world

Wisconsin governor rebuffs Democrats' request for meeting

42 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

42 Comments
Login to comment

This idiot governor should do the right thing and shut up, seppuku and let the good hard workers of Wisconsin get on with their lives, Throw this bozo out into the cold!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“Right now, I’m so damn mad at his misrepresentation of the truth and the public should be as well,” said Sen Bob Jauch, one of two Democrats who had talked last week with the Senate Republican leader about possible compromises. “Trust is completely broken down now. I don’t believe anything he says.”

Well, DUH! You're dealing with TBg-variety nuts like Walker, who view compromise and dealing in good faith with Democrats as appeasement. Time to kick the nuts to the curb.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And Wisconsin Democratic Sen Jon Erpenbach said it was Walker who was standing in the way. “We continually reach out with suggestions, ideas, offers,” Erpenbach said. “We’re not the ones getting in the way.”

Said Erpenback who is presently hiding in Illinois.

“I don’t think anyone expects us to stay here forever,” Wisconsin Sen Bob Jauch said in a telephone interview from Illinois.

“I don’t think a lot of us have the stomach to stay away and watch our state plummet off a cliff,” Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Chris Larson said.

Larson is also speaking from Illinois.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This idiot governor should do the right thing and shut up, seppuku and let the good hard workers of Wisconsin get on with their lives, Throw this bozo out into the cold!

This is easily one of the most idiotic things I've read on this site. I realize that saying this is actually insulting to idiots, but it really does fit the bill. Tell me, where do you stand on the health care bill? Should the Republicans have fled congress rather then let the Dems pass it? Or should they have stayed and fought it out, and of course lost because the Dems had the votes, even if the public was and is against them? Well, the shoe is on the other foot here. This bill is going to pass. It has more then enough votes, theres nothing the Dems can do to stop it, except to run away in order to prevent a quorum being present. Thats not how government works. Even if you don't like it. You work to repeal what you don't like when you do have the votes, and fight against it when you don't. Running away is not the answer. And the rank stupidity shown by people who want to put all the blame on Walker, is pathetic.

Whats much more likely to happen, is some of these Dems facing a recall election of their own. And since they won't even be in the state to run for office...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Molenir: Good points!

It is in their right to disagree with the bill, and they should say so in the state house. But to run away and say that we can meet in a neutral location is just plain cowardice. Whether you like the Reps or not, they at least stayed in Congress even when they were the majority and still gave debate on the Health Care Bill and other items that were brought forth.

If the Dems have the right answers, then if they present them in a clear and logical manner, I would imagine that they should be able to change a few minds on the opposition side to affect the outcome. But all they have to offer is whining and running away, which tells me that they had no viable solutions.

I say that they are all in contempt of the people who elected them, and should be forced to a recall.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This has gone leagues beyond ridiculous. It's now turned into a pissing contest for Walker. This asshat should be impeached.

The unions already accepted the proposed increase in member contributions to benefits, proving that unions aren't the immovable obstacles to progress that Republicans would paint them to be.

And yet Walker still insists on dilluting the ability of public servants to protect themselves against unfair labor practices. It makes no damned sense at all, unless, of course this all has nothing whatsoever to do with balancing a budget or doing the work of the people, but rather striking an ideological blow again unions, the wet dream of every Republican not protected by them.

If Walker's single-minded intent to cram change down the throats of the people of Wisconsin are any indication of the future, the people of Wisconsin would do better to shift their efforts towards getting Walker out of his throne before he decides to carry his little crusade to the private sector.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The last I heard the Wisconsin Democrats are going to knuckle under and return to vote. Wasn't it President Obama that said elections have consequences when he slammed Senator McCain during the health care meeting in the oval office. Well, elections in Wisconsin have consequences as well. The voters are facing up to the fiscal reality that the states (and the country) are broke. Like it or not Liberals, it is time to pay for the spending binge.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Walker is free to do what he wants...he got elected. The Dems are acting like children.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If Walker's single-minded intent to cram change down the throats of the people of Wisconsin are any indication of the future, the people of Wisconsin would do better to shift their efforts towards getting Walker out of his throne before he decides to carry his little crusade to the private sector.

The same could be said for the general US population and what happened in 2010.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Walker has very stubbornly walked himself into a corner and if things don't go his way he may well have to resign, or will definitely lose election next time around. What's worse for the Republicans is that he's dragging down their chances of winning in the next election because once again, and quite rightly so, they are being seen as obstinate and immovable, not to mention going against the general public.

I hope he gets kicked to the curb as well.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Should the Republicans have fled congress rather then let the Dems pass [the health care bill]? Or should they have stayed and fought it out,

Had the Republicans fled Congress in DC, passing the health care bill would have been much easier, since the rules for Congress dictate that a quorum consists of a simple majority.

A much better example is the filibuster that Republicans have used more than any Congress in history to block legislation as a minority. The Wisconsin House of Reps can't filibuster so the minority party has to use whatever means they have to block unjust and counter-productive laws.

