Republicans Drop Indiana Anti-Union Bill

Scott Walker is getting lonely
Politics • Views: 23,587

Still more big news: Indiana Republicans have announced that they’re killing the so-called “right to work” bill.

Senate President Pro Tempore David Long, R-Fort Wayne, said that he, House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, and Gov. Mitch Daniels all agree that the matter instead should be studied by a legislative committee later this year.

The so-called “right to work” bill would bar companies and unions from negotiating a contract that would require non-union employees to pay a fee for representation.

Democrats in the Indiana House fled to Illinois in order to deny the Republicans the quorum they needed of 67 representatives to do busisnes in the House. That effectively killed the bill in the House, and Bosma and Long both said this morning they would not revive it.

Jump to bottom

112 comments
1 McSpiff  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:35:28am

Keep the good news coming!

2 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:38:56am

It's a good call. Fix the problems first.

That said, the dems are playing a game of their own- they pledge to stay out unless other bills are called back. That could backfire.

3 tomg51spence  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:39:05am

So more hiding in then future?
Regardless the outcome, the lessen is not good.

4 tomg51spence  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:39:29am

my spelling is even worse (Lesson)

5 albusteve  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:41:10am

a whole new way to govern...leave town!
I'm not sure what to think about that, but the results in this case hearten me...the political landscape is changing fast

6 jamesfirecat  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:41:41am

re: #2 researchok

It's a good call. Fix the problems first.

That said, the dems are playing a game of their own- they pledge to stay out unless other bills are called back. That could backfire.

Its still the right move.

The public needs time to get its shit together and realize how big an issue this is.

This is filibustering the way it is suppose to work when it becomes a national event hat gets people interested in what is being debated.

7 Gretchen G.Tiger  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:43:05am

Why do all state politicians flee to Illinois?

8 albusteve  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:43:38am

re: #6 jamesfirecat

Its still the right move.

The public needs time to get its shit together and realize how big an issue this is.

This is filibustering the way it is suppose to work when it becomes a national event hat gets people interested in what is being debated.

and it seems like the media is on the sidelines, where they belong, rather than driving issues from inside the loop

9 celticdragon  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:43:47am

Jeffrey Cox will be sooooo disappointed!

No union thugs to have shot down like liberal dogs by uniformed police with hard, powerful, black, oiled weapons...

/

10 Interesting Times in Benghazi  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:43:50am

re: #7 ggt

Why do all state politicians flee to Illinois?

That sounds like it could be the opening for an interesting tourism campaign...

11 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:43:58am

re: #6 jamesfirecat

Its still the right move.

The public needs time to get its shit together and realize how big an issue this is.

This is filibustering the way it is suppose to work when it becomes a national event hat gets people interested in what is being debated.

I see your point. My concern is that we will see more of this, more often.

The stage is being set and that concerns me.

12 jaunte  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:44:23am

Texas is a 'right to work' state, and that hasn't kept it from running up a $27 billion deficit.

13 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:44:38am

re: #7 ggt

Why do all state politicians flee to Illinois?

To pay homage Lincoln?

14 martinsmithy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:44:39am

It appears that Governor Daniels is much more pragmatic (and less corrupt) than Governor Walker of Wisconsin.

He's a potential Republican presidential candidate in 2012 who bears watching.

15 Gretchen G.Tiger  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:44:44am

re: #10 publicityStunted

That sounds like it could be the opening for an interesting tourism campaign...

"Raise taxes and the politicians will come"?

16 albusteve  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:45:14am

re: #11 researchok

I see your point. My concern is that we will see more of this, more often.

The stage is being set and that concerns me.

yup, a handy device that everyone wants to have now

17 kirghazi  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:45:18am

re: #5 albusteve

a whole new way to govern...leave town!
I'm not sure what to think about that, but the results in this case hearten me...the political landscape is changing fast

Ain't new, just uncommon. See, for example, the story of Representative Abraham Lincoln trying to escape the state assemblyhouse through a window.

