Looks like someone has put the lie to the claim that Walker campaigned on an end to collective bargaining. He's just a liar.

Labor is absolutely correct that this is a nationwide fight. Already it's going on in Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana, Ohio, and Tennessee that I know of, and probably other places as well. These measures are in different forms in the different states, and whatever measure is finally successful will undoubtedly become the template wherever Republicans hold power.

If you haven't gotten it yet that isn't for lack of evidence...this is a coordinated effort by the Conservative Movement to take collective bargaining rights away from Americans.

What a creep Walker really is. A petty dictator threatening family's livelihood if he does not get his way.

This Walker clown is creating another Egypt ...i say by April the USA will see the same riots ...and the way we do business /government will change drastically...no more wealthy senate/congress etc ...the people will take the government back !

Why is no one asking is if all these governors colluded to deny American workers bargaining rights? And who is behind it?

Fact: Public employees are paid far more and receive far better benefits than private sector employees.
Fact: The higher salaries and benefits enjoyed by public sector employees is a result of government not having the incentives to negociate like the private sector does.
Fact: Public sector and especially teachers have held the American people (especially children) hostage too many times
Fact: It is the American people working in the private sector who pay for the higher salaries and benefits enjoyed by public sector employees.

It is time to for the American people to take control of this situation. The situation in Wisconsin should serve as a model for the rest of the state, local, and federal government. It is time for the American people to put an end to the higher salaries and benefits paid to public employees.

We must continue to VOTE THEM OUT!!!

Fact: You are siding with billionaires who are against the middle class.

" BADER " STATE ? In the midwest, Wisconsin is referred to as the "Badger State" you know, with a letter G.

I guess First Read must have gotten their education by being home schooled. Appears to be the kind of education all of Wisconsin is heading for, privatized or home schooled. You think the reading and writing skills of students were poor before we decided that we hated public school teachers, wait until all the qualified ones decide that they don't need to teach in Wisconsin.

Might want to fix the headline to 'Badger'.... someone might think the Supreme Court is involved *chuckle*

Duh101 has it right. Persistent assaults on teachers will result in well-qualified persons choosing other careers.

We spend so much on drone missiles and on building schools in the Mideast by paying corrupt Iraqi and Afghan officials who steal the funds outright. But we underfund education in the states, who cut taxes for businesses in order to create budget 'emergencies' and then guys like Gov. Walker want to force middle class workers to sacrifice as the supposed answer.

I don't think the President (and certainly not Gov. Walker) understands how close to mass strikes and civil defiance we are getting.

If i were the Firemen and Policemen's unions i would be wondering whose jugular he goes for next after he has broken the back of the Teachers Union. The other civil service unions in Wisconsin are fools to think they will remain sacrosanct.

"Waking the sleeping giant? “The labor movement is marshaling support for what it expects to be a nationwide fight over the collective bargaining rights of public workers..'

Three government-employee unions spent $172 million campaigning for Democrats in 2010..and that was when they were sleeping?

"Marshalling support" means stealing taxpayers money to fund a campaign to steal more taxpayers money...

The corrupt labor unions want to make it clear, elections don't matter. Corrupt big money bribing of Democratic politicians matters.

Koch inpersonator calls Walker and it's on tape. Should be very interesting!

Some rather interesting remarks. So, if I'm reading correctly, the strategy is that when one can't win a discussion on logic, yell, make deliberately incorrect statements, and call names?

Seriously, this is about fiscal responsibility. We've spend too much and have spent too much. That has to change. Time to compete with the rest of the real world by being competitive, rather that being protected.

We understand that you won't/don't like having the rules of the proverbial game to change, and we can appreciate that. Reality is setting in. The money isn't there (in spite of the fact that may of those commenting here would likely love to just tax and tax us further). This situation is analogous to someone being overweight, and requiring for health and and attractiveness reasons to go on a diet. If long term sustainability is important to you, your children, your families and friends, spending less and with greater care is critical. Lower taxes (from lower spending, less waste, and service levels recalibrated to be more appropriate for our needs) means that we become more attractive to new business startups, businesses relocating from other states, and businesses deciding whether to remain here. More businesses=more jobs. More jobs=more tax revenues. This is very simple math. If the skills and qualities you possess are in demand, you can earn more by virtue of providing more value. Simple supply and demand.

