Is what the Indiana and Wisconsin Democrats are doing, fundamentally wrong?

[Little-Acorn]

The Indiana and Wisconsin Democrat legislators have fled their entire states, in order to disrupt voting in their various houses of state government and prevent the newly-elected Republican majorities from passing anything the minority Democrats don't like. Some say it is the right thing to do, others say it is wrong.

Before government really existed (cave-man days?), people used to settle disputes by knuckling under, or doing battle, sometimes with much bloodshed. People eventually decided that that was just the wrong way to go about it, and that there had to be a better way. Many alternate methods were tried, and finally a lot of societies settled upon the idea of "majority rule". That is, people would list their disputes on pieces of paper, pass the pieces out to eveybody, and each person would mark down which side he favored. And they all agreed, for the sake of avoiding all that strife and bloodshed, that they would all obey the voice of whichever side got the most votes... even if they didn't personally favor that side.

It was a far from perfect system, of course. Some felt that the "tyranny of the majority" wasn't much better than the tyranny of whichever side could shed the most blood. But by and large, they pretty much agreed that at least they were doing better than the cave mn had done. And in the societies that agreed to that, the idea of voting and Majority Rule, lasted a long time... lasting to the present day in many cases.

Today we see the Indiana and Wisconsin minority Democrats, throwing off that agreement. Despite centuries of acceptable history - and a far better record (however imperfect) that most other schemes of government - they no longer feel that Majority Rule is the way America should go. And they are throwing off, all by themselves, the advantage that have come with it, as well as the disadvantages. And they are offering no alternative method at all, for resolving disputes.

Disputes are as old as the human species itself. And after centuries (millenia) of experience, experimentation, trial and error, Indiana and Wisconsin Democrats have decided to throw off the agreements of centuries and bring Majority Rule to a grinding halt... against, of course, the express wishes of the majority. Needless to say, they had no problem with Majority Rule, until very recently when they found themselves in the minority for the first time in a while in their respective states.

What they are doing is fundamentally wrong. It is not only an assault just on the majorities of today, but upon the very bedrock of Democracy itself. Societites have found more advantage than disadvantage, for many centuries now, in agreeing to obey the majority, than in nearly any other method of government. More and more countries are fighting to set up and use this method themselves.

But the Indiana and Wisconsin Democrats think the experience of the ages is wrong. And they propose to destroy the very concept of Majority Rule, and keep destroying it, until and unless they become the "majority" themselves. Or bully others into treating them that way, at least.

[logroller]

I believe not showing for a roll-call is against the rules of the senate and house; and quorum-busting is not unprecedented as it has occurred several times throughout our history. It seems it has never been successful though, and was damaging to the political careers of some involved(this would be a fun topic to discuss). Check out "quorum" on wikipedia, the last time at state level was a democratic minority in Texas in 2003, federally, a republican minority in 1988-- anyone remember these???

[Little-Acorn]

The most basic, fundamental principle of Majority Rule, is that all parties agree to abide by the decision of the majority, even if they didn't vote for that side. If that rule isn't faithfully and consistently followed, Majority Rule is no more.

Democrats have thrown out that most basic of principles.

In a country where Majority Rule is the fundamental principle, they are fundamentally wrong to do so.

[logroller]

I wouldnt press the majority rule too much for fear of mob-rule-- which is a majority too, no? The issue at hand, IMHO, is elected officials not performing the duties to which they have been elected to perform. If they are so disgusted witht the activities-- quit.

[Palin Rider]

Why phrase it as a question when it's obvious you accept only one answer?

[logroller]

Why phrase it as a question when it's obvious you accept only one answer?

For profiling purposes:laugh:

[jimnyc]

Why phrase it as a question when it's obvious you accept only one answer?

Because there is only one answer. The lowlifes are in dereliction of their duties and should be removed from office. It's 100% impossible to state anything other than they are wrong. Whether one agrees with their political stances or not matters not - they are not doing what they took an oath to do.

[BoogyMan]

Why phrase it as a question when it's obvious you accept only one answer?

Why respond when you, a self styled fence sitter who in actuality is simply ashamed to admit his leftism and thus tries in vain to claim the center, have an already decided position on this as well?

