Governor Culver balks at signing the Labor Bill because,

[Hardrada]

according to his press releases, there is no common ground or consensus to bemade among all the "stakeholders" involved. According to me, there could not possibly be a common ground so what is he waiting for? For the antitax and management people to change their minds? They never will. And neither will the labor forces involved who were the people who elected him. Governor Culver must realize that no one likes a slave revolt excpet the slaves!!

[Debi]

1. So from now on he'll only sign bills that both Democrats and Republicans

agree on? :banghead:

Great - just freaking GREAT! x(

[Hardrada]

2. Or management and labor. I guess we're screwn here too!

But let's keep the pressure on. Perhaps he'll realize we are the horse he rode in on.

[Debi]

3. Didn't work with Vilsack

Do you know how much it hurts to think of the two as one?

[Bluzmann57]

4. The Gov was in town earlier

He was surveying flood damage in downtown Davenport and when he came up to shake my hand, I asked him why he wouldn't pass the Labor Bill. He said, and I quote, " ". He kept on walking. A couple of waitresses at the Brew Pub we were standing in front of laughed and some photographer looked at me and said, "Had to get that in huh?" I said, "Yeah". And then he talked to the press about flooding. I guess he moved on down to the ball park after that. I went home and did laundry. Try and contain your boredom.

[IA_Seth]

5. Hey man, at least you were able to remind him..

I guarantee if he vetos the legislation he will being hearing a hell of a lot more where that came from!

[rurallib]

7. Thanks for reminding him that there are democrats in Iowa

:patriot:

[Debi]

9. That got him elected

and supported him in a three-way primary before that

x(

[Hardrada]

10. We went all out for him and to be thus rewarded

because of his interest in placating people who do not have his or our best interests at heart to way understate the matter. Iowa, wake up!!

[Debi]

16. Like I posted above - reminds me of Vilsack in his first term

It's one thing to be fair and listen to both sides of an argument - it's another to side with the very folks who not only voted against you but funded the jackass who ran against you. Think they've changed their tune and aren't going to try to replace you in 2010?

[Bluzmann57]

8. And I was on the tv.

I was watching KWQC news at 6 and there I was, in front of the brew pub taking a pic. I'm the fat guy with a Cub hat. Not sure if it is online or not. And it was around five seconds. My five seconds of fame. Lol.

[Hardrada]

6. You reminded him he does NOT have some Olympian

position above the fray. Good for you! Shame on him for not addressing the issue or can't he multitask?

[4dsc]

11. One trem governor..

Culver's action on this bill will play big come the next election.. I have heard too many democrat's complain about Culver already and this will be one more nail in his political coffin if he doesn't sign the bill..

I give him and the democratic party a failing grade for the last legislative session..

[Hardrada]

12. Or his inaction also. If he doesn't veto it but does NOT sign

it it will die in 30 days from the time he was given the bill. He thinks we perhaps won't be able to figure out what happened to the bill if it just lapses. The consensus he will find if he doesn't sign it is the consensus of the historical dust heap where he can have lengthy talks with Governor J.R. Lightfoot!!

[BalancedGoat]

13. Could someone tell me what this bill would entail?

I did a search on it and couldn't really get a good feel of the bill. Something to do with collective bargaining rights of public workers?

[rurallib]

14. Been awhile since it passed but I can at least start

the bill greatly widened the issues that could be negotiated by public workers beyond the current very narrow scope which essentially includes wages and some benefits and not much more.
New scope would include such things as class sizes and working conditions and some others which don't come to mind.
Republicans say it will greatly increase taxes or lead to closing schools and loss of services. Dems say that negotiations will not increase the size of the pie (tax revenue) but how it is divided. Obviously there is nothing in there to allow taxes to be raised and most taxing bodies are already at the limit. The usual Repug bogeymen.

[Debi]

15. Here's a couple of articles on it

http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2008/03/25/news/iowa/41b5f2b4433ad9aa862574170002e557.txt

<snip>

What's included?
Current law says the following 16 items can be part of contract negotiations for unionized public employees. Other items can be discussed as long as both sides agree to expand the scope ofnegotiations.

-- Wages
-- Hours
-- Vacations
-- Insurance
-- Holidays
-- Leaves of absence
-- Shift differentials
-- Overtime compensation
-- Supplemental pay
-- Seniority
-- Transfer procedures
-- Job classifications
-- Health and safety matters
-- Evaluation procedures
-- Procedures for staff reduction
-- In-service training.

The proposal passed by the Senate on Monday would expand the list to include anything that either side wishes to make part of negotiations, a provision known as "open scope" bargaining. The bill lists examples of issues that may be raised, though the list can include anything related to working conditions, such as: preparation time, class size, discipline and discharge, work equipment and uniforms, staffing levels and retirement systems.
Sources: Iowa Code, House File 2645

<snip>

and some of the fallout of the bill's passage:

http://www.qctimes.com/articles/2008/04/04/news/iowa/doc47f6e79701824380804104.txt