Some of these changes are painful. We get that. We private sector workers and taxpayers have had to respond to the new realities. You must as well.

Do a great job of delivering services, and you'll be well rewarded because of value, not because of contracts which taxpayers have not been treated equitably. If you want fair for you, you must play fair with those who pay you. When that is out of balance, it must be fixed. Walker is fixing it.

To those claiming that Walker did not run on this (explicitly) you're correct, he did not. He did, however, campaign on fiscal discipline, which is what he is doing. He is being authentic, responsible, and putting the long term health, vitality and attractiveness of the state first. If you don't want THAT, you should probably consider moving to IL. They just raised taxes to pay for continued irresponsible spending, not unlike what those in DC have done, and want to do more fiscally irresponsible taxing and spending.

One can't spend more than one takes in (OK, shouldn't...it's clearly been proven that it can be done as it has been done, and that's the reason we're all now in the unwelcome fiscal situation that we're in). Doing so has unpleasant consequences, as we're all feeling now.

It's time to clean up the mess and addiction to spending that we've had, go on a long term sustainable diet that helps us lose the weight (debt), improve our (fiscal) health, and be attractive to more money coming (from capital, business, taxes, jobs) into the state that keeps us strong, sustainable, attractive and all fully employed.

Well said Dave!

My question is, why don't some of the Republican state representatives and Senators respond by eliminating those things which are not needed and which are causing all of the unrest ? Did they all sign an oath (possibly in blood ?) to only respond to the governors requests by saying "yes, mien fuhrer"

Duh...very classy response.

You suggest "eliminating those things that are not needed..." I concur. Walker is eliminating those things that are not needed: costs going up more rapidly than the growth in the state that do not need to, that do not benefit the majority of the residents of the state, that do not result in an improvement in performance.

Duh, are you and Fancy teachers? If so, can you explicitly explain to me examples that demonstrate that you have the professional integrity to instruct our kids without your bias, as they are your opinions, not your selectively chosen facts.

Fancy, I will grant you that we spend a great deal of capital on defense. Let's examine why: rules of engagement that suggest that we (US) are untrustworthy, and that during a conflict, we (US) are expected to use rules of engagement that put our men and women at great (and highly unnecessary) levels of peril, which dramatically increase costs (amount of time there and headcount required), and levels of precision and excessive validation and analysis in order to protect foreign citizens, because of the behavior of an enemy that wants to risk its own people.

Does it cheese me off that we have to spend as much money as we do on defense - absolutely. That capital could be put to far more productive use. Fewer of our men and women's lives and health would be spared.

Who made many (not all) of those rules of engagement? Those in the party that quit the conversation in Madison, who are holding up decisions, making a mockery of the state, making a mockery of the legislative process, those in the party in this country who are and have wasted - WASTED - SHOCKING amounts of money. Those irresponsible decisions have put this country at risk of its sovereignty.

Any idea what that means? Having someone else - not in this country - call the shots, make the rules, limit what we can and cannot do. If you object to some of the minor changes (that you feel are union life threatening, but are merely inconveniences) that Walker is proposing, try spending some quality time (more like a lack thereof) in places like in China, Russia, or some of the other much less fortunate countries that would trade for what we have in an instant.

Of all the possible things in life that you could chose to fight for, this is it? And rather than argue the merits of your position, you don't, because you can't, because you're arguments lack a sound, defensible basis. If you feel otherwise, give the special treatment that you have enjoyed to someone else, and let them behave the manners in which many (not all) of you have behaved, and tell me you would not be resentful.

If you can, it is either because:

a - you've been holding back on some tremendous evidence that once provided, will convince every reasonable person to support your position because of the strength of value provided, or,

b - you are unable (or unwilling) to have an intellectually defensible argument (which, as teachers and educators, I'd certainly hope and expect that as the professionals that you claim to be that you would be capable of doing so), and that we'll know that this is all just raw emotion and greed...

