mykeystrokes.com

"Do or Do not. There is no try."

Continuing The Fight: Wisconsinites Get Revved Up For Worker’s Rights

Hundreds of Wisconsinites lined Madison’s Capitol Square, Saturday, to welcome bikers from all over the Midwest and to protest Scott Walker’s attack on Wisconsin unions.

Just when Governor Scott Walker thought he memorized all the chants and signs, Wisconsinites revved it up a notch. Every kind of bike from Harley-Davidsons to Huffys descended onto the Square from Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd and South Hamilton St.

Eric Hartz, the organizer of the event, complemented the thunderous entrance with songs from the Raging Grannies, a social justice organization made up of older women. Other speakers included Sen. John Erpenbach, Sen. Mark Miller, Rep. Cory Mason, Rep. Peter Barca, Milwaukee Public School Teachers and the City of Middleton Fire Fighters.

Throughout the speeches you could hear the low rumbling from motorcycles surrounding the capitol building. “The sound from the engines and the crowd was overwhelming,” said Miriam Kopelow, a teacher at Wringra Middle School. “I could feel the chants of the people and the rumbling of the bikes.”

According to Rep. Cory Mason, motorcycles and collective bargaining rights have a special place in Wisconsin’s history. “There are two great things that were invented here in the state of Wisconsin,” said Mason. “One is public sector collective bargaining rights and the other one is Harley Davidson and no governor in their right mind would try to get rid of any of those fine institutions.”

Most of the bikers participating were veterans supporting the unions. Dave Boetcher, a member of the State Veterans Board, rode in support of public workers, but also talked about the privatization of the new veteran’s home in Chippewa Falls after private nursing home owners lobbied Gov. Walker.

“We are first and foremost a compassionate state,” said Sen. John Erpenback. However, Gov. Walker’s budget wants to “cut a third from the vocational colleges… a billion dollars from K12…turn back 20 years of
recycling” and ultimately wants “to destroy clean and open government in Wisconsin,” said Rep. Peter Barca.

Another Wisconsin invention Rep. Cory Mason pointed out, that will prove to be important in the coming months, is the right to recall elected officials. “We will continue this fight until we finally prevail, until we bring back our proud Wisconsin tradition that stands up for working people,” said Barca.

By: Summer Abdoh, Center for Media and Democracy, May 1, 2011

May 1, 2011 Posted by | Class Warfare, Collective Bargaining, Democracy, Education, Elections, GOP, Gov Scott Walker, Governors, Lawmakers, Politics, Public Employees, Republicans, State Legislatures, Teachers, Union Busting, Unions, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Republicans | , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Justice Delayed: Wisconsin Recall Elections To Be Held July 12

A Dane County, WI judge has approved a request by the state Government Accountability Board (GAB), which oversees elections in the state, to delay some state Senate recall elections and consolidate them into one day on July 12. In the course of making that decision, the judge turned back Democratic objections that some of their recalls should proceed as quickly as possible in June.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports:

Signatures were filed against senators starting April 1, and under tight timelines in the statutes, the first election could have been scheduled in mid-June. But Dane County Judge John W. Markson agreed to give the accountability board more time to evaluate the petitions and schedule the elections.

He agreed the board needed more time because of the unprecedented demands on evaluating tens of thousands of signatures for each recall attempt. He also noted the board is bogged down by a statewide recount in the April 5 election for state Supreme Court.

The GAB had sought the extension primarily on the grounds that the extraordinary number of recalls was straining their capacity to review signatures. On the other hand, as WisPolitics reported on Thursday, Democratic Party attorney Jeremy Levinson had argued in a court filing that delaying any of the recalls would do damage to the Dems, and create political space for the Republicans to do mischief with the extra time:

Levinson argues delaying the matter would give the incumbents an “extra-statutory” fundraising advantage, and leave representation of those districts “an open and pending question.”

