# Wis. GOP strips public workers' bargaining rights (not want to...did it) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 10, 2011, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119 "2011-03-10T02:07:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/61 "2011-03-10T18:30:29Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I’m curious if the people who currently oppose filibusters (many of whom apparently came to this opinion after Obama was elected) are also the same people who support the minority party leaving the state to deny a quorum. FTR I support filibusters and quorum dodging. I oppose the abuse of them however which was clearly done in the case of filibusters. ---
**Author:** ![Page\_Fault](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ad7895/32.png) [@Page\_Fault](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Page_Fault)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/62 "2011-03-10T18:33:13Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I’m curious if the people who currently oppose filibusters (many of whom apparently came to this opinion after Obama was elected) are also the same people who support the minority party leaving the state to deny a quorum. I oppose procedural filibusters, but that isn’t the same as opposing a filibuster in concept. The difference is that the Democrats had to leave the state and stay at a hotel… basically, they had to make a sacrifice and actually put forth some effort. The Republicans, during their ‘filibuster everything’ minority, basically said repeatedly, “We filibuster this.” and that’s the total effort they had to put in. If that’s the case, then why not just say you need a supermajority to pass ANYTHING and get rid of the filibuster to begin with? On preview, what WaM said. There’s a difference between use and abuse of a tactic. Now if the republicans actually went through the effort of reading the phone book and talking in shifts like they used to do, I might have more respect for them. That said, the procedural filibuster is in the rules… and denying a quorum is also within the rules. You can dislike a practice without thinking it’s illegal. Also, I note that nobody has addressed my first link where Fitzgerald basically admits this has nothing to do with the ‘good of the people’ and everything to do with denying Labor a voice. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/63 "2011-03-10T18:45:07Z")
> [@Page\_Fault](#): > > I oppose procedural filibusters, but that isn’t the same as opposing a filibuster in concept. The difference is that the Democrats had to leave the state and stay at a hotel… basically, they had to make a sacrifice and actually put forth some effort. > > The Republicans, during their ‘filibuster everything’ minority, basically said repeatedly, “We filibuster this.” and that’s the total effort they had to put in. If that’s the case, then why not just say you need a supermajority to pass ANYTHING and get rid of the filibuster to begin with? This is a popular misconception. The reason for the “procedural” filibuster is because it serves the interests of the majority. If the majority tried to enforce an actual filibuster, they would have to keep a quorum of their members present, while the minority could get by with only a couple on hand. It would be a lot more wearying for the majority, and they would be the ones putting forth a lot more effort. So as a practical matter, once the minority announces that they intend to filibuster, it’s in the interest of the majority to let the legislation wait rather than attempt to break the filibuster. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/64 "2011-03-10T18:54:36Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I’m not up on my parliamentary procedure. **Bricker** , according to your expertise( honest-no sarcasm here), how legit was this move? Well, his objection is grounded in the open meetings law, which I believe I have already shown is not applicable to senate (or joint committee) meetings as long as the meeting complies with the legislative house rules. In ordinary parliamentary procedure, this would be considered a point of order, which is a preferential, non-debatable motion. The chair must rule on the motion. A member dissatisfied with the chair’s ruling may appeal the decision of the chair, and the chair’s decision must be sustained by majority of the members present and voting. So even in ordinary parliamentary procedure analysis, the end result is legit. By this I mean that we can imagine that even if the decision had been appealed, the majority would have sustained the decision. But this is all moot, because the senate uses their own rules, not Roberts’. And under senate rule 17(2), this is a valid procedure. ---
**Author:** ![Page\_Fault](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ad7895/32.png) [@Page\_Fault](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Page_Fault)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/65 "2011-03-10T18:54:39Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > This is a popular misconception. The reason for the “procedural” filibuster is because it serves the interests of the majority. > > If the majority tried to enforce an actual filibuster, they would have to keep a quorum of their members present, while the minority could get by with only a couple on hand. It would be a lot more wearying for the majority, and they would be the ones putting forth a lot more effort. So as a practical matter, once the minority announces that they intend to filibuster, it’s in the interest of the majority to let the legislation wait rather than attempt to break the filibuster. In theory, that’s an improvement. In practice, that’s not the way it ended up, since it also allowed the minority to filibuster everything, no matter how minor an issue. I can appreciate the spirit of the attempt, but the intent and how it ended up being used aren’t the same. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/66 "2011-03-10T18:55:48Z")
> [@Page\_Fault](#): > > Considering that the Republicans didn’t even wait for the law to be read before voting and then /walking out/ of the room, I don’t see how this argument helps your case. How is that relevant to the question of the legality of the process? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/67 "2011-03-10T18:56:56Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > It’s still a better proposal than the across-the-board scores ( **furt** , these proposals are much rarer in recent years, but NCLB was largely based on across-the-board scores when it was written a decade ago), but it has, like I said, some unintended consequences. I didn’t want you to think I’m ignoring this, but it requires some thought before I can answer… ---