Quorum-busting, like a filibuster, is an extreme tool. Unlike the modern fililbuster, however, it is politically much riskier to participants.

18 Gretchen G.Tiger  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:45:37am

re: #13 recusancy

To pay homage Lincoln?

YES, that must be it.

Springfield has a wonderful National Park built around his house and such.

19 jamesfirecat  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:46:27am

re: #11 researchok

I see your point. My concern is that we will see more of this, more often.

The stage is being set and that concerns me.

We will.

Look to the US Senate.

Look what happened when people realized they could Filibuster everything just because they wanted to.

Either live with it or suggest that we need to rectify the laws is my opinion and I feel that this kind of "filibuster" is much less odious than one which doesn't require you to leave the room let alone the state....

20 lawhawk  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:46:34am

re: #7 ggt

Deep dish pizza of course? /

21 SpaceJesus  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:47:05am

double nice.

nice to see some push back against the tea loons

22 albusteve  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:47:16am

re: #17 kirkspencer

Ain't new, just uncommon. See, for example, the story of Representative Abraham Lincoln trying to escape the state assemblyhouse through a window.

Quorum-busting, like a filibuster, is an extreme tool. Unlike the modern fililbuster, however, it is politically much riskier to participants.

I didn't mean all new literally

23 celticdragon  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:48:02am

re: #19 jamesfirecat

We will.

Look to the US Senate.

Look what happened when people realized they could Filibuster everything just because they wanted to.

Either live with it or suggest that we need to rectify the laws is my opinion and I feel that this kind of "filibuster" is much less odious than one which doesn't require you to leave the room let alone the state...

Boldened for truth.

24 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:48:34am

re: #14 martinsmithy

It appears that Governor Daniels is much more pragmatic (and less corrupt) than Governor Walker of Wisconsin.

He's a potential Republican presidential candidate in 2012 who bears watching.

He busted public sector unions the day after he took office. He thinks the way to fix social security is to raise the retirement age because as he states people are going to live well passed 100 and "be replacing body parts like we do tires".

25 Blizard  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:49:54am

re: #20 lawhawk

Deep dish pizza of course? /


As long as it doesn't have pineapples on it...

Geez, I spend one night off the web and I come back to see all kinds of new threads. Much catch-up to do today. Politics of the fast and furious.

26 jamesfirecat  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:49:57am

re: #24 recusancy

He busted public sector unions the day after he took office. He thinks the way to fix social security is to raise the retirement age because as he states people are going to live well passed 100 and "be replacing body parts like we do tires".

I for one long for one welcome our shadow running overlords...

27 jaunte  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:50:56am

re: #24 recusancy

Huckabee was taking the same tack last night.

28 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:51:41am

re: #19 jamesfirecat

We will.

Look to the US Senate.

Look what happened when people realized they could Filibuster everything just because they wanted to.

Either live with it or suggest that we need to rectify the laws is my opinion and I feel that this kind of "filibuster" is much less odious than one which doesn't require you to leave the room let alone the state...

I hope you're right.

I do see a difference though in this kind of ;filibuster'. It seems to me there is an attempt to subvert an election. For example in the case of the Indiana legislators, they have said they will not return until 6 (or more!) other bills are taken off the table.

Like I said, I hope you are right, but I have a bad feeling about this.

30 Killgore Trout  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:52:26am

re: #17 kirkspencer

Ain't new, just uncommon. See, for example, the story of Representative Abraham Lincoln trying to escape the state assemblyhouse through a window.

Quorum-busting, like a filibuster, is an extreme tool. Unlike the modern fililbuster, however, it is politically much riskier to participants.

Even as recent as a few year ago one party in a state legislature (I thinkit was New York) changed the locks and wouldn't let the other party in.

31 Kragarghazi  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:52:41am

re: #27 jaunte

Huckabee was taking the same tack last night.

