Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-02-2018, 03:12 PM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet Budget Player Cadet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,136
Republicans aim for a lame-duck power grab in Wisconsin

https://eu.jsonline.com/story/news/p...ry/2162684002/

The republican party in Wisconsin lost the governorship but maintained the state senate and house. So, much like in North Carolina, we're seeing shenanigans:

The sweeping plan — to be taken up Tuesday — would remove Gov.-elect Tony Evers' power to approve major actions by Attorney General-elect Josh Kaul and give that authority to Republican lawmakers.

That could mean the campaign promise made by Evers and Kaul to immediately withdraw Wisconsin from a federal lawsuit to overturn the Affordable Care Act would likely be blocked.
This is a pretty long list. Perhaps the most bizarre item on the list involves a conservative state supreme court justice who is up for re-election. The state congress intends to shift the primary so that it isn't on the same day as his election. No points for guessing why they want to that - it's the turnout. Higher turnout almost always leads to higher democratic wins, so making people come out again for another vote makes it very likely to lower turnout. It's also liable to cause a massive clusterfuck, as this would lead to the state having to run three statewide elections in three months, and good luck with that (this article has more details). 60/72 district clerks came out against the move; none have put forward a stance in favor.

All in all, though, what we're looking at is a slate of bills rushed out in a weekend to strip powers from the governor and the AG (where republicans lost their reelection bids) to the state legislature (where republicans remain in power). Legal? Maybe. A good look for democracy? Ha ha, fuck no.

But yeah, this is starting to become a pattern - if republicans lose one branch of government, their immediate response seems to be to do whatever they can to hamstring that branch. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think this is how the separation of powers is supposed to work. It is a blatant power grab.

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 12-02-2018 at 03:13 PM.
  #2  
Old 12-02-2018, 05:41 PM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 10,583
Is anything they are attempting illegal or something the courts may block?

If not, then itís just politics.

I wonít hide my bias. Anything that prevents Evers from reversing the changes weíve made over the past 8 years has my support. He has no mandate anyway. The election was a squeaker and Republicans even made gains in the legislature. In the face of the opposing party overwhelmingly controlling both sides of the state house I canít imagine what, if anything, he thinks heís going to get done in the first place. Even without the hamstringing he is destin for failure.
__________________
I got tired of coming up with last-minute desperate solutions to impossible problems created by other fucking people!

William Stranix
  #3  
Old 12-02-2018, 06:13 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 5,816
Inarguably this Wisconsin GOP effort, like the one in North Carolina two years ago, is a plan intended to subvert the expressed will of voters. As Eric Holder said on Twitter:

Quote:
The people spoke in November. Republicans refuse to hear and seek to hold on to power-by any means. This is not good for our democracy. Time for the people in Michigan, North Carolina and Wisconsin to be heard-again. Contact these legislators/let them know you oppose this action.
https://twitter.com/EricHolder/statu...-tony-evers%2F

And:

Quote:
Republicans are taking aim at voting rights again as well. The bill would limit early voting to two weeks ahead of an election, rather than six weeks in some parts of the state currently. (This provision would likely face pushback, since a federal court in 2016 blocked a similar voter law because it discriminated against racial minorities.)
https://www.motherjones.com/politics...er-tony-evers/
  #4  
Old 12-02-2018, 06:25 PM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 20,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Is anything they are attempting illegal or something the courts may block?

If not, then itís just politics.

I wonít hide my bias. Anything that prevents Evers from reversing the changes weíve made over the past 8 years has my support. He has no mandate anyway. The election was a squeaker and Republicans even made gains in the legislature. In the face of the opposing party overwhelmingly controlling both sides of the state house I canít imagine what, if anything, he thinks heís going to get done in the first place. Even without the hamstringing he is destin for failure.
Attitudes like this are the problem. We have a party that uses underhanded measures to thwart the vote of the people and its supporters are all like "well, as long as my team does it, yippee!" What you consider to be progress under Walker are considered by others to be mistakes to be corrected. Evers has as big a mandate as Walker has had, he got the most votes. I would not be happy if Democrats did similar things and I would call them out for being sore losers if they did. We have one party that has no respect for the rule of law.