Hypocrisy? Oh yeah.

[Palin Rider]

Because there is only one answer.

But if that's true, the question is pointless.

[Psychoblues]

Some of you rightwingers seem to forget that we live in a republic and not a democracy. In a true republic the minorities are always protected by one method or another. Take the Senate for instance. All states have just 2 (two) Senators no matter the size or population of the state. In the case of the legislatures in Indiana and Wisconsin the Governors are pulling unprecedented and illegal tricks to protect the interests of their contributors rather than abide the agreements and rules of their own legislatures and Labor negotiators.

The Unions WILL prevail on this issue.

Psychoblues

[Nukeman]

Some of you rightwingers seem to forget that we live in a republic and not a democracy. In a true republic the minorities are always protected by one method or another. Take the Senate for instance. All states have just 2 (two) Senators no matter the size or population of the state. In the case of the legislatures in Indiana and Wisconsin the Governors are pulling unprecedented and illegal tricks to protect the interests of their contributors rather than abide the agreements and rules of their own legislatures and Labor negotiators.

The Unions WILL prevail on this issue.

PsychobluesI call bullshit........... Do YOU even know what they are asking of these government funded unions. If your for the unions so much why don't you support the biggest union of all namely the people of those states who are sick and tired of paying for EVERYTHING these union members receive!! Why shouldn't they help with their health insurance why shouldn't they contribute to their own retirement. Why should a public employee enjoy BETTER benefits than the private sector. They should at the very least be on an even scale!!!

These elected officials who ran away have abandoned their jobs plain and simple. Job abandonment calls for immediate loss/dismissal of your job/employment in all other sector why not for elected officials as well?? Or do you feel they are privileged as well??

[Psychoblues]

I call bullshit........... Do YOU even know what they are asking of these government funded unions. If your for the unions so much why don't you support the biggest union of all namely the people of those states who are sick and tired of paying for EVERYTHING these union members receive!! Why shouldn't they help with their health insurance why shouldn't they contribute to their own retirement. Why should a public employee enjoy BETTER benefits than the private sector. They should at the very least be on an even scale!!!

These elected officials who ran away have abandoned their jobs plain and simple. Job abandonment calls for immediate loss/dismissal of your job/employment in all other sector why not for elected officials as well?? Or do you feel they are privileged as well??

I expect the Governor and the legislators to abide the legal and binding agreements they have already in place with the Unions. Anything less is cause for dismissal of the offending partner. The Governor has made his point and should now step aside. He is incompetent.

Insofar as benefits are concerned the government, like the auto and other industries of yore, can re-negotiate their contracts. The Union members have already demonstrated they are certainly willing to re-approach pay and benefit concerns but apparently the Gov has his incompetent mind made up. When I began working with the government in 1968 the pay wasn't very good at all. I could make more money sacking groceries but the benefits made the case a bit better for the government gig. It was during the 80's and the Reagan administration that the government started paying better and more as a prevailing consideration and that included benefits. But even today, nobody gets wealthy as a government employee. A contractor or an employee of a contractor often gets rich but no government employee that I have ever known has gotten wealthy on the government payroll. I once knew what the Presidential salary was and even it didn't make the Forbes Top 10,000 list.

The Unions WILL prevail on this issue.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

I expect the Governor and the legislators to abide the legal and binding agreements they have already in place with the Unions. Anything less is cause for dismissal of the offending partner. The Governor has made his point and should now step aside. He is incompetent.

Insofar as benefits are concerned the government, like the auto and other industries of yore, can re-negotiate their contracts. The Union members have already demonstrated they are certainly willing to re-approach pay and benefit concerns but apparently the Gov has his incompetent mind made up. When I began working with the government in 1968 the pay wasn't very good at all. I could make more money sacking groceries but the benefits made the case a bit better for the government gig. It was during the 80's and the Reagan administration that the government started paying better and more as a prevailing consideration and that included benefits. But even today, nobody gets wealthy as a government employee. A contractor or an employee of a contractor often gets rich but no government employee that I have ever known has gotten wealthy on the government payroll. I once knew what the Presidential salary was and even it didn't make the Forbes Top 10,000 list.