We will wring every cent we can from your miserable frame for the company store.

32 Jeff In Ohio  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:52:47am

This is why Indiana needs Mike Pence. He will not turn his back on his duty to crush the Marxists and show them who is boss like that RINO Daniels.Then newly appointed Attorney General Jeffery Cox can have his State Troopers, who have just had their union busted, shoot all the protesting police officers who have had their unions busted and then turn their guns on those libtard firefighters and elite teachers who think they know so much about everything with their evolution and revolution and de-evolution and I ain't fucking no monkey I don't care how many gays the Feds refuse to persecute.

Let's make America safe again for The Producers! It's time to go John Gault and take to the highways (please stay off the publicly supported ones...Sam Walton has goods to deliver.)

33 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:53:08am

re: #24 recusancy

He busted public sector unions the day after he took office. He thinks the way to fix social security is to raise the retirement age because as he states people are going to live well passed 100 and "be replacing body parts like we do tires".

Apparently everyone is a billionaire in his view. Because, while I can barely afford health insurance, I can totally afford bionic replacements for failing organs. Seems reasonable.

If people can't afford bionic body parts, clearly they are just shiftless and lazy.

34 Gretchen G.Tiger  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:53:24am

re: #30 Killgore Trout

Even as recent as a few year ago one party in a state legislature (I thinkit was New York) changed the locks and wouldn't let the other party in.

That would be funny if it wasn't true.

35 albusteve  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:53:39am

re: #28 researchok

I hope you're right.

I do see a difference though in this kind of ;filibuster'. It seems to me there is an attempt to subvert an election. For example in the case of the Indiana legislators, they have said they will not return until 6 (or more!) other bills are taken off the table.

Like I said, I hope you are right, but I have a bad feeling about this.

so do I...it has the taste of soft bribery to it, flex your muscles and shut down govt whenever you want

36 jamesfirecat  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:54:34am

re: #28 researchok

I hope you're right.

I do see a difference though in this kind of ;filibuster'. It seems to me there is an attempt to subvert an election. For example in the case of the Indiana legislators, they have said they will not return until 6 (or more!) other bills are taken off the table.

Like I said, I hope you are right, but I have a bad feeling about this.

And the rampant filibustering by the GOP on issues like DADT repeal, and healthcare reform didn't feel like a an attempt to subvert an election to you?

37 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:57:04am

re: #28 researchok

I hope you're right.

I do see a difference though in this kind of ;filibuster'. It seems to me there is an attempt to subvert an election. For example in the case of the Indiana legislators, they have said they will not return until 6 (or more!) other bills are taken off the table.

Like I said, I hope you are right, but I have a bad feeling about this.

There is no functional difference between using one procedural trick to prevent a bill from being voted on, vs. using a different procedural trick to prevent a bill from being voted on. Both methods have the exact same effect.

38 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 10:57:49am

re: #36 jamesfirecat

And the rampant filibustering by the GOP on issues like DADT repeal, and healthcare reform didn't feel like a an attempt to subvert an election to you?

There is a distinction between real filibustering and legislators leaving the state.

The filibuster is an integral part of business as usual (for better or worse).

What these state legislators have done is different. They are precluding state business from being done.

That's why I have some concerns. You can be sure GOP legislators will do the same somewhere else at some other time. The behavior will escalate.

It always does.

39 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:00:52am

re: #37 Fozzie Bear

There is no functional difference between using one procedural trick to prevent a bill from being voted on, vs. using a different procedural trick to prevent a bill from being voted on. Both methods have the exact same effect.

The effect is the same but the context is very different.

Bills can pushed aside in the case of one 'procedural trick' however the business of government is shit down in the case of another.

Further, what are we to make of the Indiana situation? Their legislators say they won't come back unless a whole slew of bills are rescinded.

Talk about slippery slopes!

40 jamesfirecat  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:01:25am

re: #38 researchok

There is a distinction between real filibustering and legislators leaving the state.

