Surprise! UPDATE:Supreme Court doesn't care whether open meetings were violated; budget repair is law

Fox 6 Milwaukee read from the statement of the Court (I guess that's what it was) that Republicans did NOT violate the open meetings law (Please see FINAL UPDATE below) --so I guess the collective bargaining bill is law.  Gosh, who'dathunk the WI Supreme Court (aka David Prosser and the Conservatives) would have ruled that way?

FINAL UPDATE: I'm not changing all the subsequent "Updates" here (to keep the integrity of what I've already posted, such as it is), but there obviously was some confusion about the Court's actions among a lot of sources.  As it stands right now, it appears that the Courts did say the committee of legislators was NOT subject to open meetings laws, making Sumi's actions (and those of any lower court) void. (JS Online)

UPDATE 1: The law was upheld because the Court said Sumi did not have authority to void it, so it will go into effect.  However, it still seems pretty evident that the Republicans likely violated the open meetings law, but, unfortunately, the Court didn't even consider that. 

Since the process of the bill's passage into law still is still sullied because of the undecided open meetings question (which actually Sumi said there was a violation), it makes it all the more laughable to read the hot air of Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald: "We've been saying since day one that Republicans passed the budget repair bill correctly, so frankly this isn't much of a surprise. We followed the law when the bill was passed, simple as that." (Wisconsin State Journal). 

Yeah, keep telling yourself that, Fitzgerald.


UPDATE, PART 2: It seems even the Court has trouble making a clear decision. 

From the Wisconsin State Journal:  The court, however, declined to step into the dispute over whether the March 9 conference committee meeting violated the state's open meetings law, leaving it to the Legislature to set its own rules.
"In the posting of notice that was done, the Legislature relied on its interpretation of its own rules of proceeding," the court wrote. "The court declines to review the validity of the procedure used to give notice of the joint committee on conference."

From WisPolitics: A brief description on the court's site said the court concluded the Legislature did not violate a provision in the Wisconsin Constitution that the doors of each house shall be open except when public welfare requires secrecy.

From JS Online: The court found a committee of lawmakers was not subject to the state's open meetings law, and so did not violate that law when they hastily approved the measure and made it possible for the Senate to take it up.

I'm sure it will be all sorted out, but it still smells.  There are numerous challenges outstanding against the collective bargaining law, including "bad faith" negotiating claims (which Walker knows something about  from his days as Milwaukee County Exec).  It's a long way from over.

More slime from WI GOP: Call for "extraordinary session"

For only the tenth time (and the first since 1993), Wisconsin's Legislature will be meeting in "extraordinary session," this time to pass Walker's state budget.  Extraordinary session, according to the State Legislative Reference Bureau can be called by the Legislature to "focus its attention on specific legisltion it wants to expedite." 

And there's nothing the Republicans would love to do more than get this business-loving, people-hating budget passed (including, it now looks like, Walker's stripping of collective bargaining) before they could lose the Senate majority following this summer's recall elections.  In extraordinary session, regular rules can be suspended, and according to Rep. Mark Pocan (see Pocan's YouTube explanation in yesterday's post), debate and amendments can be limited, and Democracy, really, is stomped on.  Senate Chief Clerk Rob Marchant, however, says it would neither limit amendments or debate, but would allow quick preliminary approval from each house on the same day, and then only require a simple majority, instead of two-thirds, to advance the bill.  Regardless, this budget does not seem to require emergency-type passage.

 Assistant Assembly Minority Leader Donna Seidel (D-Wausau) said she was concerned about the use of the extraordinary session to pass the budget. “It appears to be part of their strategy that anything can happen and anything can be rushed through with little or no scrutiny,” she said (JS Online).

Yeah, it sure does look like that, doesn't it?

You can read a great summary of the "Budget Basics" from DefendWisconisn.org (thanks to Solidarity Wisconsin). Or, if you're well-versed in politispeak, you can review the entire budget here (thanks to Steve Hanson at Uppity Wisconsin).

Protestors will be out in force.  My union, WEAC, is calling for membership to join protests  (11AM on the Capitol Square and 5:30 PM at State Street corner) of a budget that includes severe cuts to education, local government, the environment, and the poor.

Oh, yeah, and collective bargaining.

Extraordinarily power-hungry, greedy, and compliant Republican legislators call for an extraodinary session.  Come to think of it, I guess that's not so extraordinary at all.

For an extraordinarily detailed and informative site about all things budgetary, check out the Wisconsin Budget Project (thanks to Becky and Mark for the link)

More GOP dirty tricks on tap as WI budget looms?

It promises to be a busy week in our state capital.  Perhaps even "extraordinary" (more on that later) as Walker's budget comes to the floor. Walker's right-hand puppet and chief alarmist, Administration Secretary Michael Huebsch (the man behind the collective bargaining bill) told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel last week, "We are anticipating, we are preparing for the height of what we saw in the early part of March. A mass crowd that actually rushed the Capitol." Huebsch continued, "I am preparing for that. I hope we never get to that again."

The protests have been honest reaction to dishonest practice.  And that about which Huebsch espouses would not happen without things such as illegal meetings, legislation passed in the middle of the night, content of bills not shared (with the populace or even with other legislators, for goodness sakes).  The people of Wisconsin are too intelligent, too dedicated, too rooted in the tradition of fairness throughout our state's history not to protest against injustice.