If there is another option, please let us all know.

Duh, thanks for your response.

I appreciate hearing your thoughts, but, you know, the deliberately inflammatory stuff...just not very classy.

Going beyond that to address several of the substantive points you raised:

"I believe they, and every other US Citizen who chooses to join a union, should have all of their collective bargaining rights." I agree with every word except two - 1) all, and 2) rights. 1) We (taxpayers) pay you for services rendered.

"This is not about money, its about power." You are indeed correct. That's precisely why the union is fighting this so hard. Not about money. About control. I know about the work rules that exist in your contracts are not favorable, nor do they add value to your buyers - we taxpayers (not knowing your specific union, perhaps not every buyer hostile work rule applies in your specific situation, but I've negotiated union contracts in the past, so I have some intimate knowledge and understanding about some of the shenanigans that go on).

"How does removing the abitlity to negotiate have anything to do with the financial position of the government?" First, the ability to negotiate will still exist, and protections will still be in place, but they will be changed. Second, the terms of the agreements have been overly favorable to the unions, and unfavorable to the State. As the buyers of the services (the State buying services from the Union), we have been dictated to, and if you don't know or realize that, you should. The full effect of your agreements have meant a combined cost and impact that has exceeded both the cost of inflation (CPI) and the growth of the State (GSP). If we're in it together, then we're in it together, and the fact is, we have not.

"What is it about the bidding process that he is afraid of?" Excellent question. The purpose in using competitive bidding is to lower the cost of acquiring goods and services needed. There is no competitive bidding with union environments...so, what about the competitive bidding is the union afraid of?

"Finally, why is the Governor sending State (storm) Troopers to the Democratic Senators homes?" (Again, not very classy...). Are the senators being paid to execute their responsibility? Seems that they are deliberately, willfully, intentionally impeding the business of the State. I get that they dont like it, because without union backing, many of them would have never won office. Whether Walker has authority to have them arrested or not, I don't know. They are lawyers refusing to follow the law...does that not strike you as odd? As lawyers/legislators, either they do or do not not have a defensible position, but running away and abandoning their responsibility? What would happen to you if you did that? I know in the private sector (and I've been on both sides of the desk - employer and employee), there is very little tolerance for such behavior. Have any of the 14, or the union leaders ever proactively offered, or even attempted to offer any bills to address the matter? They've indicated "willingness"...not quite sure what that means. If they (14 and the unions) are serious, bring a proposal that demonstrates a serious intent. Running away is not a mature solution. Sending the state police after them is not a great response either, but how do you respond to a grown adult throwing a temper tantrum? I suspect your answer is negotiate. You cant do that when you're not willing to come to the table. The 14 should be fired, and had their pay withheld. They're making a mockery of the law, and of this great State.

So, please be very candid with me: if the set of circumstances were reversed, would you hold the same position?

Its time that the revenge motivated dysfunctional behavior stops. That the media (who are given a very special pass to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth - and deliberately do not) is providing the coverage that they are, and not providing the coverage they should, is absolutely irresponsible, not unlike the 14 - running from the truth.

Dave: I am not in a union. I just don't like the tactics Governor Walker is using. Why did he send state police to the members homes. I recall seeing reported that they do not have the authority to arrest the Senators. I found the tactic distastefull and reminisent of the kind of activities used at the beginning of the last century.

I understand your attempt to equate a collective bargaining agreement made by a (for example) group of teachers with the school board to the sale of a power plant to a powerful company, in a no bid contract. The situations are completely different issues, but I do understand the attempt to make them seem equal. While many union negotiators do attempt to utilize the little power they have for maximum personal gain, I would think that most legislators realize that putting so much power into the hands of one politician (or his/her appointee) can easily lead to bribery, theft, and malfeasance. I do not have an issue with the sale or lease, just the no bid portion of the bill.