The filibuster is an integral part of business as usual (for better or worse).

What these state legislators have done is different. They are precluding state business from being done.

That's why I have some concerns. You can be sure GOP legislators will do the same somewhere else at some other time. The behavior will escalate.

It always does.

Abraham Lincoln once JUMPED OUT a SECOND STORY window to try and prevent a Quorom from being achieved.

Don't tell me that this behavior is not a part of "business as usual" because it is, or at the very least it is a well respected American tradition.

And yes it will escalate as America becomes more polarized, but at least unlike the "gentalmen's filibuster" pulling this off takes some f***ing effort and commitment!

41 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:03:12am

re: #40 jamesfirecat

Abraham Lincoln once JUMPED OUT a SECOND STORY window to try and prevent a Quorom from being achieved.

Don't tell me that this behavior is not a part of "business as usual" because it is, or at the very least it is a well respected American tradition.

And yes it will escalate as America becomes more polarized, but at least unlike the "gentalmen's filibuster" pulling this off takes some f***ing effort and commitment!

I'm not really sure going to stay at a Ramada Inn in Illinois takes that much commitment, but point taken.

42 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:03:30am

re: #40 jamesfirecat

Abraham Lincoln once JUMPED OUT a SECOND STORY window to try and prevent a Quorom from being achieved.

Don't tell me that this behavior is not a part of "business as usual" because it is, or at the very least it is a well respected American tradition.

And yes it will escalate as America becomes more polarized, but at least unlike the "gentalmen's filibuster" pulling this off takes some f***ing effort and commitment!

I saw that earlier. That said, I wonder how many 'Lincolns' are around nowadays.

I don't think this is a good idea, though.

43 CarleeCork  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:04:30am

re: #6 jamesfirecat
The Public needs to hear about Walkergate.

44 jamesfirecat  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:04:34am

re: #41 SanFranciscoZionist

I'm not really sure going to stay at a Ramada Inn in Illinois takes that much commitment, but point taken.

It takes more commitment than standing up, saying "I filibuster this bill" and then sitting back down the way that it takes in the US Senate at the moment.

45 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:05:15am

re: #41 SanFranciscoZionist

I'm not really sure going to stay at a Ramada Inn in Illinois takes that much commitment, but point taken.

It does because if the public is not on your side you're going to get destroyed politically. It's high risk.

46 Kragarghazi  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:05:23am

re: #43 CarleeCork

The Public needs to hear about Walkergate.

You had to make this a Gate, didn't you?

47 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:05:56am

re: #41 SanFranciscoZionist

I'm not really sure going to stay at a Ramada Inn in Illinois takes that much commitment, but point taken.

The pool is closed for the season.

These are a tough lot.
//

48 Obdicut  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:05:57am

re: #38 researchok

There is a distinction between real filibustering and legislators leaving the state.

The filibuster is an integral part of business as usual (for better or worse).

/blockquote>

The use of the filibuster by the GOP in recent history is not business as usual.

Nor was the number of appointments they blocked.

What these state legislators have done is different. They are precluding state business from being done.

It's true. And moves like this-- and like the filibuster-- should be reserved for dire emergencies.

49 jaunte  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:06:03am

re: #46 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Could be a Walkeramada.

50 Obdicut  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:06:50am

re: #48 Obdicut

God I suck at formatting.

51 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:07:22am

re: #42 researchok

I saw that earlier. That said, I wonder how many 'Lincolns' are around nowadays.

I don't think this is a good idea, though.

The right never thinks it's a good idea to take a risk for workers' rights.

52 SpaceJesus  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:07:41am

hey now

[Link: www.theonion.com...]

53 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:08:10am

re: #48 Obdicut

It's true. And moves like this-- and like the filibuster-- should be reserved for dire emergencies.

I'll remind you of this comment next time state GOP legislators skip town and threaten not to come until bills they don't like are rescinded.

