to a teacher is a dollar taken from somewhere else, directly, when it's a state budget.

I hope it turns out for the best...

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

States can't print money and budgets are at red line now....so every dollar to a teacher is a dollar taken from somewhere else, directly, when it's a state budget.

Maybe they should have thought of that when they started handing out tax breaks and subsidies to corporations.

Awesome!

Not that I'm a big union person - - - but I hate the arrogance of Walker.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000
I agree with you for crimes with victims. When we're talking about violent offenders the last thing we want is a free for all with early releases. From a fundamental standpoint the last thing you want is to create more victims unnecessarily, or through legislative negligence (for lack of a better term). But what about nonviolent offenders? Isn't one of the main objectives of the incarceration system to rehabilitate offenders?

Walker's plan eliminates other early release programs that Doyle put in place in 2009. One of those plans gave the prison the authority to release low-level nonviolent offenders who had served all but 12 months of their prison time. The unserved prison time was added to their extended supervision. Only 56 inmates were released since Oct. 1, 2009, under that program.

GREEN BAY PRESSMaybe to be thorough I should repost the FORM 10-K released by the Corrections Corporation of America to the Securities Exchange Commission, where they state what they consider to be risks.

Our ability to secure new contracts to develop and manage correctional and detention facilities depends on many factors outside our control. Our growth is generally dependent upon our ability to obtain new contracts to develop and manage new correctional and detention facilities. This possible growth depends on a number of factors we cannot control, including crime rates and sentencing patterns in various jurisdictions and acceptance of privatization.

Well, what could threaten their ability to obtain new contracts?

For instance, any changes with respect to drugs and controlled substances or illegal immigration could affect the number of persons arrested, convicted, and sentenced, thereby potentially reducing demand for correctional facilities to house them.

So let's stop this "we care about the safety of citizens" act, and call it what it is. The intention of profiting off of the incarceration of the populace.As far as unions go. Anything where citizens work in collusion to get a better deal is bad, and anything where corporations work in collusion to get a better deal is good. Apparently this is the message that is pushed on a consistent basis.

reply to post by GD21D


"The people" of Wisconsin have spoken - not once - with the election of Walker,

not twice - with the non-election of Kloppenberg for State Court,

but three times - with the re-election of Walker in a very expensive, tax-paid-for, recall election == with a larger percent of the vote.

Walker did issue a statement did he? He thinks governors are above the legal system. I know a lot of politicians feel that way, but they're just public servants. And legislation IS NOT LAW. The only thing that gives legislation the chance of being lawful is the constitution and basic common law.

reply to post by GD21D

I'm 100% with you on the need to reform the entire structure of the criminal justice system and it's not just about that T&C sensitive drug issue, but everything from actual jail over parking fines to prostitution (either side of that deal) or best of all...Prison for not paying Child support where, Yeah, the father's THEN going to PAY, right?

We do agree on the total absurdity of all that and how many things people do actual prison time on the taxpayer's dollar for. Perhaps truth in sentencing will help push the system to the point the public cannot ignore it.

After all, these are state issues...and I've known more than one guy around here who have been State Reps. Not federal in Washington, state level in the capital. They're normal people and they are the ones who can change the Penal Code and penalties for many offenses we all find silly or outright destructive beyond reasoning for people's lives. MUCH of this madness we live under is decided and enforced MUCH closer to home than Washington, IMO.

Originally posted by Happy1
reply to post by GD21D

 

"The people" of Wisconsin have spoken - not once - with the election of Walker,

not twice - with the non-election of Kloppenberg for State Court,

but three times - with the re-election of Walker in a very expensive, tax-paid-for, recall election == with a larger percent of the vote.

I guess the demonstrations of an estimated 100,000 of Wisconsin residents isn't really the voice of anyone important.

Madison police spokesman Joel DeSpain estimated the crowd at 85,000 to 100,000 people, which would top the size of protests in Madison during the Vietnam War.

Reuters Oh yeah, something barely covered my the media outlets because the voice of the people gets in the way of politics.

