Mass Protests Over WI Governor's Controversial Budget Repair Bill

The one thing in all this that really needs to be understood is that no matter what the unions will loose in this matter. The reason is that there is no money to continue with business as usual. Walker is doing the best thing he can in order to save jobs from being lost and to eliminate the need for furlos. Also, something else that is not being noted is that many of the people in the protests are being bussed in from out of state. What needs to be understood is that the people of the state voted him into office to do his job and fix the problems within the state. This is the first step in a long hard process. Wisconson, like many states is facing the reality of a major financial shortfall. One that can in fact bankrupt the state.

As for Obama and his remarks regarding the situation, he is the president of the united states but that does not give him the right to say what is and is not the way to handle this. He is also not a reliable source as his administration has created the largest debt this nation has ever seen and has not come up with a reasonable way to fix that himself as of yet. He should be focusing on his issues not the issues of other states at this time.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_wisconsin_...9uc2luZGVt

Standoff is getting more intense. I wish the Wisconsin Democratic lawmakers the best of luck. They didn't have to do this if it weren't for Governor Walker being a total as'shole. >_>

I wish I could be there, just for the sense of being apart of something. I really hope you guys pull through and get a good governor. Our's doesn't seem too bright yet.

Hey, Pat Quinn's awesome compared to Walker.

The one thing in all this that really needs to be understood is that no matter what the unions will loose in this matter. The reason is that there is no money to continue with business as usual. Walker is doing the best thing he can in order to save jobs from being lost and to eliminate the need for furlos. Also, something else that is not being noted is that many of the people in the protests are being bussed in from out of state. What needs to be understood is that the people of the state voted him into office to do his job and fix the problems within the state. This is the first step in a long hard process. Wisconson, like many states is facing the reality of a major financial shortfall. One that can in fact bankrupt the state.

As for Obama and his remarks regarding the situation, he is the president of the united states but that does not give him the right to say what is and is not the way to handle this. He is also not a reliable source as his administration has created the largest debt this nation has ever seen and has not come up with a reasonable way to fix that himself as of yet. He should be focusing on his issues not the issues of other states at this time.

Dude. What the pineapple. Simple logic to combat your statement:

Scott Walker has said if the bill is not passed, there could be as many as 5500 layoffs. My mother is a teacher, and can thus relate to all those affected by the bill, and already told me she would quit her job if a bill like this came to Illinois and fucked with her livelihood.

So simple math: 166,000 public employees affected by this bill quitting their jobs >>>>>>> 5500 layoffs.

To state this again: Wisconsin GETS statewide financial hardships. We understand that. Believe it or not, that's probably why a lot of Wisconsinites voted for Scott Walker: because when on the campaign he said the first thing he'd do when taking office would be creating jobs. The first thing he did when he got to office was refuse $810 million from the federal government for the sole purpose of creating a high speed rail system between Madison and Milwaukee, which would, ironically, create tons of jobs, not just on the creation of the system, but in increasing travel between the two cities, benefiting local businesses springing up in the urban centers. The best part is that the money was free, with the only clause to use it that it be used only for that project; if the state refused, it would go to another state to create high speed rail systems.

tl;dr: The first thing Scott Walker did upon taking office was refuse free money and job creation, and now, six weeks later, has gone about the "job creation" process by stripping the rights of those currently with jobs, which will result, again, if passed, in thousands of job losses with people quitting and leaving the state.

I'm don't know everything about politics and how to run a state effectively, but common sense and a normal degree of mental competency shows that Scott Walker is beyond incompetent - he's a flat out, illogical idiot running Wisconsin into the ground.

Simple logic. So simple math: 166,000 public employees affected by this bill quitting their jobs >>>>>>> 5500 layoffs.

Bolded because they are the key words here. Your statement is exactly that, simple. You are assuming that 166,000 people will just up and quit. I hate to break it to you but the odds are not in your favor on that. I bet you have not even taken the time to acually read what is in the bill itself. I have and it seems pretty reasonable to me. Just for you, I have copied the details for you and put them right here:

Fiscal Year 2010-11 Budget Adjustment Bill Items

Employee Compensation:

Pension contributions: Currently, state, school district and municipal employees that are members of the Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) generally pay little or nothing toward their pensions. The bill would require that employees of WRS employers, and the City and County of Milwaukee contribute 50 percent of the annual pension payment. The payment amount for WRS employees is estimated to be 5.8 percent of salary in 2011.

