Two components of Act 10 - the budget repair bill - were deemed unconstitutional today, according to a federal judge's ruling.
Specifically, unions challenged whether or not dues can be automatically deducted from public employee paychecks and that unions must certify with an absolute majority.
The lawsuit was filed by a coalition of unions shortly after Act 10 was passed last year.
Saying those provisions violate union members' First Amendment rights because public safety employee unions are not subject to the same restrictions, US District Judge William M. Conley issued his opinion Friday. He rejected assertions that the law violates any equal protection under the law clauses, but he ordered that automatic dues withdrawals be reinstated by May 31.
In a story from jsonline.com, Conley's ruling is quoted, in part, as saying, "So long as the State of Wisconsin continues to afford ordinary certification and dues deductions to mandatory public safety unions with sweeping bargaining rights, there is no rational basis to deny those rights to voluntary general unions with severely restricted bargaining rights."
State Rep. Sandy Pasch (D-Whitefish Bay) said in a news release that today's ruling serves as a reminder of Wisconsin Republicans' "unprecedented power grabs" this session.
"Unnecessarily dividing our state and unconstitutionally dismantling workers’ rights are not examples of responsible governance – they are examples of extreme arrogance," Pasch said. "The extreme, divisive decisions made by Gov. Walker and legislative Republicans threaten to undermine Wisconsin’s longstanding traditions of openness and transparency and damage the well-being of our working families."
Rep. Robin Vos (R-Rochester) is Co-Chair of the Joint Committee on Finance, and he issued a statement with Assembly Majority Leader Rep. Scott Suder (R-Abbotsford) saying the reforms of Act 10 will stand the test of time.
“While we’re disappointed that two parts of the law were struck down by a liberal judge from Dane County, appointed by President Barack Obama, the fact is he ruled almost all of Act 10 constitutional. We are hopeful that the ruling will be appealed but are pleased that the first federal court test confirms that Act 10 is valid," they wrote. "The reforms in Act 10 have undeniably helped the state move forward past difficult financial times. The reforms were used by local governments and school districts to balance their budgets. Together with our jobs agenda, Act 10 helped turn the tide and move the state toward a more prosperous future for its citizens.”
Rep. Cory Mason (D-Racine), the ranking Democrat on the Joint Committee on Finance said the judge's decision is a win for public employees.
"The decision is a vindication for workers and their right to be in a union without discrimination," he told Patch Friday.
: "On the other hand, the study also found that Gore probably would have won, by a range of 42 to 171 votes out of 6 million cast, had there been a broad recount of all disputed ballots statewide. However, Gore never asked for such a recount. The Florida Supreme Court ordered only a recount of so-called "undervotes," about 62,000 ballots where voting machines didn’t detect any vote for a presidential candidate."
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-29/republicans-tampered-with-court-audio-in-obama-attack-ad.html Republicans Tampered With Court Audio in Obama Attack Ad By Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Greg Stohr - Mar 30, 2012 10:47 AM CT A Republican Party Internet advertisement altered the audio of U.S. Supreme Court (1000L) oral arguments in an attack on President Barack Obama’s health-care law. In a web ad circulated this week, the Republican National Committee excerpts the opening seconds of the March 27 presentation by Obama’s top Supreme Court lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli. In the ad, he is heard struggling for words and twice stopping to drink water. .....
If the dues deductions were truly voluntary, as you're claiming them to be, then wouldn't there be an opt-in option as opposed to a complex and complicated opt-out process? You really need to stop living over on the Daily Kos my friend, as it's really starting to effect your deductive skills. Try again!
"... tired, mean spirited rants" and "... two ex-wives and kids in jail...." REALLY??? As my good friend Steve ® has already pointed out, it would appear that you're an ironically in denial hypocrite, but such is life - it is what we make of it! BTW - Hoffa has no ex-wives or children to speak of, yet alone any direct family members currently incarcerated. Are such unfounded accusations a part of that infamous liberal strategy known as projecting?
What does this have to do with portions of Act 10 being ruled unconstitutional by a liberal activist hack federal judge?
I thought I warned you about personal attacks here - STOP IT!!! Or, prepare to be visited by some Teamsters for the concrete shoe treatment!
Looks like maybe that touched a nerve? :) Nice response. Thanks, Randy.
But see, that is where your voluntary deduction ends. If they have a choice, they wouldn't pay it. It will be interesting see what happens at the end of the current contracts.
So the current status of the law, after the injunction goes into effect, is that the union still can't force people to join or pay dues (or "agency fees" they're sometimes called), but people who are members can, if they say choose, voluntarily have their dues deducted from their paychecks. But because the union's ability to enter a contract calling for automatically withdrawing the dues of ALL members from their paychecks has ended (because they can only contract over base wages now), union members will have to opt in to having their dues withdrawn. Hope that helps.