As to the Senators who have left the state, they are doing what is allowed under Wisconsin state law. If Wisconsin had a filibuster available, they would use that. Unfortunately, this is the only remedy available. If the Democratic party were in control and attempting to require a minimum increase each year and that the negotiators for the taxpayers could only negotiate on wages ABOVE a that level (kind of the opposite of what Walker is saying) I would be equally upset.

Having read the entire bill, the majority of the provisions associated with the collective bargaining process have no fiscal purpose. They are designed to reduce the ability of a union negotiator to do the job they were hired to do. Why remove the ability to negotiate working conditions ? Why require ANNUAL recertification elections ? Why no collection and forwarding of union dues ? Requiring voter approval of raises over a certain percentage is purely designed to ensure that the entire negotiation process is derailed. Since a voter referendum generally takes 30-90 days, requiring voter approval virtually guarantees that negotiated contracts are not approved. I wonder if the governor and legislators would want to have voter approval of their pay packages, every year.

Governor Walker, in writing this bill, assumes the entire poplulation of the state of Wisconsin is made up of the people who voted for him. He won by just over 50% of under 50% of the eligible voters. I am sure that if he persists in pushing this bill, he will find that in about a year, he will not be able to get 50% of the over 50% of the voters needed to prevent a recall.

I thank you for your civil discourse.

Duh,

Thank you. I too appreciate our ability to have a serious, spirited yet civil discourse. I would like to address and respond to you points:

"I just don't like the tactics Governor Walker is using. I found the tactic distastefull and reminisent of the kind of activities used at the beginning of the last century." Who is creating the need to use unusual measures to try to successfully operate the state, as Walker is charged to do? 14 folks who are charged with doing their duty are not. They have abandon their jobs. Do I like that we have become a Jay Leno joke? I don't. I realize they don't agree with what Walker is proposing. Where are their counterproposals that TRULY solve the problem? Haven't seen nor heard one. "Taking a deal (conceding on increases)" now does not solve the problem...it delays it. Walker is trying to get a the root causes of problems. The union mentality is such that they'll come back with other measures to put the taxpayers at risk in other or new areas. Walker is allowing CBA on wages, not benefits, which, as in WI, are the problem across the US. Moreover, the local govt and school districts are experiencing the same issues for the same reasons. The State obligations are those at a State level, and do not include all of the obligations from school and local governmental bodies across Wisconsin. When those are added in, we are much deeper that $3B..the numbers that I have seen exceed $10B (I have not seen all of the sources to validate that info, but I suspect that we will shortly)

"While many union negotiators do attempt to utilize the little power they have for maximum personal gain, I would think that most legislators realize that putting so much power into the hands of one politician (or his/her appointee) can easily lead to bribery, theft, and malfeasance." The unions wield TREMENDOUS power and influence. Anyone who tells you otherwise is simply not being honest. I concur on the second element of your remark. Let's put sunshine and full disclosure on EVERYTHING...let the facts speak for themselves.

"As to the Senators who have left the state, they are doing what is allowed under Wisconsin state law." Barely, perhaps. What is it for which they are being paid? Appears to be abandonment to me. Moreover, if their positions are defensible (other than not liking it), then let's hear their arguments. They have been silent, aside from not agreeing with Walker. I have not heard them bring a factual case of the issues, the causes, the options, the implications, the recommendations, the tradeoffs that are all about the long term health of the residents of this State. I'd respect them a great deal more if there were ANY evidence that they were even trying to bring some kind of rational, fact based argument. Instead, they are silent aside from not liking it. That is simply not professional.

"Having read the entire bill, the majority of the provisions associated with the collective bargaining process have no fiscal purpose. I wonder if the governor and legislators would want to have voter approval of their pay packages, every year." Patently false on point 1. Point 2, I'd be fine with.

"Governor Walker, in writing this bill, assumes the entire poplulation of the state of Wisconsin is made up of the people who voted for him." Not true. When you examine the polling data and questions from both WI and across the US, what people want and expect is fiscal sanity. That is what he is attempting to do. State CBA covers less that 5% of the state employment. Union membership (public and private) is less than 15 % of state employment. That the desires of the minority are negatively impacting the long term health and sustainability entire populous, that's simply wrong.