Health insurance contributions: Currently, state employees on average pay approximately 6 percent of annual health insurance premiums. This bill will require that state employees pay at least 12.6 percent of the average cost of annual premiums. In addition, the bill would require changes to the plan design necessary to reduce current premiums by 5 percent. Local employers participating in the Public Employers Group Health insurance would be prohibited from paying more than 88 percent of the lowest cost plan. The bill would also authorize the Department of Employee Trust Funds to use $28 million of excess balances in reserve accounts for health insurance and pharmacy benefits to reduce health insurance premium costs.

Health insurance cost containment strategies: The bill directs the Department of Employee Trust Funds and the Group Insurance Board to implement health risk assessments and similar programs aimed at participant wellness, collect certain data related to assessing health care provider quality and effectiveness, and verify the status of dependents participating in the state health insurance program. In addition, it modifies the membership of the Group Insurance Board to require that the representative of the Attorney General be an attorney to ensure the board has access to legal advice among its membership.

Pension changes for elected officials and appointees: The bill modifies the pension calculation for elected officials and appointees to be the same as general occupation employees and teachers. Current law requires these positions to pay more and receive a different multiplier for pension calculation than general classification employees. Under the state constitution, this change will be effective for elected officials at the beginning of their next term of office.

Modifications to Wisconsin Retirement System and state health insurance plans: The bill directs the Department of Administration, Office of State Employment Relations and Department of Employee Trust Funds to study and report on possible changes to the Wisconsin Retirement System, including defined contribution plans and longer vesting periods. The three agencies must also study and report on changes to the current state health insurance plans, including health insurance purchasing exchanges, larger purchasing pools, and high-deductible insurance options.

General fund impact – Authorize the Department of Administration Secretary to lapse or transfer from GPR and PR appropriations (excluding PR appropriations to the University of Wisconsin) to the general fund estimated savings of approximately $30 million from implementing these provisions for state employees in the current fiscal year (2010-11). Segregated funds would retain any savings from these measures.

State and Local Government and School District Labor Relations:

Collective bargaining – The bill would make various changes to limit collective bargaining for most public employees to wages. Total wage increases could not exceed a cap based on the consumer price index (CPI) unless approved by referendum. Contracts would be limited to one year and wages would be frozen until the new contract is settled. Collective bargaining units are required to take annual votes to maintain certification as a union. Employers would be prohibited from collecting union dues and members of collective bargaining units would not be required to pay dues. These changes take effect upon the expiration of existing contracts. Local law enforcement and fire employees, and state troopers and inspectors would be exempt from these changes.

Career executive transfers – The bill would allow state employees in the career executive positions to be reassigned between agencies upon agreement of agency heads.

Limited term employees (LTE) – The bill would prohibit LTE's from being eligible for health insurance or participation in the Wisconsin Retirement System.

State employee absences and other work actions – If the Governor has declared a state of emergency, the bill authorizes appointing authorities to terminate any employees that are absent for three days without approval of the employer or any employees that participate in an organized action to stop or slow work.

Quality Health Care Authority – The bill repeals the authority of home health care workers under the Medicaid program to collectively bargain.

Child care labor relations – The bill repeals the authority of family child care workers to collectively bargain with the State.

University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics (UWHC) Board and Authority – The bill repeals collective bargaining for UWHC employees. State positions currently employed by the UWHC Board are eliminated and the incumbents are transferred to the UWHC Authority.

University of Wisconsin faculty and academic staff - The bill repeals the authority of UW faculty and academic staff to collectively bargain.

Debt Restructuring – The bill authorizes the restructuring of principal payments in fiscal year 2010-11 on the state's general obligation bonds. These principal repayments will be paid in future years. Since the state is required to make debt service payments by March 15th, the bill must be enacted by February 25th to allow time to sell the refinancing bonds. This provision will reduce debt service costs by $165 million in fiscal year 2010-11. This savings will help address one‑time costs to comply with the Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund state Supreme Court decision and make payments under the Minnesota‑Wisconsin tax reciprocity program.