'In politics, 'dire emergencies' are in the eyes of the beholder.

54 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:08:14am

re: #52 SpaceJesus

hey now

[Link: www.theonion.com...]

The dominos are falling. You're next.

55 jamesfirecat  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:08:27am

re: #52 SpaceJesus

hey now

[Link: www.theonion.com...]

Look on the bright side Space Jesus, think about how much you're going to inherit!

56 albusteve  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:08:36am

re: #51 recusancy

The right never thinks it's a good idea to take a risk for workers' rights.

never never ever!
that's hardcore

57 Kragarghazi  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:08:53am

re: #52 SpaceJesus

hey now

[Link: www.theonion.com...]

"the fact that He's omnipotent really worked against us."

58 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:08:57am

re: #50 Obdicut

God I suck at formatting.

LOLOL

Not to worry.

59 Kragarghazi  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:09:14am

re: #55 jamesfirecat

Look on the bright side Space Jesus, think about how much you're going to inherit!

Nah, the meek are getting it all.

60 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:09:16am

re: #53 researchok

I'll remind you of this comment next time state GOP legislators skip town and threaten not to come until bills they don't like are rescinded.

'In politics, 'dire emergencies' are in the eyes of the beholder.

You're right. And if the GOP miscalculates the beholders will vote them out of a job.

61 CarleeCork  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:09:33am

re: #46 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

You had to make this a Gate, didn't you?


You say that like it's a bad thing.

62 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:10:14am

re: #51 recusancy

The right never thinks it's a good idea to take a risk for workers' rights.

Indiana had said they were taking the union busting off the table.

They won't come back until other bills are rescinded.

63 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:10:21am

re: #56 albusteve

never never ever!
that's hardcore

Do you have an example for me when the right took a risk for workers's rights?

64 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:10:22am
65 SpaceJesus  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:10:53am

re: #57 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

"Gotta give Him credit, though, God was defiant right up until the end. Scrappy bastard spit right in my face just before I pulled the trigger," added Sullivan, smiling.

66 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:10:58am

re: #62 researchok

Indiana had said they were taking the union busting off the table.

They won't come back until other bills are rescinded.

If they're overstepping they'll be a lot less democrats to flee the state after the next election.

67 Obdicut  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:11:05am

re: #53 researchok

I'll remind you of this comment next time state GOP legislators skip town and threaten not to come until bills they don't like are rescinded.

'In politics, 'dire emergencies' are in the eyes of the beholder.

So is everything in the world. I have no idea what point that is supposed to make.

Obviously, those people who think this legislation is fine, think the Democrats are being assholes by doing this. And so are the people who think that it may be wrong, but is tolerable.

It is, however, a highly visible form of protest, unlike the filibusters-- most of which are simply stated, rather than held.

68 Killgore Trout  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:11:12am
69 SpaceJesus  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:11:38am

re: #64 SanFranciscoZionist

oh yeah, i sent that to my mom. she was confused at first, but then after i explained what the onion is, she found it pretty awesome.

70 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:11:52am

re: #60 recusancy

You're right. And if the GOP miscalculates the beholders will vote them out of a job.

Agreed.

That said, in both WI and IN, it is dems who are in the minority. The voters had spoken.

71 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:13:35am

re: #70 researchok

Agreed.

That said, in both WI and IN, it is dems who are in the minority. The voters had spoken.

And the republicans are overreaching. If the dems have miscalculated and the populace is fine with the republicans overreaching then they'll pay the consequences by losing their job.

72 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:14:30am

re: #67 Obdicut

So is everything in the world. I have no idea what point that is supposed to make.

Obviously, those people who think this legislation is fine, think the Democrats are being assholes by doing this. And so are the people who think that it may be wrong, but is tolerable.

It is, however, a highly visible form of protest, unlike the filibusters-- most of which are simply stated, rather than held.

I can agree with that.

