Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I believe what he is saying is that the teachers are paid with taxpayer money AND before they get paid, their union dues are taken out of their checks involuntarily because they are forced currently to be in the union.

But that's not true. The employee's pay is determined - and the union dues are taken out of the employees gross pay (just like taxes) before the paycheck is handed to them. No work, no pay, no union dues.

Nobody is making the claim that an employees federal and state tax withholdings are "my taxpayer's money". They can't. That's absurd.

Employees are not forced into anything. They are free to take a teaching job where they don't have to be in a union. That's known up front, before the employee signs their hiring contract.

Look: Wiphan appears not to like (and he can correct me if it's wrong) that unions donate to Democratic candidates. But the argument "that is my taxpayer's money!" is completely and obviously false. It's the employee's money.

The Koch brothers don't like that either - hence the concerted, across the country word was handed out at the Republican Governors Association meeting to bust the unions. And meanwhile, back in Congress, we have Republican congressmen trying to loosen rules governing workplace safety, trying to lowering the minimum wage, etc. Look like unions shouldn't go anywhere soon. Unions don't get a hold in places where workers feel fairly treated by their employers.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

But that's not true. The employee's pay is determined - and the union dues are taken out of the employees gross pay (just like taxes) before the paycheck is handed to them. No work, no pay, no union dues.

Nobody is making the claim that an employees federal and state tax withholdings are "my taxpayer's money". They can't. That's absurd.

Employees are not forced into anything. They are free to take a teaching job where they don't have to be in a union. That's known up front, before the employee signs their hiring contract.

Look: Wiphan appears not to like (and he can correct me if it's wrong) that unions donate to Democratic candidates. But the argument "that is my taxpayer's money!" is completely and obviously false. It's the employee's money.

The Koch brothers don't like that either - hence the concerted, across the country word was handed out at the Republican Governors Association meeting to bust the unions. And meanwhile, back in Congress, we have Republican congressmen trying to loosen rules governing workplace safety, trying to lowering the minimum wage, etc. Look like unions shouldn't go anywhere soon. Unions don't get a hold in places where workers feel fairly treated by their employers.

Union dues are not taxes. They are taken out of their paychecks, they are involuntary. Saying that they can teach somewhere else is laughable. Techers teach where they can get a job. And since the vast majority of jobs are public school aka union jobs that is where they work. Unions dont want teachers or any other members the right to opt out or not be in the union.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Union dues are not taxes. They are taken out of their paychecks, they are involuntary. Saying that they can teach somewhere else is laughable. Techers teach where they can get a job. And since the vast majority of jobs are public school aka union jobs that is where they work. Unions dont want teachers or any other members the right to opt out or not be in the union.

Teacher works.
Teacher earns money.
Teacher gets paycheck.
That money belongs to the teacher.

Union dues come out of that paycheck.

Taxpayers thinking they have a right to say what union dues money is spent upon is ... beyond absurd. They have zero claim to that. Just like they have zero claim on the employee choosing to send $1 of their tax money to a wildlife fund.

Teachers are free agents. They have every right not to take a job where they have to join a teachers union. Private schools pay about 5% more in pay and benefits than Wisconsin public schools.

Trying to make the argument that union-busting is for the benefit of the employees is touching, but completely unbelievable

Although it is nice to see, now that the union has agreed to all Walkers demands regarding pension contribution, pay cut, etc., yet Walker is going forward with his main concern, being busting the unions (as verified by his unbelievable silliness in sharing his plan for threatening workers with the imaginary "David Koch") - that it's crystal clear the whole point of this has less to do with budget deficits (like maybe caused by Walker giving $140 million in unfunded tax credits to business, oh wow, that's a huge deficit hole that could be filled by ... teacher pensions and pay cuts! But the damn unions are standing in the way ... hummmmm) and everything to do with typical Republican demagogary.