Medicaid

Address FY11 Medicaid deficit – Medicaid costs are expected to exceed current GPR appropriations by $153 million. The bill would increase the Medicaid GPR appropriation to address this shortfall.

Authorize DHS to restructure program notwithstanding current law – Medicaid costs have increased dramatically due to the recession and expanded program eligibility. In order to reduce the growth in costs, the bill authorizes the Department of Health Services to make program changes notwithstanding limits in state law related to specific program provisions. The department is expected to develop new approaches on program benefits, eligibility determination and provider cost-effectiveness. The proposed changes will require passive approval of the Joint Committee on Finance before implementation.

Technical correction – Act 28 included language that required unused GPR expenditure authority in the Medicaid GPR appropriation at the end of the biennium to be carried over to the subsequent biennium. The bill repeals this provision in order to ensure unspent funds in Medicaid lapse to the general fund balance.

Aging and DisabilityResourceCenters (ADRC) – The bill transfers an estimated $3 million in savings in this appropriation to Medicaid. ADRC's are the intake and assessment element of the state's Family Care program.

Corrections – The bill provides $22 million GPR to address shortfalls in the Department of Corrections adult institutions appropriation. These shortfalls are due to health care costs, overtime, and reductions in salary and fringe benefit budgets under Act 28.

Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) Funding for Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) – The bill allocates $37 million of excess TANF revenues to increase TANF funding for the EITC from $6.6 million to $43.6 million in fiscal year 2010-11. By increasing TANF funding, GPR funding for the EITC is reduced by a commensurate amount.

Income Augmentation Revenues – Allow the Department of Children and Families and Department of Health Services to utilize $6.5 million of already identified income augmentation revenues to meet fiscal year 2010-11 lapse requirements.

Act 28 Required Lapses by DOA Secretary – Under Act 28, the Department of Administration Secretary is required to lapse or transfer a total of $680 million in 2009-11 from appropriations made to executive branch agencies to the general fund. The bill would reduce this amount by $79 million to ensure the lapses can be met in the next five months as this was ineffectively addressed by the previous administration.

Lapse of Funding from Joint Committee on Finance (JCF) Appropriation – The JCF appropriation includes $4.5 million related to estimated fiscal year 2010-11 implementation costs of 2009 Wisconsin Act 100 (operating while intoxicated enforcement changes). This funding is not anticipated to be needed in fiscal year 2010-11 and the bill lapses these amounts to the general fund balance.

Sale of State Heating Plants – The bill authorizes the Department of Administration to sell state heating plants. The proceeds from any sale, net of remaining debt service, would be deposited in the budget stabilization fund.

Shift Key Cabinet Agency Positions to Unclassified Status – The bill creates unclassified positions for chief legal counsel, public information officer and legislative liaison activities in cabinet agencies. An equivalent number of classified positions are deleted to offset the new unclassified positions. These activities are critical to each cabinet agency's overall mission and should have direct accountability to the agency head.

Bolded because they are the key words here. Your statement is exactly that, simple. You are assuming that 166,000 people will just up and quit. I hate to break it to you but the odds are not in your favor on that. I bet you have not even taken the time to acually read what is in the bill itself. I have and it seems pretty reasonable to me. Just for you, I have copied the details for you and put them right here:

Fiscal Year 2010-11 Budget Adjustment Bill Items

Employee Compensation:

Pension contributions: Currently, state, school district and municipal employees that are members of the Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) generally pay little or nothing toward their pensions. The bill would require that employees of WRS employers, and the City and County of Milwaukee contribute 50 percent of the annual pension payment. The payment amount for WRS employees is estimated to be 5.8 percent of salary in 2011.

Health insurance contributions: Currently, state employees on average pay approximately 6 percent of annual health insurance premiums. This bill will require that state employees pay at least 12.6 percent of the average cost of annual premiums. In addition, the bill would require changes to the plan design necessary to reduce current premiums by 5 percent. Local employers participating in the Public Employers Group Health insurance would be prohibited from paying more than 88 percent of the lowest cost plan. The bill would also authorize the Department of Employee Trust Funds to use $28 million of excess balances in reserve accounts for health insurance and pharmacy benefits to reduce health insurance premium costs.