In addition, Levinson argues that delaying the recall elections may result in laws being enacted that would not be if the recalls are held in the time frame permitted by statute.

“The rush to put ‘Voter ID’ and the concealed carry of firearms before the legislature — to say nothing of the pending budget — confirm that this is an entirely concrete concern,” Levinson writes.

In addition, as Jessica Arp from the local CBS affiliate reported from Judge Markson’s court hearing, Levinson also argued that the earliest petitions, against state Sen. Dan Kapanke and state Sen. Randy Hopper, were filed so quickly as a deliberate decision on the Dems’ part, in order to have the recalls move forward quickly while the issues are still fresh in the public mind.

Ultimately, though, Markson declared that it had become difficult or impossible for the GAB to meet the statutory deadline, and that the public would be better served by having the recalls held on a single day.

The state Senate currently has a 19-14 Republican majority, with Democrats hoping to pick up three seats in recall elections and win a majority, in a backlash against Gov. Scott Walker’s anti-public employee union legislation. In order to initiate a recall, signatures of at least 25 percent of the number of voters in the previous gubernatorial election, within the targeted district, must be collected in a 60-day window.

Democrats have filed recall signatures against six Republicans: Dan Kapanke, Randy Hopper, Luther Olsen, Sheila Harsdorf, Alberta Darling and Rob Cowles. Republicans have filed recall signatures against three Democrats: Dave Hansen, Jim Holperin and Robert Wirch.

Under Wisconsin’s recall law, elected officials must have served at least one year of their term before being recalled — thus exempting the half of the Senate that was just elected in 2010. In addition, Dems have also declared their intention to recall Walker himself next year, when the one-year exemption runs out.

By: Eric Kleefeld, Talking Points Memo, April 29, 2011

April 30, 2011 Posted by | Collective Bargaining, Elections, Gov Scott Walker, Politics, Public Employees, State Legislatures, Unions, Voters, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Republicans | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sorry Gov Walker, Wisconsin Pension System Is Nation’s Most Solvent

Wisconsin’s budget may be in a hole, but the state’s pension system is among the healthiest in the nation.

In fact, the Badger State was one of just two states to fully fund its public employee pension in 2009, according to a report released Tuesday by the Pew Center on the States. New York was the other.

Although nationally there was at least a $1.26 trillion gap in 2009 between what states have promised in public employee retirement benefits and what they have set aside, Wisconsin stands out as a leader in managing its liabilities for both pension and health benefits over the long term, the Pew report concluded. The shortfall is 26 percent greater than it was in 2008.

Pew researchers attribute the gap to unwise decisions by retirement benefits fund officials and the Great Recession that whacked pension fund investments. In all, 31 states were below the recommended 80 percent funding level for their pension plans in 2009, compared with 22 states that fell short of that threshold the previous year.

“Over the last decade, it was all too common for state leaders to skip or shortchange their annual retirement contributions and increase retiree benefits without checking the price tag or figuring out how to pay the larger, long-term bill,” said Susan Urahn, managing director for the Pew Center on the States. “Now, policymakers in many states are taking a long overdue look at how they have managed, or failed to manage, the considerable costs for public employees’ retirement benefits. Even in states like New York and Wisconsin, where pension systems are well-funded, governors have sought policy changes aimed at reducing their pension liabilities.”

The report was released at a time when Wisconsin sits at the epicenter of state budget battles across the country as governors are focusing on public employee benefits to cut costs and balance budgets. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker ignited a firestorm with his “budget repair” proposal that strips public employees of many of their collective bargaining rights and requires them to contribute more of their income toward their retirement benefits. Several states followed with similar proposals, fueling a debate over the role of pension systems in the financial crisis in the states.

At a Capitol Hill forum Tuesday sponsored by the American Action Forum, a conservative think tank, the consensus among panelists was pensions are not to blame for states’ fiscal woes. One panelist, Eli Lehrer, vice president of the Heartland Institute, said given the health of Wisconsin’s pension fund, Walker would be wise to focus his budget balancing effort elsewhere.