The Unions WILL prevail on this issue.

Psychoblues

You may have ignored this point PB, but these "poor" union workers are screwing over the taxpayers

Polls aare showing the public has had enough of the union bosses, the Dems running away like cowards, and "sick" teachers getting excuses at their protests from "Doctors"




Americans continue to believe strongly that being a teacher is an essential job, but a plurality thinks it’s a bad thing that most teachers are unionized.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 68% of American Adults view being a teacher as one of the most important jobs in our country today, down five points from May of last year but up slightly from when we first asked the question in May 2008. Twenty-one percent (21%) say it’s not one of the most important jobs, and 12% aren’t sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Thirty-seven percent (37%) say, in terms of its impact on the nation, it’s a good thing that most teachers belong to public employee unions. Forty-six percent (46%) disagree and say it’s a bad thing that most teachers are unionized. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.

In late April 2010 when we offered “neither” as another option, 38% of adults said it’s good that most teachers belong to a public employee union, but 34% said it’s a bad thing. Thirteen percent (13%) viewed it as neither, and 14% were undecided.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/february_2011/46_view_unionized_teachers_as_a_bad_thing_37_disag ree




and





Half of America’s voters favor public sector unions for government workers, but they strongly oppose the tactic by Wisconsin state senators to flee their state to prevent a vote that would limit the rights of such unions.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that only 25% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of this tactic, while 67% disapprove. State legislators in Indiana have used the same approach to avoid a vote in their state. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Sizable majorities of Republicans and voters not affiliated with either major party reject such a strategy. Democrats are fairly evenly divided, with 48% approving and 44% disapproving.

Until the Democratic senators return, there will not be quorum allowing a vote on Republican Governor Scott Walker's proposal to have public employees pay more for their health and pension benefits and to limit their collective bargaining rights. The Republican majorities in both chambers of the Wisconsin legislature are expected to pass the governor's proposal which has been the subject of major protests in the state for several days now.

Voters continue to be closely divided over the question of public employee unions themselves. Fifty percent (50%) at least somewhat favor such unions, while 44% oppose them. These figures include 25% who Strongly Favor the unions and 25% who are Strongly Opposed.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/february_2011/67_disapprove_of_legislators_fleeing_wisconsin_to_ avoid_vote

[DragonStryk72]

It's pretty cut and dry: The Dems in question have clearly abdicated their seats, and therefore a special election should be brought together to replace said absentees. The union issues are completely sidenote, and I'd need to know more about the specifics of the proposed cuts before I could form an opinion on that count.

[red states rule]

It's pretty cut and dry: The Dems in question have clearly abdicated their seats, and therefore a special election should be brought together to replace said absentees. The union issues are completely sidenote, and I'd need to know more about the specifics of the proposed cuts before I could form an opinion on that count.

They should not be paid for the time they are AWOL from work. If they are paid they should be paying income tax in the state they are hiding in. All state issued credit cards should be cancelled. And all state issued care should be repoed

If Walker wanted to, if there are state issued cars involved, he should report them as stolen and charge the Dems with Grand Theft Auto

[DragonStryk72]

They should not be paid for the time they are AWOL from work. If they are paid they should be paying income tax in the state they are hiding in. All state issued credit cards should be cancelled. And all state issued care should be repoed

If Walker wanted to, if there are state issued cars involved, he should report them as stolen and charge the Dems with Grand Theft Auto

I would give them a 24-hour timeline to return said cars, just to be nice about it, but other than that, I agree. If you're not doing your job, then do the same thing that happens anywhere you get a string of No Call No Shows. Other than that, declare them in abdication, and put up a new set of elections. Funny, but I think their "moral stand" would falter pretty damned fast at that point

[red states rule]

I would give them a 24-hour timeline to return said cars, just to be nice about it, but other than that, I agree. If you're not doing your job, then do the same thing that happens anywhere you get a string of No Call No Shows. Other than that, declare them in abdication, and put up a new set of elections. Funny, but I think their "moral stand" would falter pretty damned fast at that point

With the teachers, I would have liked to see the Gov do what Pres Reagan did. Back to work or you are fired

Dems and the unions are ripping off the taxpayer as they are being paid for NO WORK

[Psychoblues]

Man 'o man are the armchair labor and legislative negotiators running this afternoon!!!!!!!! How many of you labor or management genius's have ever had a single day in the seat of a professional wage and benefit negotiator? From everything I've seen so far in the 8 or so years I've been around these rightwing boards I would say that none of you could last a half day in intense negotiations. These loud mouth wilfully ignorant statements being flung around here like shit sandwiches at a CPAC make me laugh out loud!!!!!!!! Both sides in this argument have a right to defend themselves and use whatever tools that they find available for them.