Health insurance cost containment strategies: The bill directs the Department of Employee Trust Funds and the Group Insurance Board to implement health risk assessments and similar programs aimed at participant wellness, collect certain data related to assessing health care provider quality and effectiveness, and verify the status of dependents participating in the state health insurance program. In addition, it modifies the membership of the Group Insurance Board to require that the representative of the Attorney General be an attorney to ensure the board has access to legal advice among its membership.

Pension changes for elected officials and appointees: The bill modifies the pension calculation for elected officials and appointees to be the same as general occupation employees and teachers. Current law requires these positions to pay more and receive a different multiplier for pension calculation than general classification employees. Under the state constitution, this change will be effective for elected officials at the beginning of their next term of office.

Modifications to Wisconsin Retirement System and state health insurance plans: The bill directs the Department of Administration, Office of State Employment Relations and Department of Employee Trust Funds to study and report on possible changes to the Wisconsin Retirement System, including defined contribution plans and longer vesting periods. The three agencies must also study and report on changes to the current state health insurance plans, including health insurance purchasing exchanges, larger purchasing pools, and high-deductible insurance options.

General fund impact – Authorize the Department of Administration Secretary to lapse or transfer from GPR and PR appropriations (excluding PR appropriations to the University of Wisconsin) to the general fund estimated savings of approximately $30 million from implementing these provisions for state employees in the current fiscal year (2010-11). Segregated funds would retain any savings from these measures.

State and Local Government and School District Labor Relations:

Collective bargaining – The bill would make various changes to limit collective bargaining for most public employees to wages. Total wage increases could not exceed a cap based on the consumer price index (CPI) unless approved by referendum. Contracts would be limited to one year and wages would be frozen until the new contract is settled. Collective bargaining units are required to take annual votes to maintain certification as a union. Employers would be prohibited from collecting union dues and members of collective bargaining units would not be required to pay dues. These changes take effect upon the expiration of existing contracts. Local law enforcement and fire employees, and state troopers and inspectors would be exempt from these changes.

Career executive transfers – The bill would allow state employees in the career executive positions to be reassigned between agencies upon agreement of agency heads.

Limited term employees (LTE) – The bill would prohibit LTE's from being eligible for health insurance or participation in the Wisconsin Retirement System.

State employee absences and other work actions – If the Governor has declared a state of emergency, the bill authorizes appointing authorities to terminate any employees that are absent for three days without approval of the employer or any employees that participate in an organized action to stop or slow work.

Quality Health Care Authority – The bill repeals the authority of home health care workers under the Medicaid program to collectively bargain.

Child care labor relations – The bill repeals the authority of family child care workers to collectively bargain with the State.

University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics (UWHC) Board and Authority – The bill repeals collective bargaining for UWHC employees. State positions currently employed by the UWHC Board are eliminated and the incumbents are transferred to the UWHC Authority.

University of Wisconsin faculty and academic staff - The bill repeals the authority of UW faculty and academic staff to collectively bargain.

Debt Restructuring – The bill authorizes the restructuring of principal payments in fiscal year 2010-11 on the state's general obligation bonds. These principal repayments will be paid in future years. Since the state is required to make debt service payments by March 15th, the bill must be enacted by February 25th to allow time to sell the refinancing bonds. This provision will reduce debt service costs by $165 million in fiscal year 2010-11. This savings will help address one‑time costs to comply with the Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund state Supreme Court decision and make payments under the Minnesota‑Wisconsin tax reciprocity program.

Medicaid

Address FY11 Medicaid deficit – Medicaid costs are expected to exceed current GPR appropriations by $153 million. The bill would increase the Medicaid GPR appropriation to address this shortfall.

Authorize DHS to restructure program notwithstanding current law – Medicaid costs have increased dramatically due to the recession and expanded program eligibility. In order to reduce the growth in costs, the bill authorizes the Department of Health Services to make program changes notwithstanding limits in state law related to specific program provisions. The department is expected to develop new approaches on program benefits, eligibility determination and provider cost-effectiveness. The proposed changes will require passive approval of the Joint Committee on Finance before implementation.