**Author:** ![Page\_Fault](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ad7895/32.png) [@Page\_Fault](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Page_Fault)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/68 "2011-03-10T19:00:04Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > How is that relevant to the question of the legality of the process? You said if there was a question of the legality, shouldn’t the law be referenced? However, when there was a question of the legality and the law was referenced, instead of saying that it was not valid(as you are arguing and as may indeed be the case), it was ignored and not addressed. If it was that cut and dried, why didn’t the Republicans answer, “This is not applicable because of x, y, and z, objection denied?” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/69 "2011-03-10T19:10:19Z")
> [@Page\_Fault](#): > > You said if there was a question of the legality, shouldn’t the law be referenced? However, when there was a question of the legality and the law was referenced, instead of saying that it was not valid(as you are arguing and as may indeed be the case), it was ignored and not addressed. If it was that cut and dried, why didn’t the Republicans answer, “This is not applicable because of x, y, and z, objection denied?” Oh, I see. Well, the general rule is that the chair may summarily deny motions that are dilatory or vexatious. I agree it would have been better to say that the open meetings law was inapplicable, but it doesn’t change the result. Why didn’t they? I imagine they had agreed ahead of time to not be drawn into any further delay tactics. The Democrats were not interested in doing anything except killing the bill - thus their absence from the statehouse and the state. Why should the chair respond to a series of baseless objections? ---
**Author:** ![Page\_Fault](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ad7895/32.png) [@Page\_Fault](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Page_Fault)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/70 "2011-03-10T19:15:13Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Oh, I see. > > Well, the general rule is that the chair may summarily deny motions that are dilatory or vexatious. I agree it would have been better to say that the open meetings law was inapplicable, but it doesn’t change the result. > > Why didn’t they? I imagine they had agreed ahead of time to not be drawn into any further delay tactics. The Democrats were not interested in doing anything except killing the bill - thus their absence from the statehouse and the state. Why should the chair respond to a series of baseless objections? As a further question(and I’m not trying to be adversarial here, this is an honest curiosity), what do you think of the fact that this non-fiscal bill had provisions in it which are, in fact affecting fiscal matters such as pensions and health insurance costs? Here is a brief post discussing it: [http://uwmasls.wordpress.com/2011/03/09/state-senate-hastily-passes-non-fiscal-budget-repair-bill/](http://uwmasls.wordpress.com/2011/03/09/state-senate-hastily-passes-non-fiscal-budget-repair-bill/) In addition to this, why is it such an emergency to strip collective bargaining rights when it apparently has nothing to do with the budget after all? Aside from the fact that Fitzgerald already answered that it was merely to destroy the Labor Unions and deny them funding. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaptics](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/278dde/32.png) [@Sinaptics](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaptics)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/71 "2011-03-10T20:00:23Z")
> [@Page\_Fault](#): > > As a further question(and I’m not trying to be adversarial here, this is an honest curiosity), what do you think of the fact that this non-fiscal bill had provisions in it which are, in fact affecting fiscal matters such as pensions and health insurance costs? > > Here is a brief post discussing it: [http://uwmasls.wordpress.com/2011/03/09/state-senate-hastily-passes-non-fiscal-budget-repair-bill/](http://uwmasls.wordpress.com/2011/03/09/state-senate-hastily-passes-non-fiscal-budget-repair-bill/) > > In addition to this, why is it such an emergency to strip collective bargaining rights when it apparently has nothing to do with the budget after all? Aside from the fact that Fitzgerald already answered that it was merely to destroy the Labor Unions and deny them funding. This, IMO, is the million dollar question being dodged. That and what in the blazing fuck did outlawing mandatory collection of union dues have to do with the budget? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/72 "2011-03-10T20:34:10Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I do not recall you taking this stance after the Dems won in 2008 and were pushing health care reform (among other things). I don’t recall ever posting that the Democrats had no right to try to implement health care reform in 2008. I do remember posting (in 2006) congratulating them for their win, and also in 2008 congratulating Obama on his. Of course, if you have anything in mind, by all means let’s see it. And I will remind you that saying the other side has bad ideas is very far from suggesting that elections do not have consequences. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/73 "2011-03-10T20:49:23Z")
> [@Sinaptics](#): > > This, IMO, is the million dollar question being dodged. That and what in the blazing fuck did outlawing mandatory collection of union dues have to do with the budget? Did they do that? Is Wisconsin a right-to-work state now? In Virginia, they outlawed collective bargaining at the same time they became right-to-work. Did that happen here? If not, what’s the significance of one without the other? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/74 "2011-03-10T21:07:54Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I don’t recall ever posting that the Democrats had no right to try to implement health care reform in 2008. I do remember posting (in 2006) congratulating them for their win, and also in 2008 congratulating Obama on his. > > Of course, if you have anything in mind, by all means let’s see it. And I will remind you that saying the other side has bad ideas is very far from suggesting that elections do not have consequences. > > Regards, > Shodan Took me about 5 seconds to find this. > [@Theocracy NOW!](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/theocracy-now/468367/50): > > I think it is mostly because I get this all the time, and I don’'t really give a shit. > > I have basically given up on the election. Obama is going to win. The Blessed One is going to turn the White House beige. He will inherit a whole shit load of problems, and no doubt create a whole shit load more on his own. > > So one derives what pleasure one can from the debacle. I am going to make fun of those things I find amusing, and the worshipful reverence the Obamaniacs expect of their Chosen One is a big, bad, juicy target, and I intend to kick it until it stops amusing me or my toes get tired. > > All this huffy “how dare you!” is richly entertaining, in a _fin du siecle_ kind of way. > > Expect it to continue, and get worse, for the next four years or so. Or, perhaps he will screw up badly enough that it will be less than that. In which case President Biden’s pasty white ass is the next target in the sights. > > Regards, > Shodan Looks like sour grapes to me. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/75 "2011-03-10T21:32:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I didn’t want you to think I’m ignoring this, but it requires some thought before I can answer… No worries :). If you do reply, keep in mind that I’m not saying any of these unintended consequences are fatal to the idea, simply that we ought to consider them, see if they’re legitimate problems, see if there are workarounds, etc. While I think professional development e.g., getting National Board Certification, is a great was to improve the profession (and anyone who thinks NB certification is a fad is smoking way too much meth), I don’t think it’s the end of the conversation. I’m all about holding teachers accountable. Doctors at hospitals have Morbidity & Mortality reports that are used to hold physicians accountable; I think that education might learn something from those structures. ---
**Author:** ![squabi01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@squabi01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squabi01)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/76 "2011-03-10T21:55:54Z")
Trillions of dollars in federal debt, and every state is having a budget crisis. This equals to schools being shut down, thousands losing their jobs and it doesn’t matter if you are liberal, union, republican, Christian or whatever. Get used to it; the economy will take years to recover. The main question for this forum topic asked, ‘is this legal?’, and the answer is yes; it’s over. The same people, who complain here, are still crying that Al Gore lost! Let’s question how much money was lost fighting this battle. In the big picture here Sheeple, we all need to tighten our belts and accept paying more to keep our jobs. The end result is the same. Here in Central Texas, the Austin school district is simply closing schools and firing 1,100+ people. It’s a wave of change across America, either ride it out or sink. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaptics](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/278dde/32.png) [@Sinaptics](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaptics)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/77 "2011-03-10T22:00:59Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Did they do that? Is Wisconsin a right-to-work state now? > > In Virginia, they outlawed collective bargaining at the same time they became right-to-work. Did that happen here? If not, what’s the significance of one without the other? I’m not sure if it was in the final bill passed, but it was in the original. I had to look up more info on right to work states. I was under the impression that if you’re in the union, you pay dues. And this was a first of it’s kind attempt to break unions by cutting off their cash flow. Apparently, that’s not the case and other states have similar provisions. After reading a bit about right to work, I understand (and agree with) not being forced to join a union. However, I can’t see the rational for outlawing mandatory collection of dues for those in the union. ---
**Author:** ![Page\_Fault](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ad7895/32.png) [@Page\_Fault](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Page_Fault)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/78 "2011-03-10T22:01:36Z")
> [@squabi01](#): > > Trillions of dollars in federal debt, and every state is having a budget crisis. This equals to schools being shut down, thousands losing their jobs and it doesn’t matter if you are liberal, union, republican, Christian or whatever. Get used to it; the economy will take years to recover. The main question for this forum topic asked, ‘is this legal?’, and the answer is yes; it’s over. The same people, who complain here, are still crying that Al Gore lost! Let’s question how much money was lost fighting this battle. In the big picture here Sheeple, we all need to tighten our belts and accept paying more to keep our jobs. The end result is the same. Here in Central Texas, the Austin school district is simply closing schools and firing 1,100+ people. It’s a wave of change across America, either ride it out or sink. Unless, of course, you’re rich. Then you get tax breaks, because making people who have stuff sacrifice is unamerican. The poor need to tighten their belts! ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/79 "2011-03-10T22:04:04Z")
> [@squabi01](#): > > Trillions of dollars in federal debt, and every state is having a budget crisis. Under those conditions, wouldn’t you agree it is the last time you want to pass tax cuts for the wealthy, which just makes the budget crisis worse? Yet that is exactly what Gov. Walker did as soon as he took office. ---
**Author:** ![squabi01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@squabi01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squabi01)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119/80 "2011-03-10T22:17:30Z")
> [@Page\_Fault](#): > > Unless, of course, you’re rich. Then you get tax breaks, because making people who have stuff sacrifice is unamerican. The poor need to tighten their belts! Everyone has to tighten their belts. Saying the poor are worse off is an old comment that is silly. If one doesn’t like the tax laws, vote for someone who will change them! I believe it’s unAmerican to force anyone to do anything they don’t want to without harming others, we agree there. The problem is, it’s NOT American to sit there with our hands out for every government program, and expect the Feds to give us everything. The founding fathers, are turning in their graves! :smack: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wis-gop-strips-public-workers-bargaining-rights-not-want-to-did-it/574119.md?page=5)