Take a guess!! Connect those dots! I know you can do it correctly. But, I also know it would be difficult for you to actually type it out. Jason Easley @politicususa Scott Walker Tastes Defeat As Part Of Union Busting Bill Gets Struck Down http://www.politicususa.com/walker-union-busting-court/ via @politicususa #wearewi #p2 #p2b #topprog
No, it's not - did you even read the pdf you linked to? Here's the entire body of page 35: "C. Governmental Interest in Selectively Subsidizing Public Unions In defending against plaintiffs’ First Amendment challenge, defendants exclusively argue that the prohibition on the withholding of union dues from paychecks of general employees does not implicate the First Amendment. Having rejected defendants’ position, the court now must determine whether the State of Wisconsin has demonstrated “a rational basis to justify the ban on . . . payroll deductions” and, if so, whether plaintiffs have advanced evidence of invidious viewpoint discrimination. Given its position that none is required, the State proffered no justification for the ban on dues deductions from paychecks.17 One might turn to the justification already discussed in the Equal Protection context -- that extending the ban further would result" So, where exactly is Fitz's name? Oh, that's right, it's in the lowly footnote, just as Hoffa stated. morninmist - 0 Hoffa - 1
"With the passage of 2011 Wisconsin Act 10, denominated the “Budget Repair Bill,” the State of Wisconsin took a sweeping right turn from a half century of developments in the rights of its public employees to unionize, collectively bargain and collect union dues.1" In all honesty, the remainder of the opinion also reads more like a DPW propaganda piece than a federal judicial opinion. I've never seen anything so blatantly partisan coming from a federal court outside the 9th Circuit. Simply amazing. You can tell how the judge is going to rule just by reading the opening sentence. If this is the kind of fairness and impartiality that we can expect from Obama appointees, then we should all be fearful of what four more years will produce. This is a warning and a wake up call - Obama and his politically activist judges need to go NOW!!!
NOTHING!
Wouldn't it be useful if there could be a rational discussion of, say, the statistically undeniable mess our health are system is in, and what could be done to fix it, rather than rant at each other? Or, for that matter, how to help school systems deal with the children who are homeless, living in poverty, or otherwise seriously disadvantaged? Surely there are people out there, somewhere, who think independently, and don't just parrot what their party tells them???
We must, and I emphasize must, improve education. It is not a coincidence that as the school district goes, so does the community. Because 27% of our children don't graduate (1 in 2 African Americans), we have more and more people destine to poverty. Let's put that in real numbers. Every year, RUSD is sending out to the world, 405 children who don't have a high school diploma. Because a higher percentage are African-American, with many already coming from poor homes, the inner-city of Racine is growing. Crime rates rise, employers can't find decent employees so they move, and the homeless number grows. It is a vicious cycle. We can't except excuses from the school district anymore, and the rest of the communites in Unified are also affected. We can't have the leaders of the school district saying that poor people are unteachable. If they throw in the towel, it hurts everyone. We must demand better.
Democratic governor candidate Tom Barrett: I would restore labor powers http://centralwisconsinhub.wausaudailyherald.com/article/20120401/WDH010403/204010445/Democratic-governor-candidate-Tom-Barrett-would-restore-labor-powers?odyssey=mod|mostview Apr. 1, 2012 | Newly announced Democratic gubernatorial candidate Tom Barrett said Saturday he will support restoring collective bargaining for thousands of union workers if he beats Gov. Scott Walker in a recall election. Barrett spoke to reporters before he gave a speech at the Marathon County Democratic Spring Dinner at the Wausau Labor Temple, 318 S. Third St. It was the Milwaukee mayor's first public appearance since he announced Friday his intention to run for governor. ......Barrett said Walker "started a civil war" when he introduced a plan last year to restrict the ability for public unions to collectively bargain. The proposal, included in a budget-repair bill, led to protests in spring 2011 in Madison and recall elections that so far have removed two Republican state senators from office. "The governor had an opportunity to compromise, and rather than compromise, he wanted to kick the workers to the curb," Barrett said.....
So Barrett is going to run on the hypocrite card - I used Walker's tools to balance my budget as mayor of Milwaukee, but if elected governor, the first thing I'll do is take away those same tools from my successor. That's a bold strategy - I guess we'll see if it pays off for him or not. WOW - the one thing Barrett had going for him is that he didn't pander to the public sector unions the way Falk did. But, it appears as if he just flushed that card down the toilet! Message - the DPW is clearly owned by the public sector unions! Thanks for info morninmist - did you suddenly wake up and change sides or something, or did you honestly see this as good news for the recallers? EPIC FAIL!!!
http://elections.wispolitics.com/2012/03/barrett-walker-started-civil-war.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed Barrett, who on Tuesday seeks to be elected to his third term as Milwaukee’s mayor, told a spring meeting of about 150 Marathon County Democrats at a labor temple in Wausau that Walker was a “divide and conquer” leader who dropped a “bomb” on the state with his successful plan to eliminate collective bargaining for most public workers. ..... Barrett called Walker a politician interested in “kicking his political enemies when they were down” instead of trying to find solutions to problems. “We all know what happens when someone drops a bomb. They either obliterate a village or people fight like they have never fought before,” Barrett said. “And that is what happened here in the state of Wisconsin.” Walker decided rather than focus on jobs, he focused on “ripping this state apart,” Barrett said. “For the first time in my lifetime, we can’t talk politics in this state without getting mad at each other.” Walker cares only about himself and his “ideological war,” Barrett said, blaming the governor for failing to resolve differences over a new mining law and a venture capital bill. “He cared about going around the country delivering his gospel according to Scott Walker.” ..
You will notice Barrett is attacking Walker-not other Dems. That is good. Onto the recall election.
Can you please help me with this? http://wisupnorth.com/2012/03/where-was-tom-barrett-before-the-vote/