Technical correction – Act 28 included language that required unused GPR expenditure authority in the Medicaid GPR appropriation at the end of the biennium to be carried over to the subsequent biennium. The bill repeals this provision in order to ensure unspent funds in Medicaid lapse to the general fund balance.

Aging and DisabilityResourceCenters (ADRC) – The bill transfers an estimated $3 million in savings in this appropriation to Medicaid. ADRC's are the intake and assessment element of the state's Family Care program.

Corrections – The bill provides $22 million GPR to address shortfalls in the Department of Corrections adult institutions appropriation. These shortfalls are due to health care costs, overtime, and reductions in salary and fringe benefit budgets under Act 28.

Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) Funding for Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) – The bill allocates $37 million of excess TANF revenues to increase TANF funding for the EITC from $6.6 million to $43.6 million in fiscal year 2010-11. By increasing TANF funding, GPR funding for the EITC is reduced by a commensurate amount.

Income Augmentation Revenues – Allow the Department of Children and Families and Department of Health Services to utilize $6.5 million of already identified income augmentation revenues to meet fiscal year 2010-11 lapse requirements.

Act 28 Required Lapses by DOA Secretary – Under Act 28, the Department of Administration Secretary is required to lapse or transfer a total of $680 million in 2009-11 from appropriations made to executive branch agencies to the general fund. The bill would reduce this amount by $79 million to ensure the lapses can be met in the next five months as this was ineffectively addressed by the previous administration.

Lapse of Funding from Joint Committee on Finance (JCF) Appropriation – The JCF appropriation includes $4.5 million related to estimated fiscal year 2010-11 implementation costs of 2009 Wisconsin Act 100 (operating while intoxicated enforcement changes). This funding is not anticipated to be needed in fiscal year 2010-11 and the bill lapses these amounts to the general fund balance.

Sale of State Heating Plants – The bill authorizes the Department of Administration to sell state heating plants. The proceeds from any sale, net of remaining debt service, would be deposited in the budget stabilization fund.

Shift Key Cabinet Agency Positions to Unclassified Status – The bill creates unclassified positions for chief legal counsel, public information officer and legislative liaison activities in cabinet agencies. An equivalent number of classified positions are deleted to offset the new unclassified positions. These activities are critical to each cabinet agency's overall mission and should have direct accountability to the agency head.

tl;dr. I don't see what your point is.

Less copy/pasting, more compacted points, please. Anything past 12 paragraphs is usually unread.

@kanevalider: Sorry that I didn't bother reading the bill; I don't usually bother with something the moment I know it contains clauses limiting human rights. Perhaps the bill actually proposes some useful options. I don't know, and don't really care, so long as rights are not stripped in the process of passage. That's perhaps the biggest misconception of what protesters want. No one cares about the money anymore. Unions have already said they'll concede to the 5.6 percent pension and 12 percent health care premium contribution rates (which are ridiculous already considering the amount of statewide corporations that pay no taxes) so long as they can keep collective bargaining rights. Yet that's just not good enough for Scott Walker, who claims you can't fix the budget with one or the other. Bullshit.

And just to update everyone, this is how democracy dies:

Wisconsin Assembly passes union-weakening bill, move to Senate (CNN Breaking News)

Quote from one of the two campus papers that sums up what happened:

Republicans resorted to a surprise vote at 1:09 a.m. Friday morning to pass the governor’s controversial budget repair bill as Democrats leapt out of their chairs shouting “Shame! Shame!” at the exiting representatives.

Republicans had attempted the quick vote at least two other times earlier in the night, but Democrats, under the vocal leadership of Rep. Peter Barca, D-Kenosha, protested and demanded the speaker renounce the votes. The move came after around 61 hours of debate had taken place, largely due to Democrats taking liberty with the length of their speeches. The final count of the vote was 51-17.

http://badgerherald.com/news/2011/02/24/...ves_bu.php

Support the bill if you do, but don't support ramming it through a state legislature like this.

Support the bill if you do, but don't support ramming it through a state legislature like this.