My point is I believe we will be seeing a lot more of this kind of behavior. If it were about one vote om one issue, well, that's one thing. What we are seeing though is something very different. The IN legislators want their minority agenda endorsed and will stay the states business until the state caves.

That's a whole other game.

73 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:15:34am

re: #68 Killgore Trout

Glenn Beck vs The Jews...
ADL: Glenn Beck's Comments About Reform Judaism Demonstrate "Bigoted Ignorance"

Thank you, ADL!!!

Jeez.

74 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:16:01am

re: #71 recusancy

And the republicans are overreaching. If the dems have miscalculated and the populace is fine with the republicans overreaching then they'll pay the consequences by losing their job.

The dems are already in the minority.

Are you saying it is appropriate for a minority to shut down government and hold the states business as hostage until their agenda is met?

75 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:16:07am

re: #72 researchok

I can agree with that.

My point is I believe we will be seeing a lot more of this kind of behavior. If it were about one vote om one issue, well, that's one thing. What we are seeing though is something very different. The IN legislators want their minority agenda endorsed and will stay the states business until the state caves.

That's a whole other game.

This is their "minority agenda" as you put it. [Link: www.indystar.com...]

76 jamesfirecat  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:16:49am

re: #74 researchok

The dems are already in the minority.

Are you saying it is appropriate for a minority to shut down government and hold the states business as hostage until their agenda is met?

Well they can do it on the federal level!

(See no DADT repeal or New Start until the upper class gets their tax cuts last December...)

77 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:17:25am

re: #75 recusancy

This is their "minority agenda" as you put it. [Link: www.indystar.com...]

Your point?

78 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:17:50am

re: #76 jamesfirecat

Well they can do it on the federal level!

(See no DADT repeal or New Start until the upper class gets their tax cuts last December...)

Yes- but government isn't shut down.

79 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:18:16am

re: #74 researchok

The dems are already in the minority.

Are you saying it is appropriate for a minority to shut down government and hold the states business as hostage until their agenda is met?

It's not their agenda. It's stopping a disastrous agenda put through by the right. If public sentiment turns against them they will begrudgingly return or become even more of a minority (so much so that even leaving the state will not stop business next time).

80 Decatur Deb  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:18:25am

re: #74 researchok

The dems are already in the minority.

Are you saying it is appropriate for a minority to shut down government and hold the states business as hostage until their agenda is met?

Were you off-planet during the 2010 senate?

81 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:18:42am

re: #78 researchok

Yes- but government isn't shut down.

Government isn't shut down here either.

82 Obdicut  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:18:49am

re: #72 researchok

The IN legislators want their minority agenda endorsed and will stay the states business until the state caves.

Nope. That is a false statement.

They are objecting to a specific set of bills that they see as absolutely dangerous to the future of the state.

I think they are overstepping on one of those.

They are not asking for their agenda to be endorsed.

83 abolitionist  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:19:14am

re: #63 recusancy

Do you have an example for me when the right took a risk for workers's rights?

Reagan, when the air traffic controllers were on strike? I suspect there may have been some workers who needed to fly in order to do their jobs.

84 jamesfirecat  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:19:39am

re: #78 researchok

Yes- but government isn't shut down.

How do you define the government being "shut down"?

85 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:19:54am

re: #83 abolitionist

Reagan, when the air traffic controllers were on strike? I suspect there may have been some workers who needed to fly in order to do their jobs.

lol

86 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:20:19am

re: #83 abolitionist

Reagan, when the air traffic controllers were on strike? I suspect there may have been some workers who needed to fly in order to do their jobs.

That's a pretty amazingly inept attempt at spin.

87 SanFranciscoZionist  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:21:39am

re: #86 Fozzie Bear

That's a pretty amazingly inept attempt at spin.

I do give it points for off-the-wall style.

88 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:22:02am

re: #79 recusancy

It's not their agenda. It's stopping a disastrous agenda put through by the right. If public sentiment turns against them they will begrudgingly return or become even more of a minority (so much so that even leaving the state will not stop business next time).