[Riot]

This gets better and better every hour. God, I love politics

I thought the highlight was Walkers tape today, revealing how he planned to trick Democrats under the false ruse of them coming back and "talking to them", so the Republicans could vote for the legislation withhout the Dems.

Or how he's trying to find out if he can charge the Dems with a felony regarding who could be paying for their hotel rooms (as he withholds their paychecks to be picked up personally in Wisconsin to try and get them back to the state) but wait, there's more fun here!

Gov. Walker tried to ram this bill through quickly, with little exam of the 144-page bill, little debate and scrutiny. Now we have a third reason why:

1. Hidden union-busting provisions
2. Hidden proviso allowing state government to sell off their state-owned electrical utilities to any chosen private company with no competitive bidding (like Koch brothers electric)

And number three hidden in the bill (reported today courtesy Amanda Turkel):

3. "The bill would grant the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (DHS) sweeping authority to making changes to the state's Medicaid program -- which covers one in five residents -- with virtually no public scrutiny. According to an analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau, Walker's plan would use "emergency" powers to allow DHS to restrict eligibility, raise premiums and change reimbursements -- all moves traditionally controlled by the legislature."

Walker is all about the power of doing it all himself, isn't he? He doesn't need any steenkin' legislature to enact laws!

Thank you, Wisconsin voters - Sarah Palin may be gone, but now we have this guy for our entertainment pleasure :-)

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Teacher works.
Teacher earns money.
Teacher gets paycheck.
That money belongs to the teacher.

Union dues come out of that paycheck.

Taxpayers thinking they have a right to say what union dues money is spent upon is ... beyond absurd. They have zero claim to that. Just like they have zero claim on the employee choosing to send $1 of their tax money to a wildlife fund.

Teachers are free agents. They have every right not to take a job where they have to join a teachers union. Private schools pay about 5% more in pay and benefits than Wisconsin public schools.

Trying to make the argument that union-busting is for the benefit of the employees is touching, but completely unbelievable

Although it is nice to see, now that the union has agreed to all Walkers demands regarding pension contribution, pay cut, etc., yet Walker is going forward with his main concern, being busting the unions (as verified by his unbelievable silliness in sharing his plan for threatening workers with the imaginary "David Koch") - that it's crystal clear the whole point of this has less to do with budget deficits (like maybe caused by Walker giving $140 million in unfunded tax credits to business, oh wow, that's a huge deficit hole that could be filled by ... teacher pensions and pay cuts! But the damn unions are standing in the way ... hummmmm) and everything to do with typical Republican demagogary.

Can you outline to me the demands that the teachers union has agreed to and please give me specifics?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

Can you outline to me the demands that the teachers union has agreed to and please give me specifics?

Just read any detailed news reports, or view any video of the union leaders, from the past week not labeled "Fox". I'm sure you'd rather do your own investigative digging on this story, so you have the true facts, and not rely upon my interpretation relaying it to you :-)

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Just read any detailed news reports, or view any video of the union leaders, from the past week not labeled "Fox". I'm sure you'd rather do your own investigative digging on this story, so you have the true facts, and not rely upon my interpretation relaying it to you :-)

No I want to know from you specifically what demands of Scott Walker have the teachers union specifically agreed to? You seem to know so much about the topic and have so much information I want to know from you since you stated that the teachers union have agreed to his demands other than collective bargaining. What have they agreed to?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

No I want to know from you specifically what demands of Scott Walker have the teachers union specifically agreed to? You seem to know so much about the topic and have so much information I want to know from you since you stated that the teachers union have agreed to his demands other than collective bargaining. What have they agreed to?

Oh, then go read your own post back at the start of this thread, where you outlined them

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Union dues are not taxes. They are taken out of their paychecks, they are involuntary. Saying that they can teach somewhere else is laughable. Techers teach where they can get a job. And since the vast majority of jobs are public school aka union jobs that is where they work. Unions dont want teachers or any other members the right to opt out or not be in the union.

Taxes are also involuntary...