But, carry on. I've got the buttered popcorn and the Dr. Pepper to hold out for a week or so!!!

Psychoblues

[Little-Acorn]

In other words, little psycho hates what he's hearing but can't refute any of it, so he tries to slime everything he can without referencing any facts or details, hoping somebody will believe him anyway.

:lame2:

[DragonStryk72]

Man 'o man are the armchair labor and legislative negotiators running this afternoon!!!!!!!! How many of you labor or management genius's have ever had a single day in the seat of a professional wage and benefit negotiator? From everything I've seen so far in the 8 or so years I've been around these rightwing boards I would say that none of you could last a half day in intense negotiations. These loud mouth wilfully ignorant statements being flung around here like shit sandwiches at a CPAC make me laugh out loud!!!!!!!! Both sides in this argument have a right to defend themselves and use whatever tools that they find available for them.

But, carry on. I've got the buttered popcorn and the Dr. Pepper to hold out for a week or so!!!

Psychoblues

Okay, I'm skipping pretty much all of that, save for the buttered popcorn and Dr. P, that we can agree to agree on. What is your opinion on the OP in regards to the Senators bailing on their jobs because they don't want to face the vote they know is coming?

I will state this: Were it Conservatives jumping up and doing this, I see them in the same light on this. Consider them in abdication, and hold special elections to replace them with people who actually want to come to work on a daily basis, even when it's hard, or they don't like the way things are going.

[Psychoblues]

Okay, I'm skipping pretty much all of that, save for the buttered popcorn and Dr. P, that we can agree to agree on. What is your opinion on the OP in regards to the Senators bailing on their jobs because they don't want to face the vote they know is coming?

I will state this: Were it Conservatives jumping up and doing this, I see them in the same light on this. Consider them in abdication, and hold special elections to replace them with people who actually want to come to work on a daily basis, even when it's hard, or they don't like the way things are going.

I love ya, DS'72 but in your 1st paragraph you assume so much that it is impossible to imagine a premise. You don't know one whit why the Senators hauled ass. If the gov could do anything about it he would have already done it. But, he's pretty much of an incompetent so I wouldn't be surprised at anything he might do, legal, ethical or not.

And you can state anything you want to. It doesn't make it true or correct in this case. But, have fun "stating"!!!!!!!!!

Enjoy the popcorn and Dr. P, DS'72!!!!!!!!

[Psychoblues]

In other words, little psycho hates what he's hearing but can't refute any of it, so he tries to slime everything he can without referencing any facts or details, hoping somebody will believe him anyway.

:lame2:

And just what do you assume that I am hearing that upsets me in any way, la?

:lame2:

:laugh2::salute::laugh2:

Psychoblues

[DragonStryk72]

You don't know one whit why the Senators hauled ass. If the gov could do anything about it he would have already done it. But, he's pretty much of an incompetent so I wouldn't be surprised at anything he might do, legal, ethical or not.

And you can state anything you want to. It doesn't make it true or correct in this case. But, have fun "stating"!

You said it yourself, they hauled ass, and they're adamant in it being to stall out the vote, hence not a premise or assumption. By your statement, you are assuming yourself that he is incompetent, despite the point that he has said that he's tried negotiating, and that every time he's tried to propose cuts without laying anyone off (This seems like someone who's fighting like hell to not make people unemployed, but that conjecture), they've refused, pretty much just stonewalling him. What if that is the reality? You assume he's incompetent, I'm remarking only on the facts presented.