Here is the other misconception. The unions dont care about anything other than money. Did you know that the union boss for the teachers union in wisconson makes $450k a year? That is outragous. Unfortunately the collective bargening must go as well because it is things like that that make the problems they are facing at the moment with a $3.8 billion deficit by 2013. The concept behind collective bargening is to give better than market wages and benefits. That just isnt right to make the tax payers give them better pay and benefits than they get in the private sector. Many states facing the same types of budget woes are also moving in the same direction against the unions because they are paracitic. Unions when they first began were probably pretty useful. But in this day and age they are for more money and power hungry than those who caused the creation in the first place. As far as I am concerned, unions have no business in any government what so ever. It is ok to have them in the private sector.

As for democracy dying, that happened the minute the democrats decided to run away just to stop a vote. The people of the state have even spoken out against the demonstrators on this matter and guess what? Those who are against the bill are in the minority. So democracy dying is truely being caused by those who fled not by the rest of the government.

lolwut. I'm sorry, but you're the one who is ridiculously misinformed.

First off, those who are against the bill are not in the minority, but the majority. 61% of adults in the United States oppose the elimination of collective bargaining rights for state unions.

Second, and I can say this from personal experience, your attempts to paint public, union employees as overpaid and overbenefitted when compared to the private sector is laughably ludicrous. To explain, I'll use my parents as the perfect comparative example: my mother works in the public sector as a unionized middle school teacher, and my father works in the private sector as a firm/contract mechanical engineer. Both have bachelor's degrees from Cornell University, and both have masters' degrees - my father an MBA, and my mother two, one in Nutritional Biochemistry and the other in Education. My mother has worked as a teacher for 10 years this next academic year, and will be the science department head for her middle school, not to mention team leader and a number of other various leadership positions. My father has worked in his craft for over 20 years, at three different firms, and is currently enjoying a flexible yet challenging job.

My mother will continue to earn half of what my father makes next year, even as department head, and my father doesn't make $100k a year.

It's a personal insult to me when someone stands up and claims teachers and union workers are overpaid, and says private sector jobs is the place for high pay and good benefits. Union work may not require the most prestigious of degrees and rigorous of academic training, but it's damn well necessary for the upkeep of a community, and it's rather silly to sit here and piss on that, claiming the private sector should get everything, when these are the people who run your towns. Are you seriously going to affront the policeman and firemen that keep you safe, the snow plow drivers, garbage and sewer workers that keep this country clean, and the teachers that educate the future? What happens if you take away their rights and they fight back with strikes and protests, like they're doing in Madison?

Communities. Shut. Down.

I'm sorry kanevaldier, but you disgust me. The concept behind collective bargaining is to protect a group of public employees in a particular sector the same way a corporation protects all of its employees in the private. Unions are the only way public individuals receive some kind of power in negotiating benefits and wages with their state and local governments, a luxury taken for granted in the private sector. Without such a force, many individuals wouldn't work union jobs, and so it's essential to the upkeep of society that unions continue with full rights in the public sector.

Finally, you're absolutely ignoring other aspects of this past week in which democracy was killed. Did you know that a week ago the WI state assembly was supposed to take a vote on the bill at 5 pm one day, as decided upon by the Republican Speaker, and at 4:55, when all the Republicans were back in the assembly room and the Democrats were walking back, the Speaker started taking a vote? WITHOUT THEM? You sit here and make comments that paint the Democrats as the killers of democracy. I'm not going to lie - fleeing the state to prevent quorum is an unprecedented and unusual move. But when your Republican colleagues not only don't even listen to what you and 100,000 protesters have to say and even try and figure out some compromises, but don't even let you exercise your right to vote as a state representative, what else is there to do?

Get your facts straight.

Ok, you say "get your facts strait". You might want to do the same thing. Like I already stated, unions, when first conceived, were a good thing and did good things. Now many years later they are not. They dont care about the workers. They pretend to care about them only as long as the bosses of the union are still getting "their cut". Meaning as long as they dont loose any money they care about the worker.

