In a surprising turn of events it appears that the Wisconsin legislature’s measures to control public sector union bargaining rights may go into effect after all.
The drama over Gov. Scott Walker’s controversial measure limiting public sector collective bargaining took another turn Friday when the Legislative Reference Bureau published the law – the last step before it takes effect.
The law, which would severely curb collective bargaining rights for most public employees, has been stuck in court ever since the governor signed it two weeks ago. Officials have challenged whether Republicans violated state law in passing the measure.
A restraining order prevented Secretary of State Doug La Follette from publishing the law earlier. But the state constitution says laws must be published before they can take effect; it does not specify by whom.
The governor and Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, said flatly Friday that the law will take effect on Saturday.
“The administration will carry out the law as required,” said the administration in a statement.
Under state statutes, the secretary of state is required to set a publication date no more than 10 working days after a law is signed. A related statute requires the Reference Bureau — the Legislature’s nonpartisan drafting and research agency — to publish legislation within 10 days of enactment.
You can expect the usual howls of outrage from the left. Expect plenty of “fascist” and a fair amount of “dictator.” Who knows, the death threats might even start up again. What I do know is that the left would have used this same tactic if the shoe were on the other foot. It is time for this law, passed by elected representatives of the people, to take effect.
And if you do not believe that the public does not support measures to rein in the out of control benefits that are the result of the collective bargaining process for public sector unions, you can add the State of New Hampshire and the City of Los Angeles to the list of state and local governments to pass union reform since Wisconsin first attempted to pass theirs. Yet Wisconsin still receives all of the attention.
Why? Because the left is busy creating boogeymen in both Scott Walker and the Koch Brothers. The concessions in the Wisconsin bill are no worse than those that are being debated in other states. And more importantly, even after the bill is passed public sector unions will still have more rights and better benefits than the federal government. But I guess saying “fascist,” “war on unions,” and “assault on teachers” is easier than doing five minutes of research.
Of Buckley and Beatles 
The concessions in the Wisconsin bill are no worse than those that are being debated in other states…
So if one person sins, another is entitled to? That’s bad logic.
Also, your point about federal workers is a false comparison.
How is holding up one set of public sector employees with another a false comparison? Just because one happen to work for a state and the other the federal government it is false?
And I believe that your argument only works when one happens to agree with you that any manner of reform of public sector unions is a “sin.” It’s not. It is fiscally necessary.
You’re a republican who sees no difference between federal and state?
Wisconsin unions agreed to all the cuts Walker asked for – they did so WITH collective bargaining. So how is taking away collective bargaining fiscally necessary?
BTW, thank you for an honest discussion, we may disagree, but it’s nice we can be civil.
I suppose I don’t see a difference between federal public sector workers and state public sector worker. But if you want to look state to state there are 12 states that offer no collective bargaining for public sector employees and 12 more that offer it on a limited basis. It’s okay to click. It’s from the GAO.
As for it being fiscally necessary I believe that the fact that the repair bill could save upwards of $72 million and prevent layoffs is proof that it is necessary. I am sure most on the left would agree with that, though they will probably still say “It is important to cut money from the budget, but find another place to cut it please.”
The great unmentionable is that unions are one of the biggest and most reliable political donors that Democrats have. It’s not like those pesky PACs that flip between giving their money to Democrats and Republicans. That’s where the defense of Wisconsin public sector unions is coming from. The goose that lays the golden egg is being threatened.
“So how is taking away collective bargaining fiscally necessary?”
This blog has made a point of pointing out how collective bargaining hurts state budgets, such as the millions Wisconsin public schools lose because of the health insurance collectively bargained for by the teachers unions. $67 million… Then there is the prison industrial complex and the amount collective bargaining costs due to their lobbying efforts in California.
You can find most of these examples in our side bar.
Clipped from the linked article..
“This is going to unleash a tsunami of litigation,” Pines said.
classy metaphor there.. Surprised he didn’t say it was going to cause a meltdown too.
I don’t think this is over yet. It might have to become a law first to enable challenging it. Let the games begin, I guess. I think in the end, attempting to kill the union in one fell swoop like this might possibly turn into a win the battle, lose the war scenario for the Governor.
Theres no doubt costs need to be cut in the public education system soon and not just in Wisconsin. But the cost for well qualified teachers isn’t the lowest hanging fruit to go after.