Over 100,000 people in Madison, Wisconsin were joined by thousands of other Americans around the country in protest of Gov. Scott Walker’s attempt to strip collective bargaining rights from the state’s unionized workers, but you would not have known any of this if you watched cable news on Saturday as the coverage of the protests ranged from disappointing (MSNBC) to scant (CNN) to non-existent (Fox News).

SOURCE It's difficult to mobilize and spread a message if you're ignored by the main avenues of communication I.E. Television and Radio. When you don't have large financial backing it makes it extremely difficult to convey a message and win elections at virtually every level.This isn't to say with a strong financial backing you are guaranteed to win, but I will say without significant financial backing you're guaranteed to lose. Same goes with mobilizing large portions of any population. I wonder how much financial backing GOV. Scott Walker has had? No need to pull up the numbers, as they will be self evident.

reply to post by GD21D


score 1 for democracy and common sense,
if corporations can use alec to get more support workers can use each other for power,
they just want us devided

democracy works

xploder

reply to post by GD21D


The Unions had $30.00 out of my paycheck every month for 20 years, and all of my forced to contribute co-workers.

I work for the State of Wi, there was a lot of fiscal-minded people that voted for Walker that worked for the state.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000
That's why I like you. You're willing to take an understanding and flexible approach.There are some bad aspects of unions by the way. Especially when you look at the education system and how teachers unions have affected it. When unions make it difficult for unsatisfactory teachers to be replaced it is a disservice to the general population.I just wanted to point out that I don't agree with every aspect of unions. Sometimes we have to compartmentalize different organizations and ideas to find out what works and what doesn't. Too often we look at things as a whole, rather than looking at the different parts.I do still stand by the ability of the people to organize to protect their own interests. Otherwise you render the population impotent from a financial and legal standpoint.

reply to post by GD21D


weather you do or dont agree with unions is kinda secondary,
the right to "bargin" is part of a free market economy,
if we didnt have unions we would be working 7 days a week,
although the unions have changed to become a medium for control these days,
individuals would be at the mercy of profit loving individuals, and their vast resources,
when deciding pay rates,
its obvious what happens when worker protections are removed by legislation,
CHINA in america
and to me its the american worker that made america great in the first place,
COES forget this and claim "i did it on my own"

without organised labour we would be serfs

xploder

edit to add i am not in a union nor have i even been in one,
but i thank them and respect them for what they have done for humanity

reply to post by XPLodER
Although I don't completely disagree, there are still aspects of any doctrine whether it be political, social, religious, or otherwise that are dangerous to the well being of a society. We tend to box ourselves into a specific group without ever questioning or giving credence to arguments against certain aspects of a structure that is damaging. This is when you start hearing terms such as a "staunch conservative". When you hear labels such as these it tends to mean an individual who buys into the whole conservative package, instead of breaking the doctrine down into pieces and figuring out what works and what doesn't, what's effective and what is not.Just because I may question a certain part of unions doesn't mean I want to diminish the importance of it, or abolish it altogether. It just means I see a section of the idea that is more damaging than it is beneficial. It's in the same vein as when arguments against the left are made it usually degrades to a labeling of communist, socialist, or Marxist. The negative condentation with these terms through unseen and unrealized levers over time (the cold war and national socialism) create an ability to dismiss every aspect of social ideals such as workers unions. I give my humble apologies for swaying so far off topic, and getting into political and social ideologies. I do think it's an important aspect when examining how we view things such as unions.

I completely support the part of unions that fights for better conditions, pay and benefits for some workers. It's the whole "entitlement" part that I'm not a supporter of. You know - the part where people don't get fired for doing a bad job, or people get furloughed but still receive full pay for showing up for 2 hours a day etc. It's kind of like our welfare system created in the later 20th century - you know, the one that everyone's bitching about nowadays

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by GD21D

 

weather you do or dont agree with unions is kinda secondary,
the right to "bargin" is part of a free market economy,

In private unions, you can choose to not give those companies money if you don't believe in unions. Public unions are not part of a free market economy. With a public union, you have no choice.