Again, I aslo pointed out the key points of the bill. You did not even read them because you dont care. Learning the facts vs. just listening to the propoganda is far more intelligent of a thing to do. You are worried about their right to collectively bargin. Most people I know, several of whom have worked in unions, would say that while it is nice to be able to do that the unions just do help you the way they should. Unions are very self serving. Even more to the point, unions in government, is just rediculous. Who pays the government? We do, the tax payers. I dont want pay union boss saleries, especially ones that make $450k a year and dont provide any sort of service to the community as a whole. While I am on the subject of pay, do you even know what the average pay is for a teacher in wisconson? I do, its about $100k a year. Thats a bit too much. I could see maybe $70 to 75k a year but not $100k. To top it off they at present dont even pay into their own pension plans and barely pay for any of their other benefits. So who picks up the tab? The rest of the tax payers do.

As for the protesters in madison. The amount of people protesting is not even accurate. Many of the protesters do not even live in wisconson because the unions have bussed them in from other states in order to beef up the numbers. Even recently the protest organizers have asked them to go back to work. Hmmmm, I wonder why they would do that, could it be because they have seen that public opinion is not in favor of them? Probably so.

Point is, that no matter what is said, at the end of the day their is only a certain amount of money available. The unions have raped and pillaged the tax pays for years and now because of that fact the state is now forced with the reality that without ending their abilities to do just that, they will face financial ruin. Wisconson was just the first state to step up to the plate and now many have followed suit. Why? Because they are all facing major defecits. The last thing anyone wants to see is a state go bankrupt. In wisconson, the govener is just trying to save jobs. The starting figuers, if the bill is not passed, will cost 5500 employees their jobs. Thats just the starting point.

I dont what state you and your parents live in froznite, but each state has a very different economy and pay scales also vary. The cost of living in wisconson is pretty low compared to most of the U.S. You speak about how "great" unions are yet neither of your parents are union workers and I dont know if you are or not but something tells me not. You tell me to get my facts strait, but you base your information on what? What the unions say? Sorry but it sounds to me that you need to get your facts strait.

I dont what state you and your parents live in froznite

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. As if it wasn't blazingly obvious.

I can't help but laugh at this point. You asked where I get my facts from...perhaps the link I embedded at the beginning of my last post? You say my parents aren't union workers...after I explicitly say my mother is a 9 year unionized teacher?

You're not worth arguing with anymore, because what you've said is plain wrong. My sources are Rachel Maddow, the Huffington Post, CNN, The New York Times, and PhD economic and political science professors at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. What are yours? FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck? And you say I need to stop listening to propaganda.

P.s. I'd encourage you to try and teach any K-12 academic class for a week, and then tell me teachers don't deserve a six figure salary. As a taxpayer, I'd rather increase wages for the public employees who keep our communities together and educate the future generations, not fund projects benefitting the socioeconomic top 1%.

I dont what state you and your parents live in froznite

Sorry, but what you just said deserved this. Continue arguing what you believe, but if you're going to make arguments that are moot, and is totally off what Dan is trying to get across (and believing what Republicans are spewing out), forget it. You're now to the point where your credibility drops to 0. Zip.

And tl;dr. Like always. Nothing will ever change from you.

It always amazes me when I see people comment on things the government does when they clearly have no clue as to how the government works...will...froz...rick. People who are blind to the facts are nothing more than sheep. Froz, you stated that you didnt even read the bill and didnt care. You based you opinion on what you heard the media spew out instead of looking it up and reviewing the facts. Much is the same with most people. Those who do that are have no right to complain about some "injustice" because they have no clue what is going on other than what they heard.

Lets go back two election cycles ago. Obama was running for the presidency and everyone who voted for him or would have if they could were hooked on the promise of "change". After that election he not only won but had complete support from his party in both houses of congress. The democrats had complete control to do what they pleased. What happened? Not only did Obama and the rest of his party completely do a 180 on the things they had said durring the time they were campagning. But they also chose to continue and expand upon, the polices that were put in place during the Bush administration. All that did was to exasperate an already bad situation. Now we come to this past election cycle. Many of those who were on the Obama band wagon had reached the point were they had enough and wanted something done to fix the economy not make it worse. So, in comes the tea party and the republicans. Both worked together to bring about the real change that was needed. The thing is, that means making tough choices. Getting rid of unions is a tough choice. But in wisconson, if you read the bill that is, the problem is that the money is being reconfigured. One way that is being done is to have them put money from their pay into their penstion and health care. This is offset by making it so they dont have to pay union dues. Oh my, no we start to see why there is a problem and why the unions are up in arms. They are no longer getting paid for no reason. Paid by the tax payers I might add, to do nothing but "bargin for more stuff".

