The passage of the WI bill in the Senate yesterday, using provisions that allow by passing the presence of a quorum, has resulted in yet another eruption of an angry mob, attempting again hold Wisconsin’s Capitol building hostage today. Madison, WI “progressive voice” media, The Cap Times reports the crowd was numbering between 300 to 400 people as of 10:40AM, Wisconsin time. According to the Daily Reporter, the protestors came prepared for a lengthy squat, carrying musical instruments and stashes of food. (See Curt’s post for more indepth details.)
But sour grapes and good ol’ fashioned angry mob protest is not the only assault launched against a duly elected majority in Wisconsin, desperately trying to get the State’s debt under control. When you’re a one trick monkey, you do what you know best. In this case, “the monkey”… i.e. the labor unions and Democrats… are going back to their Alinsky roots and commenced with an assault campaign on Wisconsin’s Governor in an effort not dissimilar to the smear campaign, launched against then Veep candidate, Sarah Palin.
A notable difference here – the Dem party can’t figure out a way to make the taxpayers pay for their smear campaign, as they did in Palin’s case. They are having to pay for it themselves this time. Too bad.
Then again, maybe that’s why I’m getting Daily KO’s solicitations for Walker recall funds. They’ve got to pay for the smear campaign some way, right?
What smear campaign, you ask? First example is the formal ethics complaint by Margaret Brick of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin. The said complaint, with pile ons, actually revolves around a prank phone call to Walker’s office with a party operative who posed as one of the Koch Brothers. TPM’s Greg Sargent gleefully confirms the Gov fell for the prank, hook, line and sinker. This does seem somewhat odd since, if Walker is supposed to have some bedroom relationship with the supposedly evil Koch brothers, would he not recognize their voices?
The prank, in itself, doesn’t bother me. After all, we have exposé operations that occur from both sides of the aisle. What would be in question is whether Walker actually did anything wrong in his phone conversation. Walker avers he said nothing he hasn’t said on the campaign trail, and apparently Brick wants a court to weigh in. So be it… that’s the American way. But will it be nothing more than another frivolous lawsuit? A tactic launched relentlessly against Palin?
The complaint, according the TPM’s summation:
…alleges that several violations of the law occurred on the call: That Walker attempted to coordinate third-party campaign spending, when he told “Koch” that there would need to be messaging in support of Republicans in tough districts; That he illegally used state facilities, the phone in his office, to commit said coordination; That he conspired to incite disorderly conduct when he said he had considered planting troublemakers among the protesters; That he misused the Attorney General’s office in seeking advice on ways to trick the Democrats to come back; That he violated labor laws by saying he would use threats of layoffs of state workers in an effort to pass the bill; And that he accepted a trip to California when offered by “Koch.”
As noted in the complaint, and as Tate pointed out on the call, these various alleged offenses are punishable by large fines and even years in prison.
Here’s the one that’s got me in an uproar. The most heinous “punishable” offenses are tantamount to a Class I Felony – as noted on pg 2 of the link, #13, which isn’t dissimilar to the AWOL/MIA Dem Senators, avoiding their duties to their contituents.
Dang, I bet Wisconsin taxpayers are glad this isn’t on their tab… unlike the Alaskan denizens.
Another interesting charge is that Brick accuses Walker of soliciting political contributions while present in the State offices. Dang… did they just go thru the Palin complaints and use them as a playbook?
Personally I find that extremely interesting when you consider it’s beyond questionable as to who is paying the hotel and expense tabs of the AWOL, irresponsible Dem legislators, hiding out in other states. Howard Dean’s $100K slush fund is being funneled to the Wisconsin State Senate Democratic Committee (SSDC) in violation of Wisconsin election law. Then there’s $279K, run thru the PAC, ActBlue, via several fundraiser including those run by Democracy for America and the Daily Kos website.
USAToday also reports on ActBlue’s activities to pay the bill for WI legislators, frolicking out of the state on a voluntary strike.
While Brick is happy to file lawsuits, she may want to consider the illegality of of funneling cash to Dems for *not* working (how union’esque, eh?) during a legislation session, as noted by WesternPAC’s site, and evoking WI Statute, Subchapter III, Chapter 13, Wisconsin Statutes (13.625) Prohibited practices.
Then, of course, there’s that pesky fact that the MIA legislators are the fiscal puppets of the unions and public sector employees, due to their heavy dependence upon them for campaign funds. i.e., the best AWOL legislators money can buy.
In the meantime, recall efforts by those on both sides of the aisle abound. Again, progressive blogsite, Daily KOs, finds it prudent to solicit the Democrats across the nation to support a single State’s recall effort, with the below alert sent out yesterday.
Progressive site, Think Progress, also reports on the attempt to recall eight GOP Senators in the Wisconsin legislature.. and effort that now the union powerhouse, the SEIU, has joined.
But it’s not just the left who is disgruntled with elected ones, skirting their duties and living off of Democrat donations in another state. American Thinker’s Phil Boehmke reports on the efforts to recall some Democrats, who’s efforts were met with union obstruction and thuggery.
The DLCC’s Michael Sargeant is doing his Alinsky best to rile up the base with anger by stating in his most recent mailout (in response to the WI vote) that Dems to to “..get mad AND get even.”
My guess is we can safely assume that Obama’s “can’t we all get along” type pleas following the Gifford shooting in AZ is but a distant memory.
What remains to be seen is how a nation will end up viewing David vs Goliath type battles, as voters and grassroots citizens – insistent that debt be reined in – go to battle with the well oiled thug tactics of powerful unions. The irony here is that a party that claims they are against special interests and for “the little guy” are those egging on one of the most power special interests groups, and applauding their bullying against those they claim to represent. Will they every acknowledge the dichotomy?
Unlikely.
Mata Musing: For an interesting history of “the fist” as a logo, as seen in the 1948 photo used in the thumbnails here, read here.
Vietnam era Navy wife, indy/conservative, and an official California escapee now residing as a red speck in the sea of Oregon blue.
According to Daily Kos,
Also linked there is the, Scott Walker Watch’s Boycott list.
Apparently they discovered that people were doing with their own personal money what unions have been doing with taxpayer money (giving to a candidate) and they don’t like it.
They took bailout funds, and (gasp) employees were making political donations???
Still ‘fused… why that bank, and not any other bank in Wisconsin that did the same? uh… that’s rhetorical, Nan G. Sure don’t expect you to waste more time than you have on the insanity…. LOL But really…. I believe that BFD is appropriate here.
@MataHarley:
Maybe my premise is faulty. I’m thinking that union pensions, federal pensions, and state and local public employee pensions are getting to be the only middle and working class defined benefit pension plans that are still left. While pensions may be taxed equally, it’s a a specific group of people who receive them to begin with.
But unequal treatment under the new tax Michigan tax law gets even worse:
Many retirees eligible for public pensions aren’t eligible for Social Security benefits at all. They weren’t covered under Social Security. Their annual public pension benefits will now be taxed by Michigan, while someone who receives an idential yearly amount of Social Security retirement benefits as sole their retirement income may not be. That can already be the case with federal income taxes. Same total income, different taxes.
If a retiree has worked in both the public and private sectors and is eligible for both a non-covered pension and Social Security, it’s already the norm for their Social Security benefits to be substantially reduced under the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision. The reductions are often very substantial, reducing the Social Security benefit to a small fraction of what it would be for a private-sector-only employee who as worked identical years under Social Security and paid in identical amounts. So here again, we can now have public sector workers paying more state taxes on the same total dollar amount of retirement income. The same disparity pops up again with federal income tax.
I call this one a foul! The new Michigan law isn’t going to provide equal treatment for people having the same total retirment dollars to live on by any means, and public employee retires in particular could get the shaft.
Well, Greg… if someone doesn’t pay into Social Security, and gets to keep all that withholding in their paychecks over their working life while the rest of us don’t, why are they owed special favors in their retirement years to get exemption bennies?
Oh what a bunch of horse manure. I’ll tell you what. If you don’t like the 1978 new calculation of the Windfall Elimination Provision, why don’t you call Jimmah Carter and the 57 Dems who held the Senate in that year, and the 222 Dems who held the majority House in that year, to complain. I might add, all because of an entitlement ponzi scheme program YOUR party pushed to begin with. Frankly, I’m tired of listening to your selective “the middle class” BS over and over. Your class warfare, and insistence that some “classes” should get special consideration is beyond highly offensive. My patience is wearing thin.
So now, because of a state of which you aren’t even a resident, you’re calling “foul” on computations decided by your party’s President, and a Congress where both chambers were held by your party’s majority?
Desperate. And why?
Yes, it’s generally a minority amount of people who receive them. And it’s mostly the taxpayers on the hook with guaranteeing their solvency when the “union” employers lose their arse in investments. But that’s the *only* “middle class” in your opinion?
Really, Greg… your math is worse than Billy Bob’s. Repeat after me…the amount of union workers – private or public sector – is a minority of workers in this nation. So if you want to genuinely consider “the middle class” your party likes to pretend to defend, you might consider that most don’t have exempt SS withholding, nor pensions, but are still on the hook for living month to month on their retirement with a dwinding unsolvent SS retirement check.
Sheer chutzpah, dooooooood. You should be whipped at dawn… LOL Which brings me now to this, which was totally out of order in your response.
Ya think? Your entire mindset… even with your class warfare arguments and beliefs… is “faulty”.
@MataHarley, #68:
Federal retirees didn’t get to “keep all that withholding in their paychecks over their working life”. The great majority of currently retired federal employees worked under the Civil Service Retirement System. They paid 7% of their gross annual pay for their retirement plan coverage, plus an additional 1.45% in Medicare tax. That combined 8.45% total contribution rate exceeded the combined 7.65% paid by private sector employees for Social Security and Medicare. (See? I can do simple arithmetic.)
If the federal retiree also had a separate private sector job that gained Social Security retirement coverage, any Social Security benefit that would be payable is subject to offset under the Windfall Elimination provision. As a rule, career civil servants–and public employees in general–don’t get the full Social Security benefit they’ve paid Social Security taxes for. They generally get only a fraction of the computed amount; sometimes only a very small fraction (Same deal with public retirees who might otherwise be eligible for Social Security widow’s benefits. The Government Pension Offset provision often eliminates that Social Security benefit for the retired public employee totally–eliminating the non-taxable benefit in favor of the public pension that is totally taxable. Another classic example of how public employees put one over on their private sector counterparts, I suppose.)
So, we’ve got the fact that public pensions are subject to federal income tax, were an identical amount of Social Security benefits won’t be. We can now add the fact that the same will be true for Michigan state tax.
Admittedly Michigan has been giving public employee retirees a better deal on state taxes than most other states. Presumably that has been to Michigan’s benefit. It was calculated to make the state a more attractive retirement location, bringing retired public employees and their dollars into the Michigan economy. Retirees pay property taxes but bring no children that would be expenses to Michigan school systems. They spend outside sourced money locally, and pay state sales taxes on their purchases. They generally have health insurance, so they don’t put much demand on public health care. They also tend to be a stable social element.
Snyder, of course, can eliminate that attractive feature. He can selectively tax pensions where the same amount of Social Security isn’t taxed, but there’s no way in hell he’ll sell me on the thought that this is an example of equal treatment. One sort of retirment dollar based on one sort of career is fair game, while another sort of retirement dollar isn’t. He can get away with it only because of the divisive resentment that’s being stirred up about unions and public sector employees. (Or so he assumes.)
I suppose career military retirees who elected to settle in Michigan are having some of these same thoughts. The long cold winters up there might suddenly be looking somewhat less attractive. That not the only chill that’s setting in up in Michigan.