Similar crookedness is going on in Michigan, where sore loser Republicans are trying in the lame duck session to undercut the powers of the Secretary of State and Attorney General, as Democrats won both of these offices as well as the governor's seat.
  #5  
Old 12-02-2018, 08:40 PM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 10,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
Similar crookedness is going on in Michigan
Is it illegal? If it isn't it isn't "cooked".

Politics is a cut throat business. It's not pretty or nice. I can see why you don't like what they're trying to do. IMHO Republicans are generally the ones who don't know how to use power. Which is why when they have it they tend to drop the ball and not get things done.

As long as my Assembly Rep and State Senator are members of the majority I expect them to represent me. Tony Evers does not represent my interests nor the interests of the people of the district I live in.

Technically, as Attorney General Josh Kaul will be my boss. Can't say I'm happy about that but the last two AG's (both Republicans) admittedly did a couple of dopey things. It was only a matter of time before a Democrat got in.
  #6  
Old 12-02-2018, 08:46 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 24,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Is it illegal? If it isn't it isn't "cooked".
Is that your moral compass? "Is it illegal?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
As long as my Assembly Rep and State Senator are members of the majority I expect them to represent me.
That sentence shouldn't end with the feeling of "at all costs" IMO and yet yours does. The amount of "attitude" in your whole post is off the charts.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 12-02-2018 at 08:49 PM.
  #7  
Old 12-02-2018, 08:51 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot Buck Godot is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 5,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Is anything they are attempting illegal or something the courts may block?

If not, then itís just politics.
So presumably you have multiple examples of Democrats doing the same thing when they lost a governorship?
  #8  
Old 12-02-2018, 09:40 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 80,022
Not on the same scale, but there was the Massachusetts legislature changing the rules on how replacement senators were chosen, after Ted Kennedy's death.
  #9  
Old 12-02-2018, 10:33 PM
Lance Turbo Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,552
Apparently the total vote for assembly seats went 53 - 45 (+8) to the Democrats. A solid majority. However, because of the careful drawing of district lines Republicans have 63 - 36 edge in assembly seats.

That's a sickening perversion of democracy even if it doesn't break any laws.
  #10  
Old 12-02-2018, 11:38 PM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 10,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Godot View Post
So presumably you have multiple examples of Democrats doing the same thing when they lost a governorship?
I do remember them running and hiding in another state to block legislation Governor Walker was trying to pass. Doesnít get much sleazier or cowardice than that.
__________________
I got tired of coming up with last-minute desperate solutions to impossible problems created by other fucking people!

William Stranix
  #11  
Old 12-02-2018, 11:53 PM
Lance Turbo Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
I do remember them running and hiding in another state to block legislation Governor Walker was trying to pass. Doesnít get much sleazier or cowardice than that.
I thought your standard was if it's not illegal it's just politics.
  #12  
Old 12-02-2018, 11:55 PM
running coach's Avatar
running coach running coach is online now
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 35,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
I thought your standard was if it's not illegal it's just politics.
For his side.
  #13  
Old 12-02-2018, 11:59 PM
RickJay RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 40,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
I wonít hide my bias. Anything that prevents Evers from reversing the changes weíve made over the past 8 years has my support. He has no mandate anyway. The election was a squeaker and Republicans even made gains in the legislature.
Sure, because the Wisconsin legislature was preposterously gerrymanded. Evers sure got a lot more of the vote than the legislature Republicans did.

Once you put partisan advantage over democracy, it's time to admit you do not believe in democracy.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #14  
Old 12-03-2018, 12:25 AM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 10,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
I thought your standard was if it's not illegal it's just politics.

My point was that both sides will take extreme measures to forward or protect their agenda.

But passing restrictions in the legislature on an incoming Governor is nowhere in the same league as hiding out in a dive motel room across the border.