[SOREHOOF]

Originally Posted by Riot

Teacher works.
Teacher earns money.
Teacher gets paycheck.
That money belongs to the teacher.

Union dues come out of that paycheck.

Taxpayers thinking they have a right to say what union dues money is spent upon is ... beyond absurd. They have zero claim to that. Just like they have zero claim on the employee choosing to send $1 of their tax money to a wildlife fund.

Teachers are free agents. They have every right not to take a job where they have to join a teachers union. Private schools pay about 5% more in pay and benefits than Wisconsin public schools.

Trying to make the argument that union-busting is for the benefit of the employees is touching, but completely unbelievable

Although it is nice to see, now that the union has agreed to all Walkers demands regarding pension contribution, pay cut, etc., yet Walker is going forward with his main concern, being busting the unions (as verified by his unbelievable silliness in sharing his plan for threatening workers with the imaginary "David Koch") - that it's crystal clear the whole point of this has less to do with budget deficits (like maybe caused by Walker giving $140 million in unfunded tax credits to business, oh wow, that's a huge deficit hole that could be filled by ... teacher pensions and pay cuts! But the damn unions are standing in the way ... hummmmm) and everything to do with typical Republican demagogary.

Is it absurd to think that the taxpayers should have some say in how much the teachers are paid in the first place? You mention the public teachers make 5% less than what private schools teachers make. Does that include benefits? That is what this is about. Are the public teachers not free to get a job at a private school?

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Oh, then go read your own post back at the start of this thread, where you outlined them

Since you don't want to answer my first question I will try another one. What would be the reaction of the federal employees if President Obama proposed the same changes to federal employees that Scott Walker is proposing to WI state employees? Would there be as much outrage?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF

Is it absurd to think that the taxpayers should have some say in how much the teachers are paid in the first place?

You do. You always have. It's called collective bargaining.

You mention the public teachers make 5% less than what private schools teachers make. Does that include benefits?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...and_local.html

Consider this analysis the Economic Policy Institute conducted comparing total compensation -- that is to say, wages and health-care benefits and pensions -- among public and private workers in Wisconsin. To get an apples-to-apples comparison, the study's author controlled for experience, organizational size, gender, race, ethnicity, citizenship and disability, and then sorted the results by education. Here's what he got:



If you prefer it in non-graph form: "Wisconsin public-sector workers face an annual compensation penalty of 11%. Adjusting for the slightly fewer hours worked per week on average, these public workers still face a compensation penalty of 5% for choosing to work in the public sector."

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

Since you don't want to answer my first question I will try another one. What would be the reaction of the federal employees if President Obama proposed the same changes to federal employees that Scott Walker is proposing to WI state employees? Would there be as much outrage?

I'm happy to answer your first question, except your deliberate and silly obtuseness is a waste of time - go read your own post where you accurately outlined what was in the Walker package regarding benefit and pension cuts. You know what they are. The unions have repeatedly, publicly agreed to those. They have agreed to everything but removal of collective bargaining rights. Walker refuses to compromise with them. He has stated so publicly when directly confronted by reporters asking about the union compromises.

Does it bother you, the other significant and important things hidden within that 144-page bill? That Walker is legally taking supervision and responsibility away from the legislature and consolidating them, without supervision, within the governors' office?

Such as the "emergency measures" regarding a new unilateral right of only himself to determine public aid qualifications, amounts paid outside the public or legislature?

The new singular ability of only himself to lease or sell, for whatever amount he wants, your state utility companies?

Do you think that is a good thing, that Walker is taking those activities away from current control by the legislature? That a Governor is trying to pass law to decrease the normal Legislative branch representation and control over major, expensive, important programs and income for your state, and place all of it, unsupervised and unaccountable, in the hands of one person who has to answer to no one else?

I'm shocked that everyone in Wisconsin, from any and all political persuasions, isn't angrily marching on the state capital and telling Walker he wasn't elected dictator, over the other secret hidden stuff, above, in that falsely alleged "fiscal" bill.