Before you make claims based on what you hear, you might want to do some actual research and see what is in the bill before ranting on about things you have no clue about.

P.S. @ froznite....that explains why you are so pro-union because your parents are in them. Makes sense to me now, I somehow missed that part in your post. As for teaching kids, the thought has crossed my mind and it stops each time not because of pay scales but because I would rather teach adults.

P.S. @ froznite....that explains why you are so pro-union because your parents are in them. Makes sense to me now, I somehow missed that part in your post. As for teaching kids, the thought has crossed my mind and it stops each time not because of pay scales but because I would rather teach adults.

I'm gonna have to step in and bite here.

When Dan's parents are in an union, it does NOT mean that he's pro-union by default. Dan has looked at both sides of the issue and develop his own opinions on it based on what he has read, seen, and from those who are experts in those issues (example: researching both sides of the issue from various news sites, and even going to ask the Political Science professors at his school, which he explicitly mentions in this thread). Your assumption that "Oh, your parents are in a union, therefore you must be a union supporter" is just outright logical fallacy. I could (and anyone could) pick you apart for that and further discredit you; you might want to be careful about how you word your arguments because you're now treading the fine line between logical arguments and logical fallacies.

I'm gonna have to step in and bite here.

When Dan's parents are in an union, it does NOT mean that he's pro-union by default. Dan has looked at both sides of the issue and develop his own opinions on it based on what he has read, seen, and from those who are experts in those issues (example: researching both sides of the issue from various news sites, and even going to ask the Political Science professors at his school, which he explicitly mentions in this thread). Your assumption that "Oh, your parents are in a union, therefore you must be a union supporter" is just outright logical fallacy. I could (and anyone could) pick you apart for that and further discredit you; you might want to be careful about how you word your arguments because you're now treading the fine line between logical arguments and logical fallacies.

Lol. Researching by going with news sites and political science? Thats not researching the facts. How about looking at the history and then looking at the present day of unions. They have changed considerably over time and become quite money and power hungry. It really amuses me to see your comments though will. I do get a good laugh. I am certain that my original thought stands, in that you have not read the bill but instead rely on the information given by the media.

Lol. Researching by going with news sites and political science? Thats not researching the facts. How about looking at the history and then looking at the present day of unions. They have changed considerably over time and become quite money and power hungry. It really amuses me to see your comments though will. I do get a good laugh. I am certain that my original thought stands, in that you have not read the bill but instead rely on the information given by the media.

I did do my research and look at the facts. Bottom line: It is not fair for the unions. Cost-cutting does not have to involve unions. Period

@ Bolded: -facepalm-. Now I'm laughing at you for what you just said. You simply don't get it. Never cease to amaze how you keep going and going while what you've said has been picked apart many times now.

@kanevaldier:
Since you don't seem to know what it is, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy.


And I'll leave this here.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-fe...-the-curds.
First five minutes sums this up nicely.

I did do my research and look at the facts. Bottom line: It is not fair for the unions. Cost-cutting does not have to involve unions. Period

@ Bolded: -facepalm-. Now I'm laughing at you for what you just said. You simply don't get it. Never cease to amaze how you keep going and going while what you've said has been picked apart many times now.

You have yet to actually pick anything apart. When you have an intelligent response I will gladly reveiw it. The fact is that you dont and the only thing you can do is to continue to make the same response. If you did any real research you would not have just said anything like you just did. You really continue to amaze me by how little you know.

@kanevaldier:
Since you don't seem to know what it is, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy.


And I'll leave this here.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-fe...-the-curds.
First five minutes sums this up nicely.

@kanedalvier: Do me a favor and read the first link. You simply didnt care that you used a logical fallacy as your argument as long you could discredit someone; you simply steamrolled over what people have said. Even if I go ahead and pick apart the bill, I will still feel like speaking to a wall because of your throat-shoving attitude. That's what you're doing right now.