“The pension system in Wisconsin is fully funded,” Lehrer said. “As a budget focus, I think he’s better off expending his political capital somewhere else.”

Andrew Biggs, a pension expert at the American Enterprise Institute, said just because Wisconsin’s pension fund is solvent doesn’t mean it should be off-limits.

“It could be well-funded and still be a drain on the budget,” Biggs said.

Pew researcher Stephen Fehr said retirement benefit costs for all states continue to rise, and while states like New York and Wisconsin should be commended for maintaining their funding obligations amid hard times, they face financial strains.

“They don’t have a pension crisis, but on the other hand they do have some pressures as all states do when it comes to figuring out how do we pay our bills,” Fehr said.

New York and Wisconsin have fulfilled their pension fund obligations regardless of the economic times, Fehr said.

By: Larry Bivins, Greenbaypressgazette.com, April 27, 2011

April 28, 2011 Posted by | Collective Bargaining, Gov Scott Walker, Governors, Politics, Public Employees, States, Wisconsin | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Governor Walker’s Misleading Claims On Medicaid

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker painted a misleading picture of Medicaid in his New York Times op-ed on Friday.  Medicaid is neither obsolete nor inflexible and changing it to a block grant, as the House Republican budget that Walker supports would do, would significantly harm the millions of seniors, people with disabilities and children who rely on it every day.

Governor Walker says Medicaid is obsolete because it is biased toward covering people in nursing homes rather than their own homes.  In fact, Medicaid is moving in precisely the opposite direction.  In 1990, just 13 percent of Medicaid spending on long-term care went for care in the community rather than in an institution.  By 2009, the figure was 43 percent.  That’s a great example of how Medicaid is changing with the times.

Moreover, health reform, (i.e., the Affordable Care Act) provides several new options to speed this trend along and continues funding for the “Money Follows the Person” program, in particular, which moves people from nursing homes back to the community.  With health reform’s new options and funding, progress will likely continue.  That won’t happen under the House Republican budget plan, which would sharply reduce funding for Medicaid and convert the program to a block grant.

My colleagues, Edwin Park and Matt Broaddus, have shown how risky a block grant is for states.  If the House Republican block grant proposal had been in place starting in 2000, their analysis shows, in 2009 Wisconsin would have received 40 percent less in federal funds – nearly $1.6 billion in that year alone.  With such a sharp drop in federal funds, the state would have been ill-equipped to deal with a recession or even to meet the ongoing needs of an aging population.

Governor Walker claims the success of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and state Medicaid demonstration projects show that states could do well under a Medicaid block grant, but he’s wrong on both counts:

CHIP, which does operate under a structure similar to a block grant, has a narrower purpose than Medicaid, as noted in a recent brief from the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured.  It covers far fewer children than Medicaid and covers children in families with higher incomes.  Moreover, in the past, some state CHIP programs did run short of funds and had to freeze enrollment and set up waiting lists.

As to Medicaid demonstration projects, they allow states to cover people who are ordinarily not eligible for Medicaid (such as low-income, childless adults) or services that aren’t usually covered (such as short-term, or “respite,” care for families with children with complex medical conditions) as long as they don’t spend more federal funds than they otherwise would have received.  This is nothing like the Ryan block grant, which would slash the federal funds that states would otherwise get to help them run their programs, not hold federal funds steady.

By: Judy Solomon, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, April 25, 2011

 

April 25, 2011 Posted by | Affordable Care Act, Gov Scott Walker, Governors, Health Reform, Medicaid, Politics, States | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Amoral And Illegal: Gov Walker Misleads On His Administration’s Legal Support For GOP Legislators

Last week, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker put a deceptively positive gloss on the legal battles surrounding his stalled union-busting bill in an interview with the right-wing Newsmax website.