As President Obama said, elections have consequences. The Republicans were given control of both chambers of the state house. I am confident that when Democrats win the majority back they will return many favors. Iíd be disappointed if they didnít. Am looking forward to the show in DC that begins in January. Should be a helluva ride!
__________________
I got tired of coming up with last-minute desperate solutions to impossible problems created by other fucking people!

William Stranix
  #15  
Old 12-03-2018, 12:32 AM
Northern Piper Northern Piper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back.
Posts: 27,651
Republicans aim for a lame-duck power grab in Wisconsin

David Frum, a neo-conservative true believer, has said something similar as RickJay:

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Frum in the Atlantic
If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.

Last edited by Northern Piper; 12-03-2018 at 12:32 AM.
  #16  
Old 12-03-2018, 12:35 AM
Lance Turbo Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
But passing restrictions in the legislature on an incoming Governor is nowhere in the same league as hiding out in a dive motel room across the border.
Correct, these are not in the same league. One delayed a vote on a bill for a couple weeks. The other one, combined with one of the most extreme state legislature gerrymanders in the country, will subvert the will of the voters for years to come.

Not even in the same league.
  #17  
Old 12-03-2018, 01:05 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet Budget Player Cadet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
My point was that both sides will take extreme measures to forward or protect their agenda.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Godot View Post
So presumably you have multiple examples of Democrats doing the same thing when they lost a governorship?
__________________
If you want to vote for people who will attack the rights of me and those close to me, we cannot be friends, and I will not accept that you're a good person.
  #18  
Old 12-03-2018, 01:16 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet Budget Player Cadet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,136
The important thing to remember is that this is not politics as usual, regardless of who may try to claim otherwise. This is an exclusively republican pattern of post-election power grabs against the will of the people. If you support it as a matter of partisan politics, well, good on you for being honest about your horribly antidemocratic beliefs. If you think it is "business as usual", you are simply empirically wrong.
__________________
If you want to vote for people who will attack the rights of me and those close to me, we cannot be friends, and I will not accept that you're a good person.
  #19  
Old 12-03-2018, 01:20 AM
zoid's Avatar
zoid zoid is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago Il
Posts: 9,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
I thought your standard was if it's not illegal it's just politics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by running coach View Post
For his side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
Correct, these are not in the same league. One delayed a vote on a bill for a couple weeks. The other one, combined with one of the most extreme state legislature gerrymanders in the country, will subvert the will of the voters for years to come.

Not even in the same league.
All of these bear repeating
  #20  
Old 12-03-2018, 01:49 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet Budget Player Cadet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
Correct, these are not in the same league. One delayed a vote on a bill for a couple weeks. The other one, combined with one of the most extreme state legislature gerrymanders in the country, will subvert the will of the voters for years to come.

Not even in the same league.
Also, while dodging a vote by skipping the state is emphatically Not A Good Lookô, it's worth mentioning that the vote in question was a congressional redistricting which handed several additional seats to the republican party, that the vote did happen (if somewhat delayed), and that this was 15 years ago.
__________________
If you want to vote for people who will attack the rights of me and those close to me, we cannot be friends, and I will not accept that you're a good person.
  #21  
Old 12-03-2018, 02:12 AM
snoe snoe is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
Also, while dodging a vote by skipping the state is emphatically Not A Good Look™, it's worth mentioning that the vote in question was a congressional redistricting which handed several additional seats to the republican party, that the vote did happen (if somewhat delayed), and that this was 15 years ago.
That’s the Texas case — Wisconsin legislators did it in 2011. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb...akers-20110220
I’m actually curious whether that tactic could work this year — the Leg has to get this stuff passed before new governor is seated.

Last edited by snoe; 12-03-2018 at 02:13 AM.
  #22  
Old 12-03-2018, 02:58 AM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 10,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
One delayed a vote on a bill for a couple weeks.
Technically it could have delayed it indefinitely.
So you’re saying that running away and hiding in another state, rather than doing the job you were elected and paid to do is perfectly acceptable to you?

Which proves what I said, both sides will take extreme measures to forward or protect their agenda. You defending what the Dems did is no different than me accepting what the Republicans are trying to do. Do not pretend you are morally superior. You are just on the opposite side of the same coin as I.
__________________
I got tired of coming up with last-minute desperate solutions to impossible problems created by other fucking people!