I'm sure if federal employees faced the sudden and complete loss of their right to collectively bargain, they'd behave exactly as union members in Wisconsin, Ohio and Indiana are acting right now.

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

I'm happy to answer your first question, except your deliberate and silly obtuseness is a waste of time - go read your own post where you accurately outlined what was in the Walker package regarding benefit and pension cuts. You know what they are. The unions have repeatedly, publicly agreed to those. They have agreed to everything but removal of collective bargaining rights. Walker refuses to compromise with them. He has stated so publicly.

I'm sure if federal employees faced the sudden and complete loss of their right to collectively bargain, they'd act exactly as union members in Wisconsin, Ohio and Indiana are acting right now.

Since federal employees don't have the right to collective bargain for wages, benefits, etc. they would be elated if they had the benefits Scott walker is proposing for state workers. If collective bargaining doesn't exist on the federal level why does it need to exist on the state level? Actually in Walker's proposal the union still has the right to collective bargain for wages. I don't see federal workers complaining about their jobs, benefits, heallthcare premiums, working conditions, etc.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

Since federal employees don't have the right to collective bargain for wages, benefits, etc. they would be elated if they had the benefits Scott walker is proposing for state workers.

The TSA doesn't have collective bargaining? I believe they do (but may be wrong). The rest of the federal government is indeed highly unionized in some sectors, although the Federal Government is "right to work"

If collective bargaining doesn't exist on the federal level why does it need to exist on the state level?

Why shouldn't it exist on a state level? It's the states that entered into these agreements, too. The states gain by collective bargaining, that's shown by how their workers tend to get less than the private sector in nearly every case.

State workers have every right to collectively bargain. What are the reasons NOT to allow it? Especially when the current Republican House is trying to decrease minimum wage, decrease workplace protections (EPA and OSHA) Looks like unions may become more necessary if the GOP has their way with the current law.

Actually in Walker's proposal the union still has the right to collective bargain for wages.

No. They only have the ability to collectively bargain for wages only up to the CPI, which makes the value of that pennies.

Why are you ignoring the rest of what is in the Walker bill? That's some damn important stuff he's trying to sneak on through.

[Danzig]

tsa has limited bargaining rights. treasury has a union-not sure who else is covered.

[Riot]

Wisconsin State Senator Tim Carpenter sends a letter to Walker, calls for his resignation:

http://wispolitics.com/1006/large/11...ter_letter.pdf

Dear Governor Walker,

I am informed that a tape recording has been released in which you apparently held an extensive discussion with someone you believed to be your campaign supporter, David Koch. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel states that the caller was actually a reporter, pretending to be David Koch, and it has posted a transcript of the recording. It appears that you admit the call occurred, and have not contested the authenticity of transcript.

David Koch is the billionaire businessman who reportedly contributed thousands to your campaign and who the media claims is a key source of funding for shadowy political groups that spend hundreds of thousands of dollars attacking your political adversaries in our state.

At a historic moment in our State’s history, brought on by your refusal to compromise with elected officials regarding the elimination of worker’s rights, you still refuse to talk with Democratic legislators. However, you apparently have no problem taking a phone call from “Mr. Koch” and to:

• Discuss your strategy to lay off public workers to seek partisan advantage to pass
your agenda;
• Discuss your plan to lure Democratic legislators to the Capitol on the pretext of
negotiation, but then state that you would never actually negotiate;
• Discuss your plan to use the pretext of negotiation to get a quorum for legislative
fiscal action that Republicans so far have not been able to do;
• Discuss that you considered the “planting” of paid troublemakers into the
peaceful protests at our Capitol; and to
• Give your enthusiastic acceptance to an offer from “Koch” to fly you out on a vacation to show you a “good time” once you “crush these bastards.” Your response was “That would be outstanding…” Given that Koch’s businesses could reap vast rewards with the ‘no bid’ sale of the Wisconsin’s power plants that you propose in your budget repair bill, this response is severely troubling.