I won't even go to the place RSR went to. This is a stunt my sister used to pull when she was 11. She'd storm outta the room when she didn't want to have to defend her point, and just wait for us to drop it and move on. She grew out of it, apparently the Senators did not. If I suddenly stopped going to work for a few weeks to avoid something about it I just didn't like, I'd be fired, and the company would be right to fire me. I hold them to the same standard i hold myself to.

[Psychoblues]

You said it yourself, they hauled ass, and they're adamant in it being to stall out the vote, hence not a premise or assumption. By your statement, you are assuming yourself that he is incompetent, despite the point that he has said that he's tried negotiating, and that every time he's tried to propose cuts without laying anyone off (This seems like someone who's fighting like hell to not make people unemployed, but that conjecture), they've refused, pretty much just stonewalling him. What if that is the reality? You assume he's incompetent, I'm remarking only on the facts presented.

I won't even go to the place RSR went to. This is a stunt my sister used to pull when she was 11. She'd storm outta the room when she didn't want to have to defend her point, and just wait for us to drop it and move on. She grew out of it, apparently the Senators did not. If I suddenly stopped going to work for a few weeks to avoid something about it I just didn't like, I'd be fired, and the company would be right to fire me. I hold them to the same standard i hold myself to.

No, I said your remarks were a scrambled premise so unclear so as to prevent adequate addressing but I tried anyway. You still don't know why they hauled ass and you still don't know your ass from a hole in the ground about Wisconsin legislative policies concerning stalemates and improper closures of the collective bargaining processes that exist there. And I don't know much more and never said that I did like you say.

And you say this guy has in any way attempted to negotiate with anyone about anything concerning this issue? Man, are you ever eat up with it!!!!!!!!! And by the way, I am not assuming the man is incompetent, he proves that on his own every time he opens his idiotic mouth. He is nothing if not a Koch Brothers bought and paid for tool.

Speaking of eatin', howz zat buttered popcorn and Dr. P holding out for you?!?!?!?!??!?!

Munch, munch, munch, glug, glug, glug, munch, munch munch!!!!!!!!!

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

You said it yourself, they hauled ass, and they're adamant in it being to stall out the vote, hence not a premise or assumption. By your statement, you are assuming yourself that he is incompetent, despite the point that he has said that he's tried negotiating, and that every time he's tried to propose cuts without laying anyone off (This seems like someone who's fighting like hell to not make people unemployed, but that conjecture), they've refused, pretty much just stonewalling him. What if that is the reality? You assume he's incompetent, I'm remarking only on the facts presented.

I won't even go to the place RSR went to. This is a stunt my sister used to pull when she was 11. She'd storm outta the room when she didn't want to have to defend her point, and just wait for us to drop it and move on. She grew out of it, apparently the Senators did not. If I suddenly stopped going to work for a few weeks to avoid something about it I just didn't like, I'd be fired, and the company would be right to fire me. I hold them to the same standard i hold myself to.

I have to agree. Here's a like minded editorial from Detroit News, an area that well knows that big time cuts are coming:

http://www.detnews.com/article/20110227/OPINION03/102270310/1008/AWOL-Dems-defy-ballot-box


February 27, 2011
AWOL Dems defy ballot box

NOLAN FINLEY

American-style democracy holds together because no matter how nasty the political game gets, the players honor a few inviolable rules. We obey the laws, even the ones we disagree with. We respect the ballot box. And after even the most bitterly contested election, the loser accepts the results, works within the system and awaits another chance to prevail with voters...

Instead of staying on the field to defend their positions, Democratic lawmakers in both states fled to neighboring Illinois, where they hope to win with their absence what they couldn't at the ballot box — namely, the right to control policymaking.

Without the Democrats, the legislatures don't have the required quorums to pass budget measures, including cutting pay and benefits for public workers.

The lawmakers in exile call this a defense of democracy. In truth, it's a step toward anarchy. If it catches on as a practice, it will officially end government by, of and for the people...

[red states rule]

As far as members of the liberal media are concerned, who cares what the voters said in the last election?


<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hdqGaGaGqG" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hdqGaGaGqG" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

[red states rule]

http://www.newsbusters.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/cartoon_500/cartoons/iranvswisconsin.jpg