William Stranix

Last edited by pkbites; 12-03-2018 at 02:59 AM. Reason: Spelling
  #23  
Old 12-03-2018, 03:17 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 35,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
My point was that both sides will take extreme measures to forward or protect their agenda.

But passing restrictions in the legislature on an incoming Governor is nowhere in the same league as hiding out in a dive motel room across the border.
Others have explained how you are right but not in the way you think.

I will just point out that you are using the fallacy of tu quoque, likely because you realize there is no argument that what they are doing isn't wrong.When logic fails, we often reach for a logical fallacy, even subconsciously. But, like all uses of that fallacy, it is easily debunked: Even if we held that these actions you described were worse, it wouldn't matter, because two wrongs don't make a right.

This case is even worse, though, because we don't even agree that this thing is worse. The problem is that Republicans keep lowering the bar so much that there's often not an equally bad thing the Democrats have done. But, for the fallacy of tu quoque to be convincing, the outrage has to match or surpass the outrage of the other side.

I very much hope that, in my life time, basic (remedial level) logical thinking courses will be required in school so that everyone in the country can recognize tu quoque well enough that it will no longer be an instinctual tactic. Because even I have to admit that people only use it because it works.

Last edited by BigT; 12-03-2018 at 03:18 AM.
  #24  
Old 12-03-2018, 03:24 AM
zoid's Avatar
zoid zoid is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago Il
Posts: 9,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Which proves what I said, both sides will take extreme measures to forward or protect their agenda. You defending what the Dems did is no different than me accepting what the Republicans are trying to do. Do not pretend you are morally superior. You are just on the opposite side of the same coin as I.
Absolute bullshit. One side is attempting to uphold democracy. The other is using underhanded tactics to harm the people of Wisconsin. Hint - the people you support are the second. The is no moral equivalency.
  #25  
Old 12-03-2018, 03:35 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 35,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Technically it could have delayed it indefinitely.
So you’re saying that running away and hiding in another state, rather than doing the job you were elected and paid to do is perfectly acceptable to you?

Which proves what I said, both sides will take extreme measures to forward or protect their agenda. You defending what the Dems did is no different than me accepting what the Republicans are trying to do. Do not pretend you are morally superior. You are just on the opposite side of the same coin as I.
And this only confirms what I said. You cannot defend their actions, so you are changing the subject to who is or isn't morally superior. You're the one who seems to feel bad because your party is doing something immoral, and you need to assure yourself that Democrats are just as bad.

But none of this debunks anything in the OP. You could prove that Democrats are controlled by Satan himself, and it it still wouldn't invalidate anything BPC said.

You would prefer us to argue about how bad an incident long past was, rather than debate the subject at hand.

I can see no defense for these actions by the Republicans. Can you?

Last edited by BigT; 12-03-2018 at 03:38 AM.
  #26  
Old 12-03-2018, 04:26 AM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 10,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoid View Post
One side is attempting to uphold democracy.
Can you explain to me how running away and hiding in another state so as to avoid casting a vote is "upholding democracy". I must of played hooky the day they taught that in civics 101.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
You're the one who seems to feel bad because your party is doing something immoral, and you need to assure yourself that Democrats are just as bad.
I don't feel bad nor do I think what they are attempting is immoral. I don't want Evers to be able to get his agenda through nor do I want the many good things that Walker and the legislature accomplished during the last 8 years to be reversed or watered down.

I do admit that it is politics at it's most hard ball, and cut throat at that. But it's not immoral and the system allows for it. If it works as planned T will be neutered, his insane ideas will go nowhere, and being viewed as a failure he'll be held to a single term as the people realize they made a mistake removing the best, most effective governor the state has ever had in the wake of their hissy fit over Trump.

I am fully aware that this could blow up in their face. Public opinion could turn savage on the Republicans, and if/when the majority is on the other side paybacks will be a mighty bitch. It is a huge political risk they are taking.

