Seeking Alpha

Democratic senators who fled Wisconsin to thwart restrictions on public employee unions say they...

Democratic senators who fled Wisconsin to thwart restrictions on public employee unions say they plan to come back to work soon, betting that the curbs are so unpopular they'll taint Republicans. "If you think this is a bad bill for Republicans, why didn't you stand up in the chamber and debate us about it three weeks ago?" the Senate's majority leader says.
Comments (16)
  • Ohrama
    , contributor
    Comments (504) | Send Message
     
    The comments appearing in SA and elsewhere seem to convey me the impression that the common folks are up against the public employee unions etc. If that is the case, how come there are not thousands of folks cheering the decision of the Wisconsin Governor to counteract the demonstrations of the unionized employees? After all the public employees comprise only 15% or so of the working population. Perhaps the other 85% need a union (of the non-governmental workers!) and highly paid union officials to cheer lead them!
    7 Mar 2011, 02:52 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3415) | Send Message
     
    Maybe they have jobs that require them to be in attendance.
    7 Mar 2011, 02:55 PM Reply Like
  • wyostocks
    , contributor
    Comments (7410) | Send Message
     
    They don't have a job where they just don't show up.
    They (the demonstrators) really showed the people just how full of bull they are when they cry "it's all for the children" What phonies..................
    BTW, how are things today at the DNC?
    7 Mar 2011, 02:59 PM Reply Like
  • lafano
    , contributor
    Comments (221) | Send Message
     
    What a terrible way of negotiating a proposed bill...these so called senators should be ashamed. People voted them to be present and to do the peoples work, otherwise just quit. What a terrible example for our children...if you don't like the deal just walk away. This is nothing but a terrible "show" and another poor example of American politics. Simply disgraceful and its resulting in more lay-offs.
    7 Mar 2011, 03:06 PM Reply Like
  • Good Captain
    , contributor
    Comments (454) | Send Message
     
    Another chapter in "Profiles in Courage". As to your question, I can't and won't speak for others on what they did or didn't do but I think the combination of the ruckus in the Capitol and the absence of those who could and should have raised a more appropriate "ruckus" given their political tendencies, I think their actions obviates the need for a counter-response. The two sides could not be clearer. May the public choose wisely.
    7 Mar 2011, 03:08 PM Reply Like
  • Terry330
    , contributor
    Comments (866) | Send Message
     
    “The U.S. government is not broke,” said Marc Chandler, global head of currency strategy for Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. in New York. “There’s no evidence that the market is treating the U.S. government like it’s broke.”

     

    The U.S. today is able to borrow at historically low interest rates, paying 0.68 percent on a two-year note that it had to offer at 5.1 percent before the financial crisis began in 2007. Financial products that pay off if Uncle Sam defaults aren’t attracting unusual investor demand. And tax revenue as a percentage of the economy is at a 60-year low, meaning if the government needs to raise cash and can summon the political will, it could do so.
    7 Mar 2011, 03:15 PM Reply Like
  • TAJerrell
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
     
    I believe that the senators' absence has served its purpose- catching the public's attention long enough to more fully understand the governor's proposal. Part of the democratic process is to use lawful means to make one's case. In this instance, had there been no requirement for quorum, the proposal to strip bargaining rights would not have been examined so closely. Be careful for what you ask, if you get it, you own it.
    7 Mar 2011, 03:22 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3415) | Send Message
     
    Yeah. To hell with government via elections. Government by minority party insurrection is infinitely preferable.

     

    Elections have consequences? Apparently they actually don't.

     

    In the future, I hope the (for their sake) Democrats get a quorum majority in WI, because they've set the precedent.
    7 Mar 2011, 03:31 PM Reply Like
  • wyostocks
    , contributor
    Comments (7410) | Send Message
     
    "Be careful for what you ask, if you get it, you own it."
    I assume you are referring to Obamacare.
    7 Mar 2011, 03:38 PM Reply Like
  • mra1385
    , contributor
    Comments (24) | Send Message
     
    The senators acted lawfully. If the state doesn't like it, it can reduce the quorum requirement. If the senators were republicans, you wouldn't have a problem.
    7 Mar 2011, 08:31 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3415) | Send Message
     
    You have an interesting take on the definition of 'lawful'. Not only are they going against the will of the people who voted last November, but they are also breaking Senate rules (Senators may be compelled to return to the floor, and they were, but did not).

     

    I didn't like the vote on Obamacare, but I would have liked it less had the Republican Senators decided to not show up. So yes, I would have a problem with it.

     

    Can't change the quorum requirement unless you have a quorum to vote. And, as we've seen, that would never happen.
    7 Mar 2011, 08:42 PM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3528) | Send Message
     
    The democrats did the same thing here in Texas two years ago to block a bill requiring identification at the polling booth. They knew they'd lose too many ghost voters if people had to show i.d. It was the same game we played in Chicago when I was a democrat; if a registered voter didn't show up, we voted for them.
    7 Mar 2011, 08:57 PM Reply Like
  • tigersam
    , contributor
    Comments (1711) | Send Message
     
    Take them to the jail directly.
    7 Mar 2011, 03:45 PM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3528) | Send Message
     
    In a business situation, the owner of the business negotiates with the union and is responsible for fulfilling his obligations under the contract. With the rise of corporate business, managers did the negotiation and the owners (stockholders) suffered if the managers made a bad deal with the union and the company went under. We need to get back to the direct negotiation between the payers and the payees. So let's just have the taxpayers vote to approve or disapprove
    7 Mar 2011, 03:54 PM Reply Like
  • lafano
    , contributor
    Comments (221) | Send Message
     
    These officials should be fined and there should be a 'recall' on their elections. They need to be held accountable for their actions, which simply encouraged needless civil unrest and silly rally's (many promoted by communists and socialists) and the defacing and destruction of property in the capital in Madison.
    7 Mar 2011, 04:08 PM Reply Like
  • headlocal
    , contributor
    Comments (104) | Send Message
     
    Remember when CAPITAL FLIGHT meant rich South Americans flying over the Andes in small planes loaded with cash before the Peronistas "liberated" it.

     

    Luckily, we now have evidence of how today's WI Dems behave...wait until the Wisconsin pension underfunding hits, and they'll all be cluttering the Champagne-Urbana rental market.

     

    On the positive side, I know how to keep them out of state during the next election. The new watchword: ABSENTEE CANDIDATE.
    And, it'll make their fundraising efforts a real chore, especially when any contributors get no access and bad publicity.
    7 Mar 2011, 08:14 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)