Governor Walker, this tape would make Richard Nixon blush. If the recording and the items discussed by you are indeed your plans, you have no business being in public office in our State, and should resign.

Sincerely,

Tim Carpenter

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/loc...cc4c002e0.html

Madison's mayor and police chief Thursday called on Gov. Scott Walker to explain statements he made in a secretly recorded phone conversation that he "thought about" planting troublemakers among the thousands of demonstrators at the Capitol.

"Someone in his inner circle raised seriously the possibility of hiring people to come in and apparently create violence in my city," Mayor Dave Cieslewicz said. "I find it appalling, and I want to know who that was."

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Danzig

tsa has limited bargaining rights. treasury has a union-not sure who else is covered.

TSA does not have collective bargaining rights

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

The TSA doesn't have collective bargaining? I believe they do (but may be wrong). The rest of the federal government is indeed highly unionized in some sectors, although the Federal Government is "right to work"



Why shouldn't it exist on a state level? It's the states that entered into these agreements, too. The states gain by collective bargaining, that's shown by how their workers tend to get less than the private sector in nearly every case.

State workers have every right to collectively bargain. What are the reasons NOT to allow it? Especially when the current Republican House is trying to decrease minimum wage, decrease workplace protections (EPA and OSHA) Looks like unions may become more necessary if the GOP has their way with the current law.




No. They only have the ability to collectively bargain for wages only up to the CPI, which makes the value of that pennies.

Why are you ignoring the rest of what is in the Walker bill? That's some damn important stuff he's trying to sneak on through.

What is your solution to the budget deficit in WI? Do u borrow more $ or raise taxes like IL just did. Do u end up like CA begging for donations to keep schools running? Please offer me your solutions and by saying that you just agree to the contributions to pension and healthcare is not a viable solution. What do u propose?

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Why shouldn't it exist on a state level? It's the states that entered into these agreements, too. The states gain by collective bargaining, that's shown by how their workers tend to get less than the private sector in nearly every case.

State workers have every right to collectively bargain. What are the reasons NOT to allow it? Especially when the current Republican House is trying to decrease minimum wage, decrease workplace protections (EPA and OSHA) Looks like unions may become more necessary if the GOP has their way with the current law..[/b]

If you do not limit collective bargaining with the teachers union then there is no negiotiating with them. If the teachers union had in the last 30 yrs actually given on some items we would not be in this situation. They have a monopoly. Do you know who the healthcare provider is for the teachers in WI? It is WEAT trust ie.- the teachers union plan. If you government were allowed to shop this plan with the same benefits they could save millions of dollars to the tax payers. The teachers union would not allow it. The average time to negotiate a contract with the teachers union is 15 months. Since Gov Doyle and the democrats put us in this situation and used Pres Obama's stimulus $ to fill the holes of the budget instead of create stimulus/jobs we do not have 15 months unless you would like to see mass layoffs. It is your choice either pass the bill or people lose jobs.

The people of WI voted last November. Our state is a tax hell. Most teachers when they retire (which they get the average of their last 3 yrs pay for lifetime and if they die their surving spoust gets it) move out of state because of the tax issues. WI people are tired of paying taxes, seeing corporations move large portions of their operations (Harley, Miller/Coors, etc.). Increases taxes does not create revenue and is not a viable long term solution since it is a never ending cycle since no revenue is created. Gov Walker is not a dictator. He is doing what he was elected to do by the people of WI. He won easily and ran on the very campaign items that he is doing today. Unlike most politicians he puts his $ where his mouth is. Elections have consequences as we all know.

Just to give you an example of the taxes a typical home married tax payer who owns a $200k house in Milwaukee and makes $75k annually pays in WI taxes not including federal taxes

Sales tax 5.1%
$5200 annual property taxes
$6318 state income tax

WI is a great state, but a tax hell and things need to change otherwise we will end up like MI