I realize my honesty on where I stand scores no points with you. ICCL. However, it is not my intent to irritate anyone.
  #27  
Old 12-03-2018, 07:48 AM
justrob justrob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
Also, while dodging a vote by skipping the state is emphatically Not A Good Lookô, it's worth mentioning that the vote in question was a congressional redistricting which handed several additional seats to the republican party, that the vote did happen (if somewhat delayed), and that this was 15 years ago.
They actually were trying to delay the vote on the anti-union Act 10. Of course pkbites has no problem with it since the bill specifically excluded law enforcement and firefighters from the stripping of collective bargaining rights from public employees.
  #28  
Old 12-03-2018, 08:16 AM
davidm's Avatar
davidm davidm is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Near Philadelphia PA, USA
Posts: 12,066
This makes me sick. This is a deliberate undermining of the will of the people. Is there any way to prevent this?
__________________
Check out my t-shirt designs in Marketplace. https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...php?p=21131885
  #29  
Old 12-03-2018, 08:30 AM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Is anything they are attempting illegal or something the courts may block?

If not, then itís just politics.
No. Hell, no.

The peaceful transfer of power is a cornerstone of democracy. And it's been a cornerstone of ours, going back to Adams stepping down when Jefferson won the 1800 election.

What we have here, in NC, in WI, in MI, is the GOP refusing to transfer power after losing an election. What the GOP is doing may violate no statutes, but it is most certainly a violation of first principles of how a democracy is supposed to work.
  #30  
Old 12-03-2018, 08:35 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet Budget Player Cadet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post

I don't feel bad nor do I think what they are attempting is immoral. I don't want Evers to be able to get his agenda through nor do I want the many good things that Walker and the legislature accomplished during the last 8 years to be reversed or watered down.

I do admit that it is politics at it's most hard ball, and cut throat at that. But it's not immoral and the system allows for it. If it works as planned T will be neutered, his insane ideas will go nowhere, and being viewed as a failure he'll be held to a single term as the people realize they made a mistake removing the best, most effective governor the state has ever had in the wake of their hissy fit over Trump.
And there you have it - "When you go high, we go low". The means aren't particularly important, and it's fine if they break denocratic norms, go against the spirit of democracy, or make the political system even more bitter, cutthroat, and unsustainable. What matters is the ends. What matters is that a conservative agenda passes, consequences be damned.

pkbites, is there any line you wouldn't see as justifiably crossable in defense of the conservative cause, as long as it's legal? Keep in mind that "what is legal" is exactly what the legislation is responsible for deciding.
__________________
If you want to vote for people who will attack the rights of me and those close to me, we cannot be friends, and I will not accept that you're a good person.
  #31  
Old 12-03-2018, 08:37 AM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 10,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by justrob View Post
They actually were trying to delay the vote on the anti-union Act 10. Of course pkbites has no problem with it since the bill specifically excluded law enforcement and firefighters from the stripping of collective bargaining rights from public employees.
It most certainly did affect me. I retired in 2007 after 25 years as a Deputy Sheriff. I then started a second career with another agency. I didnít have to pay into the retirement system during my first career. Now I do. My health insurance was free the first time around. If I were to take it with my current department it would cost me.

I donít have problem with either of those things. People in the private sector have to pay, why should I get a free ride at tax payers expense?
__________________
I got tired of coming up with last-minute desperate solutions to impossible problems created by other fucking people!

William Stranix
  #32  
Old 12-03-2018, 08:46 AM
dalej42 dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 13,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Not on the same scale, but there was the Massachusetts legislature changing the rules on how replacement senators were chosen, after Ted Kennedy's death.


Weren’t the rules actually changed to prevent Governor Romney from appointing a Republican in the event that John Kerry won the presidency in 2004? I don’t remember a subsequent change.
  #33  
Old 12-03-2018, 08:56 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet Budget Player Cadet is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by justrob View Post
They actually were trying to delay the vote on the anti-union Act 10. Of course pkbites has no problem with it since the bill specifically excluded law enforcement and firefighters from the stripping of collective bargaining rights from public employees.
I had to google it because I didn't know what we were talking about and found the texas case first. This is also A Bad Lookô, make no mistake, and it's entirely legitimate to criticize it. That doesn't magically make this move okay, though.
__________________
If you want to vote for people who will attack the rights of me and those close to me, we cannot be friends, and I will not accept that you're a good person.
  #34  
Old 12-03-2018, 09:02 AM
Northern Piper Northern Piper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back.
Posts: 27,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
No. Hell, no.