It's stopping a disastrous agenda put through by the right.

That is an opinion. If it were universally shared, the Dems would have controlled the state legislature.

Nevertheless, my objections are not predicated on politics. I do not want to see a Demlegislature held up because GOP reps absconded- and then decided to shut government down until their agenda was adopted.

It's just going to snowball in my opinion and taxpayers are going to have to foot the bill.

89 Obdicut  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:22:52am

re: #88 researchok

Why do you keep using the phrase 'their agenda was adopted'?

90 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:23:33am

re: #81 recusancy

Government isn't shut down here either.

They can't make a quorum in WI, I believe.

91 Obdicut  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:24:04am

re: #90 researchok

They can't make a quorum in WI, I believe.

That would mean the legislature, not the government, is shut down.

Enormous difference.

92 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:25:19am

re: #90 researchok

They can't make a quorum in WI, I believe.

How is that different from the federal government shutting down. In that case SS checks won't be sent out. Major services will halt. In Wisconsin all they can't do is have a quorum.

93 Renaissance_Man  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:25:47am

I have to say, I am inclined to agree in a reserved fashion with researchok on this one. (How's that for an endorsement?)

Yes, they aren't doing anything worse than has been done endlessly by Senate Republicans all of last year. Yes, they're doing it for good reasons in this case. But 'Republicans do it too and worse' isn't a good justification. We know that. When this becomes a pattern (and it will, because voting as huge blocs is becoming increasingly a problem), the process of government itself will suffer immeasurably. American government is already poorly equipped to do anything, and is much more geared to do nothing at all while taxpayers are slowly fleeced bit by bit by special interests. The system needs reform, and events like this highlight that.

If you want a government that serves the people, you have to be disconcerted at this emerging pattern. Even if it's being done in the best interests of the people now, you know it won't be that way for long.

94 iossarian  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:26:11am

re: #88 researchok


It's just going to snowball in my opinion and taxpayers are going to have to foot the bill.

Fuck, I was this close to agreeing with you, and then you have to throw in "taxpayers are going to have to foot the bill".

95 Fozzie Bear  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:26:55am

In the case of the federal government, it may literally be shut down temporarily.

The government of WI isn't shutting down because of missing representatives. It will merely not be making new laws for the time being.

HUGE difference.

96 Obdicut  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:27:38am

re: #93 Renaissance_Man

I think the Democrats shouldn't stay away on the issue of public funds going to private schools. I think that is a terrible, misguided policy, but I don't think it has the potential for irreparable harm in the same way that union-busting does.

97 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:27:57am

re: #95 Fozzie Bear

In the case of the federal government, it may literally be shut down temporarily.

The government of WI isn't shutting down because of missing representatives. It will merely not be making new laws for the time being.

HUGE difference.

And you are OK with that?

98 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:28:23am

re: #94 iossarian

Fuck, I was this close to agreeing with you, and then you have to throw in "taxpayers are going to have to foot the bill".

LOLOL

99 researchok  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:29:54am

re: #92 recusancy

How is that different from the federal government shutting down. In that case SS checks won't be sent out. Major services will halt. In Wisconsin all they can't do is have a quorum.

The legislatures business is legislating.

Are you saying you are OK with the dems staying out indefinitely?

100 jamesfirecat  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:30:45am

re: #99 researchok

The legislatures business is legislating.

Are you saying you are OK with the dems staying out indefinitely?

Are you OK with Republicans in the Senate Filibustering things for however long it takes for 60 votes to be found?

101 AK-47%  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:31:28am

re: #5 albusteve

a whole new way to govern...leave town!
I'm not sure what to think about that, but the results in this case hearten me...the political landscape is changing fast

Not new, a few years back I remember reading about Texas Republican state legislators leaving the state to prevent a vote on an electoral redistricting bill.

