Rethinking Act 10

Has it dawned on anyone else that the reason Wisconsin is starting to hear about including police and fire employees in Act 10 is because the Supreme Court might rule it is not constitutional to separate one group of public workers from another?

I stand behind my original argument as to why Act 10 is law. The one big hurdle of common sense even a liberal can’t drive around is that our constitution would not allow the Secretary of State the right to veto a law made by the legislature and signed by the governor. But, the only outstanding case is one that addresses equal protection. My gut says the Governor may have been told the law is fine as long as it is applied to all public employees equally.

And so he’s willing to apply it to all public employees equally. In the last two years most of Wisconsin has been acting as if the law is in place, and that has provided some relief to local and school budgets. The biggest hurdles in court have been passed. Union members have to opt in to have dues withdrawn from a paycheck. The method for passing the bill was upheld. (I think that was one of the state suits.) And, the biggie, voters in the state of Wisconsin said Governor Scott Walker’s law was swell when they kept him through the recall process.

Yes, I see a timeline setting up where the Supreme Court will rule, then both sides of the legislature need to dance quickly, and then the Governor signs it again. This time it creates a national headline that launches about the time of Walker’s book and his presidential campaign.

I’m still not wild about Walker as a presidential candidate. I wouldn’t mind the man staying home long enough to be a governor. The solid Republican majorities in the legislator could make for some great legislation protecting voting integrity and unwinding prior bad legislation. Kind of makes me sad to think that’s all being abandoned in favor of one man’s ambition.

Comments

  1. Jerry Hanson says:

    Your last statement accurately portrays Wisconsin today: “ONE MANS AMBITION………not care or compassion for people, their rights, nor fairness.”……. “If you have men who will exclude any of GOD’s creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity, you will have men who will deal likewise with their fellow men.”
    St. Francis of Assisi

  2. The solid Republican majorities in the legislator could make for some great legislation protecting voting integrity and unwinding prior bad legislation. —-

    its been three years, they can start at anytime!

  3. So much for that theory.

    http://media.jrn.com/documents/act10orderdismiss.pdf

    What lawsuits are left? The one in the State Supreme Court?

  4. Well this is an interesting post … and not unfamiliar to me… I said this from the very beginning .. Scott Walker is about Scott Walker… It’s not about good government .. .it’s about what’s right for Scott Walker… it just happened that the two came together with Act 10. And as it turned out a public mandate for Act 10 stood after the 2nd election. Those against Act 10 don’t get it or have a personal stake in it. In spite of Scott Walker the good guys win for a change. I didn’t vote for him the first time but I sure did the 2nd time. But with all that said .. .I’m still miffed in a major way about de-railing the train between Milw and Madison. A battle of egos and little brains winning out … two steps forward… one step back.

  5. As a staunch opponent of ACT10 because I have to deal with it on a dialy basis….please tell me what I am not getting…..

    Also curious as to how the 2nd election was a mandate on ACT10 also

  6. @Wilson828 – The train was just a bad idea. Lots of hype on both sides, how can we turn away ‘free’ money, which in reality isn’t free at all. The bottom line was, it wasn’t going to be a high speed train. It still miffs me that the majority didn’t bother to read the engineering reports, or research on ‘high speed’ trains. There were a number of issues, but the most glaring to me were 1) the train wasn’t going to stop anywhere near Madison, and the cab ride to downtown Madison from the stop would be almost as expensive as the train ride itself. 2) True ‘high speed’ trains don’t share rails with freight. One it’s dangerous, two it’s fraught with delays and slowdowns due to traffic and inadequate rail design. Successful high speed trains (many of which were pointed to as examples) have their own dedicated rail line. That wasn’t happening here. 3) As a result of 2, It wasn’t going to be a high speed train at all. Studies showed that average speed between Milwaukee and Madison would be less than 80 MPH. High speed trains are defined as those that average 110 MPH at a minimum. Not even close.

    I think a high speed train between Milwaukee and Madison is a great idea, but if we are going to suck funds from the public trough we all pay into, let’s do it right.

  7. Oh my goodness. It’s almost like having my blog back! Hey you guys. Thanks.