The peaceful transfer of power is a cornerstone of democracy. And it's been a cornerstone of ours, going back to Adams stepping down when Jefferson won the 1800 election.



What we have here, in NC, in WI, in MI, is the GOP refusing to transfer power after losing an election. What the GOP is doing may violate no statutes, but it is most certainly a violation of first principles of how a democracy is supposed to work.


I don't see that. The Republicans in the Legislature aren't blocking Evers from taking office.

Rather, they seem to be reducing the powers granted to the Governor by statutes passed by the previous Legislature. As long as that is permitted under the state Constitution, they are not hindering the peaceful transfer of power. What the Legislature has previously granted to the Governor by statute can be taken away by statute.

And, pkbites point about electoral mandate is valid: the voters have elected the governor with a certain electoral mandate, but they've also elected the members of the two houses with a different mandate, directly opposed to that of the incoming Governor. Why is it undemocratic for them to do what is in their power to try to block the incoming Governor from carrying out his platform?

This really is the issue with divided government in the Congressional / Presidential (or Governor) system. Both branches of gouvernement can legitimately claim to have a democratic mandate and thus to block each other. That system only works as long as their is a commitment to compromise by the actors. If there is a breakdown in compromise, appeals to democracy can't resolve the dispute.
  #35  
Old 12-03-2018, 09:17 AM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 20,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Piper View Post
I don't see that. The Republicans in the Legislature aren't blocking Evers from taking office.

Rather, they seem to be reducing the powers granted to the Governor by statutes passed by the previous Legislature. As long as that is permitted under the state Constitution, they are not hindering the peaceful transfer of power. What the Legislature has previously granted to the Governor by statute can be taken away by statute.

And, pkbites point about electoral mandate is valid: the voters have elected the governor with a certain electoral mandate, but they've also elected the members of the two houses with a different mandate, directly opposed to that of the incoming Governor. Why is it undemocratic for them to do what is in their power to try to block the incoming Governor from carrying out his platform?

This really is the issue with divided government in the Congressional / Presidential (or Governor) system. Both branches of gouvernement can legitimately claim to have a democratic mandate and thus to block each other. That system only works as long as their is a commitment to compromise by the actors. If there is a breakdown in compromise, appeals to democracy can't resolve the dispute.
The legislature's mandate stems from the extreme gerrymandering of the WI legislature. More voters preferred Democratic candidates, yet Republicans have supermajorities in both chambers. This clearly does not reflect the will of the people. At least in MI the situation was addressed by having a referendum to change the state constitution to have an impartial panel with open meetings draw the districts. We'll see how it works out, but it's a promising start.

I recall the MA legislature messing with the interim Senate appointment process, that was wrong of Democrats to do it as well. Elections have consequences, but Republicans seem to think that only applies when Republicans win.
  #36  
Old 12-03-2018, 09:20 AM
Lance Turbo Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Technically it could have delayed it indefinitely.
Who gives a shit about technically? Two weeks is not in the same league as two years. Two years is the minimum time this current issue will last, but it will probably last a lot longer.

Dems won the average assembly seat by 8 points yet the assembly seats will be 63 R - 36 D for the next two years. This current bill gives more power to that undemocratically elected body for those two years.

That one time you had to wait two week whole extra weeks to fuck the unions does not remotely balance the scales.
  #37  
Old 12-03-2018, 09:26 AM
Musicat Musicat is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 20,732
A clever headline and article in the LA Times shows how terrible the act of voting can be: California Republicans see what happens when more voters vote, and they don't like it one bit

Quote:
California Republicans, drummed out of office by the carload in the recent election, have exited whining.