102 abolitionist  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:31:36am

re: #86 Fozzie Bear

That's a pretty amazingly inept attempt at spin.

One very amazingly inept attempt at spin is the movie Ground Control. As much as the story was about heroics, it was also about antiquated and fragile equipment and systems.

103 recusancy  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:32:08am

re: #99 researchok

The legislatures business is legislating.

Are you saying you are OK with the dems staying out indefinitely?

State services will not come to a screeching halt because a legislative quorum isn't made. I'm ok with it.

104 Kragarghazi  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:32:50am

Guess what, Union members pay fucking taxes to last time I checked.

105 Decatur Deb  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:32:53am

re: #101 ralphieboy

Not new, a few years back I remember reading about Texas Republican state legislators leaving the state to prevent a vote on an electoral redistricting bill.

No, those were also our guys, Dems. Lost that one.

106 dmon  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:39:01am

Eventually the legislators will return and have to vote. Meanwhile they have slowed down a bill that any objective person would agree, was not such a dire emergency that it had to be passed in just a few days, their stalling has given the public a week or so to voice their opinion. After seeing the response if the GOP still wants to pass the bill as written they will.

I don't see a down side to allowing the public to have their voices be heard, when you have a policy proposed that will affect a large percentage of your population for decades, a week of discussion is hardly unreasonable..

107 dmon  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 11:46:56am

I remember a US Senator that fillibustered an unemployment extension for millions of American families because he was missing a basketball game. I wish he had been forced to leave the country to stop the vote.

108 RogueOne  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 1:57:48pm

re: #7 ggt

Why do all state politicians flee to Illinois?

They have to go to a state with a dem gov or run the risk of getting picked up by the state police and brought back.

109 RogueOne  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 2:00:46pm

re: #11 researchok

I see your point. My concern is that we will see more of this, more often.

The stage is being set and that concerns me.

This is the 4th time in less than 20 years that they've done this, 3x by dems and 1x by repubs. It's moved beyond stupid. The RTW law is just one of 11 issues they want to go away. This is a smart tactical move by the governor. Every other bill they're complaining about was an issue run on by the gov and the state repubs, this one they can afford to toss to the side in order to change the argument. I said earlier they might win the battle on RTW but they're going to lose the war. They aren't going to be able to just stay away and keep the governor from getting the bills he wants and ran on.

110 RogueOne  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 2:02:42pm

re: #24 recusancy

He busted public sector unions the day after he took office. He thinks the way to fix social security is to raise the retirement age because as he states people are going to live well passed 100 and "be replacing body parts like we do tires".

So did the presidents debt commission. Weird that, all that time and effort put into a debt commission and the president didn't even try to get any of their suggestions enacted. It's almost like he's not serious about the debt issue......

111 RogueOne  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 2:05:31pm

re: #100 jamesfirecat

Are you OK with Republicans in the Senate Filibustering things for however long it takes for 60 votes to be found?

Using the rules laid out for you is fair game. In this instance no where in the indiana code does it say you should bail out of state if you don't have the numbers to stop a bill you don't like. 4x since 1994. It's time Indiana does something to ensure this kind of crap comes to a stop.

112 Obdicut  Wed, Feb 23, 2011 2:19:33pm

re: #111 RogueOne

Using the rules laid out for you is fair game. In this instance no where in the indiana code does it say you should bail out of state if you don't have the numbers to stop a bill you don't like. 4x since 1994. It's time Indiana does something to ensure this kind of crap comes to a stop.

Don't you mean no where in the Indiana code does it say you can't bail out of state if you don't have the numbers to stop a bill you don't like?

That'd be congruent with the previous statement.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
A Closer Look at the Eastman State Bar DecisionTaking a few minutes away from work things to read through the Eastman decision. As I'm sure many of you know, Eastman was my law school con law professor. I knew him pretty well because I was also running in ...
KGxvi
2 hours ago
Views: 71 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 1