But it sounds like the Republicans may reach into their bag of dirty tricks again, through something called "extraordinary session," in which normal channels of debate and legislative process can be circumvented to rush through legislation. Here's the Friday video blog of State Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Madison) with a great explanation (thanks to Jenny at WEAC's facebook):

So don't worry Mike Huebsch, there will be protests, just as there were several dozen protestors at a Walker business schmooze on Friday, just as dozens of souls camp in Walkerville every night in our capital.  How intense those protests will be, however, I think will pretty much depend on you and your friends, especially if they put in collective bargaining restrictions.

You know, it's possible the protests just may be extraordinary.

A different take on Walker's GOP

Introducing a new page here at MisLeading Wisconsin: Not Necessarily the Blog, a satirical, “Onion”-like feature about our friends in Madison.  The page tagline is “The first paragraph is actual news, the rest…not so much.”  Page author jh’s self-description: “I’m part Tina Fey, part Jon Stewart, part Irish, and a tiny part Dutch, from my mother’s side.”   Seeing as it’s running on this blog, I realize that any recommendation is self-serving, but I think it’s pretty funny.  Hopefully, you might, too.  Thanks for checking it out.

WI Republicans ARE up for sale

An enormous bombshell hit Madison Republican legislators today, the revelation that one of their own, Rep. Chris Kapenga (R-Delafield) said in a note--not suggested, but said--the reason firefighter and police unions aren't subject to upcoming collective bargaining changes is that "the unions have bought out several people and we can not get it put through." (from Daniel Bice of the Journal Sentinel). That phrase, once again, is "bought out."

Bought.

Out.

When given a chance to clarify his note, Kapenga said he stood by his statement. And it's an incredibly serious accusation.  Kapenga is saying Wisconsin policy-making is, in fact, up for sale.  And that his party is the one that's selling it.

What would be the upside for the Republicans? Walker's initial excuse for excluding police and firefighter unions was supposedly to ensure public safety.  But could it be payback for endorsements from Milwaukee's powerful police and firefighter unions (two of the few that backed Walker's gubernatorial bid)?  Coincidentally, there have been a couple major isues recently that have benefitted those departments: Senate Republicans seemingly going against their standard line by promoting pay for suspended police officers , and the GOP proposal to end residency requirements for, hmmmm, Milwaukee police and firefighters.

With earlier corporate giveaways--some, such as Walker's JobFundsNow, even too much for staunch Walkerites like Sen. Glenn Grothman (R-West Bend)--it's easy to see how people could believe Wisconsin's policy-making may be up for sale. 

Now, even one of the Republicans' own says it's so.

Sure, it's illegal, but we're WI Republicans!

Another week, another likely illegal proposal from the Republicans.  Now, to add to the indignity of not being able to find work, the Joint Finance Committee endorsed a proposal (in the budget, mind you) to require the unemployed to pee into a cup, so to speak.  If a drug test is failed, or if the individual even refuses to submit to this affront, unemployment benefits could be suspended for a year (JS Online).  A spokesman for the US Labor Department said, "Requiring a person to take a drug test as a condition of eligibility is not related to the 'fact or cause' of a person's unemployment and would raise an issue under federal law."   And, in the same article, the ACLU rep says such testing should only be related to business or health or safety-related issues.

And this is in the same week in which running fake candidates in recall elections may not be illegal, nor are once-GOP-criticized late night meetings  to approve things such as vouchers in Green Bay, and in the week the lock-step conservative Supreme Court may not find open meetings violations illegal. 

Whew!  That's a busy week.  Even for Republicans.

And it's only Tuesday.

WI Supreme Court: If I were a betting man...

Well, the WI Supreme Court started hearing arguments as to whether or not it should take on the collective bargaining atrocity of Walker and his pals.  And, if they do, hmmmm, which way would they rule?

Not surprisingly,the four conservatives on the bench banded together during the hearing (to be fair, as did the other three justices).  But, surprisingly to me, it doesn't appear they were challenging how the bill was advanced in an illegal meeting, but rather they were challenging Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi's order blocking implementation of the bill as law. Conservative Justice Michael Gableman asked, during what the Journal Sentinel called "aggressive" questioning, if a judge can stop a law from being published, could a judge stop a senator from even introducing a bill?

That just sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?  Wasn't this about the legality of the bill's creation and passage in a violation of the open meetings law?  If the meeting wasn't legal, would anything else matter?

Walker's Deputy Attorney General Kevin St. John actually did address the issue of the open meetings law by basically saying the open meetings law doesn't apply to the Legislature, which was echoed by conservative Justice Patience Roggensack's comments. St. John went on to mention that the Legislature has the right to lock doors, and that even letting in one member of the public would satisfy open meetings requirements.

Either way this falls, it's a scary thing--the Court agreeing with this, or the Legislators in power actually believing what they say about open meetings.  Attorney Lester Pines, who is representing State Senate Minority Leader Mark Miller (D-Madison) says, “I don’t hold the view that the court makes its decisions solely based on ideology.”

I wouldn't bet on it. 

And, at this juncture, I'm not sure it would even matter.