Theyíve figured out why they got thumped so badly, and itís simple: California, that dastardly state, allowed voters to vote.

<snip>

ďI just think itís weird,Ē outgoing House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) said of Californiaís system of allowing every vote to be counted..."California defies logic to me.Ē

Last edited by Musicat; 12-03-2018 at 09:29 AM.
  #38  
Old 12-03-2018, 10:03 AM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Piper View Post
I don't see that. The Republicans in the Legislature aren't blocking Evers from taking office.

Rather, they seem to be reducing the powers granted to the Governor by statutes passed by the previous Legislature. As long as that is permitted under the state Constitution, they are not hindering the peaceful transfer of power.
This is just one step away from that: while they aren't blocking Evers from taking office, they are changing the laws to render the office as powerless as possible.

If they're refusing to transfer the actual power, it's not a transfer of power, peaceful or otherwise.
Quote:
And, pkbites point about electoral mandate is valid: the voters have elected the governor with a certain electoral mandate, but they've also elected the members of the two houses with a different mandate, directly opposed to that of the incoming Governor. Why is it undemocratic for them to do what is in their power to try to block the incoming Governor from carrying out his platform?
As has been noted multiple times in this thread already, a majority of the voters also voted for a Democratic legislature. Their mandate was undone by previous GOP gerrymandering.

There is no way one can truthfully say that the legislature has a popular mandate to restrict the incoming governor's powers. The GOP has maintained control of the legislature by antidemocratic means, and it is bootstrapping that antidemocratic result to antidemocratically undo the un-gerrymanderable outcome of the gubernatorial election.
  #39  
Old 12-03-2018, 10:22 AM
justrob justrob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
It most certainly did affect me. I retired in 2007 after 25 years as a Deputy Sheriff. I then started a second career with another agency. I didnít have to pay into the retirement system during my first career. Now I do. My health insurance was free the first time around. If I were to take it with my current department it would cost me.

I donít have problem with either of those things. People in the private sector have to pay, why should I get a free ride at tax payers expense?
Itís probably a good thing that I didnít say it did not affect you at all. I said that it stripped collective bargaining from all the public unions except law enforcement and firefighters. Would still be just as happy with it if your union no longer had the ability to bargain for the group?

I have always thought the retirement and health insurance perks were not ďfreeĒ but part of the overall compensation package. Thatís how it has always worked for me in the private sector, total compensation consists of salary+insurance benefits+any type of retirement package.
  #40  
Old 12-03-2018, 10:42 AM
justrob justrob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
I had to google it because I didn't know what we were talking about and found the texas case first. This is also A Bad Lookô, make no mistake, and it's entirely legitimate to criticize it. That doesn't magically make this move okay, though.
Agreed, just making sure everyone is on the same page as to what was going on.
  #41  
Old 12-03-2018, 11:20 AM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB E-DUB is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,256
[QUOTE=As long as that is permitted under the state Constitution, they are not hindering the peaceful transfer of power.[/QUOTE]

No, they're just hindering the power.
  #42  
Old 12-03-2018, 11:30 AM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 20,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
It most certainly did affect me. I retired in 2007 after 25 years as a Deputy Sheriff. I then started a second career with another agency. I didnít have to pay into the retirement system during my first career. Now I do. My health insurance was free the first time around. If I were to take it with my current department it would cost me.

I donít have problem with either of those things. People in the private sector have to pay, why should I get a free ride at tax payers expense?
Nothing is "free". In your first career, your health insurance and retirement were part of your compensation package. Your union (or you if you were non-unionized) and your employer agreed to this total package which made them due to you for services rendered. You earned them. They were not free.

What Wisconsin did was strip bargaining rights away from public sector workers on the grounds that "hey, public service workers and unions are overwhelmingly Democratic. Let's fuck them over!" and nothing more.
  #43  
Old 12-03-2018, 12:21 PM
Lance Turbo Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
What Wisconsin did was strip bargaining rights away from public sector workers on the grounds that "hey, public service workers and unions are overwhelmingly Democratic. Let's fuck them over!" and nothing more.
Never forget that they had to wait two extra weeks to fuck them over. Two whole weeks! It's like the 9/11 of political shadiness. Never forget!
  #44  
Old 12-03-2018, 12:27 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 24,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
No. Hell, no.