Public unions bargain for the "right" for more of your paycheck.

/TOA

An update on this story. As expected there is an attempt to continue to enforce the law while the ruling goes through the appeals process.

MADISON, Wis. (AP) -- Wisconsin's attorney general said Saturday he would seek court permission to keep enforcing a state law that effectively ended collective bargaining for public employees while his office appeals a judge's ruling striking it down.

Here is part of the explained reasoning behind the repeal.

The ruling throws into question changes that have been made in pay, benefits and other work conditions for city, county and school district workers. The law only allowed for collective bargaining on wage increases no greater than the rate of inflation; all other issues, including workplace safety, vacation and health benefits could no longer be bargained for.

USA TODAY

Originally posted by GD21D

MADISON, Wis. — A Wisconsin judge on Friday struck down nearly all of the state law championed by Gov. Scott Walker that effectively ended collective bargaining rights for most public workers.

Good For the people of Wisconsin. At the very least people should have the ability to bargain for better pay and benefits.

Walker issued a statement accusing the judge of being a "liberal activist" who "wants to go backwards and take away the lawmaking responsibilities of the legislature and the governor. We are confident that the state will ultimately prevail in the appeals process.

Wow. Why stop there? Why not call the judge a communist?www.nypost.com...So who is Gov. Walker? Looking into it a little further you begin to see some scary agendas. As expected being a member of ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council), he most certainly is expected to push right ideologies. Such as the elimination of unions (as noted above), the privatization of education and medical fields, and limiting citizens abilities to take legal action against corporations for bad practices. With that being said, there was one truly creepy thing I have come across in my short research of Gov. Walker and ALEC.

He also worked hard to pass "Truth in Sentencing" (1997 AB 351), which would greatly increase the number of inmates in prison at the same time that he attempted to privatize Wisconsin's prison system (1997 AB 634, 1999 AB 176 and AB 519)

HUFF POST If there is one thing I personally don't like, it's intentionally trying to incarcerate more people for profit. I had previously made a Thread discussing the privatization of the prison system.What's really sad is that when the right works together (ALEC) to pass legislation it's good politics. But when the people mobilize or the democratic party tries to push any type of true left narrative they're demonized and called communists, or socialists, or Marxists. As long as it's something that has a negative association to it.

Actually no, this is terriblle for Wisconsin. Look at the economic recovery in right to work states vs forced union states. Your eyes will be opened. Wisconsin just took a blow to the head.

Originally posted by GD21D

I guess the demonstrations of an estimated 100,000 of Wisconsin residents isn't really the voice of anyone important.

Did he get reelected? There's your answer.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04]
Actually no, this is terriblle for Wisconsin. Look at the economic recovery in right to work states vs forced union states. Your eyes will be opened. Wisconsin just took a blow to the head.

Yep, yep, yep. The failed economic recovery is because the middle and lower classes want to bargain for a better deal. Funny how it's always the fault of the poor, and never the fault of the rich. Funny how the nonwealthy should sacrifice what little they have, but the wealthy shouldn't sacrifice any of what they have in excess. Never once have the wealthy taken any bit of responsibility for the absolute disaster that we are in the midst of. Never once have they offered to sacrifice a little to alleviate the crisis we are in. And yes, they are in a position to do so and be relatively unaffected.I also can't take any election that is largely dominated by monetary contributions seriously. This goes for both political parties by the way. To take a position of these elections being a product of any true democratic nature is absurd. This is an area in which I do blame the middle and lower classes for not mobilizing and building a strong sentiment that it is unacceptable. It's like I'm listening to Charlie Browns teacher. Wonk wonk wonk unemployment benefits. Wonk wonk wonk the poor are lazy. Wonk wonk wonk big business needs more tax breaks and an unregulated environment. Wonk wonk wonk our election process is effective. It's the same nonsense over and over again.Enjoy the cheerleading charade that will be the election cycle. I'm sure those appointed were done so by the genuine consent of the people. Just as they have genuine concerns for the people.