Background on the Legal Battles

As CMD has reported, Governor Walker’s union-busting bill (“Act 10”) was amended by a conference committee on March 11 to avoid quorum requirements, then passed by the Wisconsin Senate with no Democrats present. State Open Meetings laws require 24 hours notice for all meetings, or two hours with “good cause,” but neither standard was met at the March 11 vote. Following a complaint from Dane County’s District Attorney, Judge MaryAnn Sumi found a probable Open Meetings violation and issued an order preventing the Secretary of State from publishing the bill, a necessary step before it can become law. Attorney General JB Van Hollen appealed the decision, and the Court of Appeals offered the case to the state Supreme Court on March 24, which has not taken action (possibly because Justice Prosser’s election is still pending). In the meantime, the Legislative Reference Bureau published the law under statutory authority separate from that of the Secretary of State, raising questions of whether the bill has become law, and prompting Judge Sumi to issue an order declaring it not to be in effect.

On April 7, Governor Walker’s Administration jumped into the fray and asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to vacate Judge Sumi’s order.

Walker Administration’s Legal Position Contrary to Governor’s Statements

The Walker Administration’s petition was discussed during the Governor’s videotaped interview with mustachioed Newsmax anchor Ashley Martell. Walker said:

My administration this week appealed to the state Supreme Court on two counts. Really both on […] the fact that we don’t believe it is legitimate for the judge to be an issuing a temporary restraining order when we think the law was dufully (sic) passed by the members of the state legislature. (at 3:29)

Mustache Martella replied: “speaking of that, the legal issue seems to be the notice given before the vote . . .”

The heart of the issue that is regarding the restraining order really involves the issue of the open meetings laws and whether or not there was notice on that. The legislature feels, and I think they are right about this, that they very clearly did follow the statute, that under other circumstances there might be a problem, but in a special session . . . it is clear that they followed the law. (at 4:12)

Despite Walker’s faith in the conduct of fellow Wisconsin Republicans, his legal team is not contending that GOP legislators followed the law, but only that violations of that law be enforced more leniently. In its petition to the Supreme Court, not once does Walker’s Administration argue that Republican legislators acted lawfully.

Walker’s petition focuses on three issues, claiming (1) that breaking an Open Meetings law is a “procedural violation” that cannot be punished through voiding a legislative act, (2) that a court does not have jurisdiction to prevent a bill from becoming law (even if it may have authority to void a law once enacted), and (3) that the Act is published and is now law, meaning Sumi’s order has no relevance. The brief also questions whether the District Attorney can sue to invalidate a statute, and whether Judge Sumi could enter an order considering defendants’ legislative immunity. Significantly, the petition does not discuss whether legislative notice rules can override Open Meetings laws (which, if argued, could have implied legislators acted lawfully).

Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is

Walker’s Newsmax statements give the impression that legislators acted honorably, avoiding the fact that they may have illegally shut citizens out of the political process, violated the state’s constitutionally-recognized open government guarantees, and did so on a bill that has a significant impact and massive public attention. This is no small matter. As the late Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice William Bablitch wrote in the 1994 case State ex rel. Hodge vs. Town of Turtle Lake: 

The purpose of the Open Meetings Law is to protect the public’s right to be informed to the fullest extent of the affairs of government. . . An open meetings law is not necessary to ensure openness in easy and noncontroversial matters where no one really cares whether the meeting is open or not. Like the First Amendment, which exists to protect unfavored speech, the Open Meetings Law exists to ensure open government in controversial matters.

Open Meetings laws are fundamentally important to Wisconsin’s democracy, and violations are serious business. If Walker genuinely believes the GOP lawmakers’ actions were virtuous and lawful, his administration’s legal documents should reflect that.

By: Brenda Fisher, Center for Media and Democracy, April 13, 2011

April 14, 2011 Posted by | Collective Bargaining, Democracy, Gov Scott Walker, Governors, Ideologues, Ideology, Politics, Public Employees, Right Wing, State Legislatures, Union Busting, Unions, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Republicans | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »