Wisconsin leaders face recall for balancing their state budget, WHY

The government leaders have made a balanced budget by cutting jobs, reducing spending and disallowing union representation to use collective bargaining as a tool to raise their wages. This would seem to me to have been the only way that the state could come up with a balanced budget without laying off even more and more government workers. While I really think that other measures should have been addressed like reducing state pensions, overtime and other perks , this is what they decided to do. Now they face a recall for trying to do their jobs although again I say there could have been other things done but they weren't but they at least aren't shut down any longer and those still on the states payroll are now back on their jobs.

So why is it if the politicians did what they were elected to do by the majority of the people that live in that state are they now being recalled? If the 70 percent majority think that their leaders did what they were sent there to do who, besides the unions, would want a recall that is costing over 35 million dollars to hold? This seems rather a last grasp at straws to me to salvage a small amount of peoples jobs that can no longer use collective bargaining as a tool to get pay increases. What is your opinion about this recall election, do you think it is really necessary since what was done was what the majority of the people wanted?:shrug:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No one interested in this but me? :shrug:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Part of the problem is that the people who elected them are the people that they were elected to represent.

I am sure that if I voted for someone to balance the budget in my state, I would not have intended them to do it by laying me off work and lowering taxes on corporations.

Much of what was done seems directed more at representing special interests and corporations than the people of the state. The fact that this was accomplished while wading through the public outcry and demonstrations should have been proof enough that that their plans were not what the "people" had intended.

The recalls support the fact that the actions taken were not consistent with the wishes of the governed. And they were not the only options...

Had they even just left off the union busting they would have probably been able to achieve similar results. The results would not have entrenched the dictatorial power but they could still have balanced the budget.

The governor seems to have believed that he was elected to be a dictator and not a benevolent one at that.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well it's kind of a moot point, since Wisconsin allows it and the vote is today for 6 Republicans and and next Tuesday for 2 Democrats.

 

Maybe it's your presentation

I think part of the problem here is that you have the appearance of mouthpiecing party propaganda. Whether you are or not, or even whether you intend to or not, that's kind of what it sounds like.

The reason for this is that we just went through the Wisconsin fight in recent months, and if all you got out of that was the title of this thread, well, there's not much anyone can say to you.

OnlyMe has pointed to one of the big problems: No, we can't afford to let public workers have collective bargaining rights, because it's somehow too expensive, but in the meantime we're going to give a tax break to our rich friends because, well, we can afford that, and we'll just make the public employees we're after pick up the tab.

Another was the way in which they did it. If you can't pass a bill on a straight vote according to the rules, figure something else out; don't just hold a poisoned vote in violation of procedures in order to make sure your bill passes.

And so on.

Look, we hear all the time about legislative shenanigans, but for some reason when it's the Republicans, there is always—always—someone who will come along afterward and make sure that everyone knows just how badly some folks have missed the point.

I mean, after all that, "The government leaders have made a balanced budget by cutting jobs, reducing spending and disallowing union representation to use collective bargaining as a tool to raise their wages," is the best you can come up with?

Or is this sort of inner-narrative fantasy, where you're playing the talk show host you always wanted to be, or something, and showing us what conservatives think fair and balanced journalism is?

The bottom line is that when a topic post looks, as yours does, so much like troll bait, there isn't a whole lot for people to say.

 

Many voters of Wisconsin don't seem to think these guys did what they were elected to do. They seem to think they were betrayed by people who got themselves elected under false pretenses.

That's exactly the situation recall election procedures are designed to address.

 

Voicing my opinion is now considered propaganda? You really have allot of nerve to say something like that. I only made a statement about what I thought was a stupid thing to be doing with the recall and now you feel I'm propagandizing without even bothering to read what I said. You are a very closed minded person who seems only wanting to hear what you think is the "correct" way it should be done and not what others might think. What makes you that way? Why is it that you can't see that there are at least two sides to this story but you seem to see only one. I pity you for this narrow viewpoint and do hope that one day you might find it in yourself to realize that people can say what they wish without it being "propaganda " like you think.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

From what I've read the polls indicate that 70 percent the people who live there are satisfied with the way the government did what it did. Only a 30 percent were not happy. I'm going to wait and see when this recall happens and see who's right and wrong.

 

They are being recalled for implementing an anti-democratic pro-business agenda that actually harms the state.

 

tiassa is being diplomatic, fella
i would not push it

/kind like that

 

lets see they fired a bunch of hard working people who needed their incomes and didn't really need to be fired, cut spending on the programs designed to help people in hard economic times, and than tried to deny people their legal rights and their only means of defending themselves from the corporate power you and yours so loves to increase and you unable to wonder why a solidly lefty state that has elected socalists in the past wants them gone?


are you just incapable of thinking or just unable to understand that people can see the harm in your ideas?

 

The recall results will determine whether what you read was a true reflection of the voters.

 

My ideas? I'm only stating what was already said . Those are others ideas I was talking about but gave an opinion about what they did and said. I suggested about only what was done already not something new if you read what I said.

 

Sorry if you think that my opinions are somehow being propaganda , which they weren't as I have stated. I don't push anything except freedom to speak what I believe is happening and should be addressed back the same way, not being called propaganda mongering.

 

They cut taxes on the rich, then said

"Oh, we have to use austerity measures to make ends meet!"

Um, so why did you cut taxes on the rich? Because it supposedly creates more jobs? It doesn't when you pass a certain point, and I'm quite sure we passed it a long time ago.

They cut taxes on the rich, then screwed the middle class, now the middle class that elected them is pissed.

Good.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

They can't recall Scott Walker, that's why. Did you know he wanted to be able to sell off any state owned heating, cooling, or power plants "with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state. "? Did you know he wanted to call out the National Guard on the protesting teachers?

He has no interest in balancing the budget, if you think that's what this is about, you are a fool.

 

You clearly have not done any research on the topic, so I call your notion that Walker was "just trying to balance the budget" is a lie, and political propaganda. Maybe that wasn't your intention. If that's the case, please educate yourself a little better on the right-wing agenda.

 

Well, you asked

Do you feel better for that?

You bumped your own thread.

You bumped your own thread.

You bumped your own thread.

"No one interested in this but me?"​

I simply advised you on the most likely reason people were passing the thread by.

Your topic post sounds exactly like a radio host or sound-bite script. The question of your freedom of speech doesn't enter the consideration. Rather, the point is that people read the topic post and have to decide what it's going to take to make this into a sane discussion. And given that the topic post is strictly political argumentation, devoid of and insensate toward history itself, the immediate suggestion is that we're going to have to rehash the history we just witnessed in order to bring the whole discussion current.

It's a lot of effort other people are going to have to make in order to give your thread any weight of historical or otherwise factual legitimacy.

Your right to speak doesn't enter into it unless you would assert that it obliges other people to respond to you.

 

Not to mention the little provision in the bill that kills unions which allows the governor to sell state assets at below market prices to reward his financial sponsors.

 

And you will never learn to disregard stuff from people who have been lying to you for years, no matter how many times events show them up.

Let me guess: the same people who were telling you that the incumbent Republicans had the support of 70% of the voters, were shoveling millions of dollars into these small and local races to sway the upcoming vote and asking for more.

The governor, Walker, won every one of these recall districts by large margins. One take (from several sources but 538.com is easy googled) is that close races - even if the Dems lose - mean trouble for Walker next year.