The peaceful transfer of power is a cornerstone of democracy. And it's been a cornerstone of ours, going back to Adams stepping down when Jefferson won the 1800 election.

What we have here, in NC, in WI, in MI, is the GOP refusing to transfer power after losing an election. What the GOP is doing may violate no statutes, but it is most certainly a violation of first principles of how a democracy is supposed to work.
The GOP routinely violates the social contract and then points fingers at the other side.
  #45  
Old 12-03-2018, 02:55 PM
RickJay RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 40,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
I don't feel bad nor do I think what they are attempting is immoral. I don't want Evers to be able to get his agenda through nor do I want the many good things that Walker and the legislature accomplished during the last 8 years to be reversed or watered down.
That has nothing to do with the principles of democracy. No one likes it when they lose, but someone who believes in democracy accepts it when they lose and works towards the next election. Approving of subverting democracy means you don't believe in democracy. Belief in democracy comes before belief in the policies of your chosen candidate.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #46  
Old 12-03-2018, 03:30 PM
Lance Turbo Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,552
An Exit From Trumpocracy - David Frum

Quote:
If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.
  #47  
Old 12-03-2018, 03:59 PM
kaylasdad99 kaylasdad99 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 30,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
I do remember them running and hiding in another state to block legislation Governor Walker was trying to pass. Doesnít get much sleazier or cowardice than that.
That was a RIGHT thing to do, because everything Walker wanted to do was BAD. And WRONG. And EVIL.

And if anyone thinks I donít understand Poeís Law or I would have put some kind of smiley to indicate that I was being sarcastic, let me assure yíall that I understand Poeís Law just fine. Those evaluations are 100% objectively accurate and consistent with observed reality.
  #48  
Old 12-03-2018, 04:32 PM
justrob justrob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
That was a RIGHT thing to do, because everything Walker wanted to do was BAD. And WRONG. And EVIL.
Walker also never even hinted at these being on the slate of things he would do if elected.
  #49  
Old 12-03-2018, 04:41 PM
muldoonthief's Avatar
muldoonthief muldoonthief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 10,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
Werenít the rules actually changed to prevent Governor Romney from appointing a Republican in the event that John Kerry won the presidency in 2004? I donít remember a subsequent change.
The 2004 change removed the governor's power to appoint a replacement Senator, and set up a special election for a Senator to serve the remainder of the term. So under the terms of that change, the seat would stay vacant for the 4-5 months before the special election.

But in 2009, when MA had a Democratic governor and Ted Kennedy was in failing health, they changed the law again so that the governor could appoint a replacement to serve the 4-5 months until the special election. At the time, there were exactly 60 Democratic Senators, resulting in a filibuster-proof majority. So Paul Kirk (D) was appointed to the seat until Scott Brown (R) was elected a few months later.

It will be interesting to see what happens if Elizabeth Warren does throw her hat in the ring for 2020, given that MA currently has a Republican governor.
  #50  
Old 12-03-2018, 05:17 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 7,446
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
Sure, because the Wisconsin legislature was preposterously gerrymanded. Evers sure got a lot more of the vote than the legislature Republicans did.

Once you put partisan advantage over democracy, it's time to admit you do not believe in democracy.
And like most Republicans, he doesn't care to dispute what you've said. He's not interested in debating the merits of democracy and probably sees more popular forms of democracy as inherently 'flawed,' preferring flawed forms of democracy in which only the "qualified" voters participate.

What matters isn't whether the will of the people is respected -- after all, they aren't "real" Americans and "real" Wisconsinites. What matters is that those who were democratically elected to power a few years ago maintain that power. This is what authoritarian regimes do - use the legitimacy of their being elected to power to justify tinkering with the system so that it's harder for a majority of people to vote them out once they're there.

Last edited by asahi; 12-03-2018 at 05:18 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:52 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017