Wisconsin Senate GOP Tries Nuclear Option for Passing Anti-Union Bill [UPDATE: It Worked]

[nadinbrzezinski]

Up to now, the Budget Repair Bill in Wisconsin has been frozen because all fourteen Senate Democrats will not return to the state to negotiate it. There's no quorum -- the bill, which consists of many fiscal components, can't pass.

Republicans in the Senate are trying an end run around that now. They have called a conference committee meeting -- which is open to the media -- where the key fiscal component of the bill, a refinancing provision, will be stripped out. The collective bargaining component, the pay cuts, pension reform -- all still there. That would allow the stripped-down bill to pass the Senate with no Democrats present.

This is incoherent in a number of ways. First, Gov. Scott Walker's argument for not putting the collective bargaining and union dues/formation reforms on the negotiating table has been, since the beginning, that they were necessary for letting local governments balance their budgets. These only fail to be "fiscal components" if the definition of "fiscal" is limited to numbers that will appear in the legislation. Second, Republicans punted on a voting reform bill two weeks ago because they did not want to split the fiscal portions of the bill -- funding for IDs, for those who couldn't afford them -- from the rest of it.

This is a desperation move. It's happening, say Democrats, before they read the new bill. Obviously, had Democrats not fled the state, the un-changed legislation would have passed last month. But this happens a day after e-mails from the governor's office floated the possibility -- which Democrats didn't quite buy -- of negotiation on the collective bargaining parts of the bill.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/weigel/default.aspx

[Pryderi]

1. What? How?

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. They separated them

and now the REAL fight begins

[Countdown_3_2_1]

3. Its a trap to get the Democratic Senators to come back (nt)

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. It is passed, illegally mind you

GENERAL STRIKE is next

[FBaggins]

5. Not illegally.

Unethically perhaps, but this has been an option for them since day 1.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. I will take the word of a WI rep sorry

they violated the open meeting law.

[FBaggins]

8. He's not giving you his "word"

He's grasping at straws. We'll probably hear half a dozen theories on how this might still be stopped.

And I'm fine with that. Anything that draws attention to how outrageous their actions are.

But I said three weeks ago that this would eventually happen if we didn't break. They've had the option all along, they just didn't want to pay the political price for it.

Now they'll have to. :)

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. Hot summer, that is what's coming

and a strike, I suspect.

[FBaggins]

10. The first definitely.... the second I doubt.

I think that the voters are with us now. Anything more than a symbolic strike (announced well in advance and timed to provide little actual disruption) could endanger that.

I think they just gave us a big gift... I wouldn't take any chances with it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. Yeah whatever, the strike is now on

[Better Believe It]

13. What strike? Has the AFL-CIO and IBT called a state-wide or national political strike?

[Hannah Bell]

14. according to barca, it was an illegal meeting; no advance notice, rules violation.

i'll take his word. he was there.

[FBaggins]

16. What did you expect him to say?

"Darn"?

There are exceptions to the open meeting requirements. I don't know what they chose to use, but I read that they voted on fining the democrats $100/day for the time they were out. I think that they did this days ago, so my suspicion is that adding it to this evening's agenda was to set up one of the exemptions to the open meeting rules (meetings where you're considering punishing a senator would be exempt).

Regardless, just as with "nuclear" options in the US Congress, the arbiter of such rules isn't a court, it's the legislature itself. Even when the rule is in the form of a law.

IOW, even if he's right he's probably wrong.

[Hannah Bell]

17. more like what did i expect *you* to say. i figure a WI democratic rep's take is better

than a DU poster that's on the "right" side of every issue.

sorry.

[FBaggins]

19. Lol... you take correction hard HB.

Weren't you also the one who didn't believe me three weeks ago when I said that this could happen?

BS about being "right" then too IIRC.

[Hannah Bell]

20. no, baggins, you're not correcting me, & i'm not the one you talked to three weeks ago & you're

wrong on the legality.

but just keep showing your colors.

[FBaggins]

21. I may have confused you with someone else.

If so I apologize.

But no, I'm not wrong on the legality - and it has nothing to do with "colors", though it isn't lost on me that that's your knee-jerk reaction any time someone disagrees with you. You really can't tell the difference between agreeing with an action and determining whether or not it's legal?

The state open meetings law does not apply to the legislature where it conflicts with a rule of that body... and guess how many people it takes to make a rule?

There are load of ways around it. You think they just coincidentally forgot to use one of them?

[FBaggins]

22. More -To late to edit -

The (supposedly non-partisan) Senate Chief Clerk reportedly said "the notice appears to have satisfied the requirements of the rules and statutes"

The republicans are also now citing Senate rule 93 (which the democratic member would have little reason to know about since he's in the House) which says that the meeting merely needs to be posted on a particular bulleting board. As I stated before, even a simple rule like that would trump the open meetings law (which specifically says as much).

Once again. I'm not saying that I agree with their tactics (or certainly their legislation), but they've had the power to do this all along. I don't place much stock in a claim that "whoops" they missed a step that wouldn't have kept them from passing anything.

Seems like grasping at straws (and understandable action at this point). It's time to move on to protesting the assembly while they try to end this period of the game... and then move on to the battle where we DO hold the cards.

[Sonicwall]

7. They pulled a fast one - a lawsuit needs to be filed ASAP

a clear and blatant violation of Wisconsin's open meeting law - 24 hours NOTIFICATION is required. 5 minutes to confer a illegal meeting and pass it on party lines, and bust the union anyway. Not going to work. The judge should order Walker, Fitzgerald(both of them) under arrest for violation of state law and thrown into jail and let them stink in there for life.

[jp11]

12. Walker also violated a court order to keep the Capital building open to the public.

http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-madison/blocking-access-to-capitol-building-defies-court-order-and-violates-constitution

[ellie]

15. I don't understand why

they did this. Do the repukes not think they will be punished by the voters for this? Do they think people will forget? It is just so bizarre like they don't think they will ever be out of power. Like a naked power grab. It's really disgusting.

[FBaggins]

18. I think that they expect to be punished either way at this point...

...so they might was well win while they can.

It isn't as if the public union employees would have said "forgive and forget" if they had backed off and admitted defeat.