What the Wisconsin Dems are doing isn't new or unique. One of the founders of the Republican Party, Abe Lincoln, once exited out a second-story window to deny a quorum to vote on a piece of legislation his party didn't like.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And yet Walker still insists on dilluting the ability of public servants to protect themselves against unfair labor practices. It makes no damned sense at all, unless, of course this all has nothing whatsoever to do with balancing a budget or doing the work of the people, but rather striking an ideological blow again unions, the wet dream of every Republican not protected by them.

Do you really believe, for even a second, that this is what its about? Reading silliness like this makes me start to question the intelligence of some posters. I start to wonder, do they really believe their own propaganda, or are they just deluded idiots?

The unions using collective bargaining force politicians to accept deals that benefit them. They then turn around and ensure that these same politicians that gave them these deals, get re-elected. This continues, as the unions push for a better deal, the pols see it in their best interest to give in to the union demands. Not being represented here, is the taxpayers. This corruption is why so many people, even on the left criticized this. FDR himself had some choice words to say about it. Its also why Carter made it so Federal employees don't have these same rights.

In Wisconsin as well as many other states, this corrupt relationship between the Dems and the unions has lead to a huge imbalance between public and private sector workers. Public sector workers tend to take in more, and get much, much better benefits then their private sector counterparts. So, if you address the current imbalance, by reducing benefits, while that will help, it won't address the structural problems that led to this situation. Taking away the collective bargaining benefits over benefits (note not over wages), means that the governments can deal with them fairly. Unions will still get sweetheart deals. However it won't be so much of an automatic thing. Pols will start to think what is more in the interest of their constituents, not will doing this piss off the unions and lead me to get canned. Or at least this is the idea.

What the Wisconsin Dems are doing isn't new or unique. One of the founders of the Republican Party, Abe Lincoln, once exited out a second-story window to deny a quorum to vote on a piece of legislation his party didn't like.

And did he run away for more then a month to deny that very same legislation?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir: "Do you really believe, for even a second, that this is what its about? Reading silliness like this makes me start to question the intelligence of some posters. I start to wonder, do they really believe their own propaganda, or are they just deluded idiots?"

It seems you really can't comment much these days except to call people idiots and claim those who post what you don't agree with as unintelligent. One could very, very easily take what I quoted above and apply it directly to your comments, given that they do nothing but attack the posters and not argue any kind of point.

"The unions using collective bargaining force politicians to accept deals that benefit them"

Ahem, unlike what Walker wants, I suppose? which is to deny collective bargaining rights so that he gets whatever he wants with no questions asked. Please, my friend. Look over there at all those trees... they ARE the forest!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It seems you really can't comment much these days except to call people idiots and claim those who post what you don't agree with as unintelligent.

Lack of time, and changing priorities. That said, isn't that what most of us do? :D

Ahem, unlike what Walker wants, I suppose? which is to deny collective bargaining rights so that he gets whatever he wants with no questions asked. Please, my friend. Look over there at all those trees... they ARE the forest!

No questions asked? Do you really think, even for a second, that this is what will happen, even under the new rules? They are changing the rules to target specific areas. (IE benefits) The unions can still collectively bargain for wages etc. Not only that, but police and fire are still exempt. Unions aren't getting the shaft here, not even close. Even with these changes, they still will have sweet deals, that the private sector would love to have. I notice also you chose to ignore, that so inconvenient facet that Libs always prefer to not talk about. The corruption inherent in the relationship between politicians and public sector unions.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This chaos is the perfect reason why public workers should not be unionized.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir: "That said, isn't that what most of us do? :D"

Ummmm.... to an extent, I suppose. Point taken, my friend. :)

"No questions asked? Do you really think, even for a second, that this is what will happen, even under the new rules?"

Oh, I don't think there will be 'no questions asked' at all, I just think that Walker will point to a piece of paper and say they're not allowed to discuss the questions as a group and try to get the government to change it's mind if it's decided on the contrary.

"I notice also you chose to ignore, that so inconvenient facet that Libs always prefer to not talk about. The corruption inherent in the relationship between politicians and public sector unions."

Please, it's a non-topic, and no more relative than talking about deals between Republican candidates and big contract deals with vested interests. They exist, at least the ones I mentioned, and all are wrong, but that is not the topic here; we are talking about collective bargaining, and YOU are going OFF topic to defend Walker's radical position.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir wins. Smith loses again.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This has gone leagues beyond ridiculous. It's now turned into a pissing contest for Walker. This asshat should be impeached.

Missed the civility speech by President Obama I take it. What legal grounds should he be impeached? Trying to pass a law you do not like is hardly grounds for impeachment.

The unions already accepted the proposed increase in member contributions to benefits, proving that unions aren't the immovable obstacles to progress that Republicans would paint them to be.

Shamed into accepting it I would say instead. After all after it became known that they were getting sweeter deals than any private worker could dream of and bankrupting the private worker to boot to pay for it, is not exactly to win friends and influence people.

And yet Walker still insists on dilluting the ability of public servants to protect themselves against unfair labor practices

If he pushing legislation to repeal all the worker protection laws already in place that protect civil servants, the ones that prohibit discrimination, sexual harassment, age discrimination,wrongful termination and such, you would have a case. I see no loss of workers rights being taken away that there is a need to protect themselves from. I do see a fear of losing collective bargaining rights to further enhance their better deal in pensions and healthcare than the private sector that gets stuck with the bill and is pretty tapped out right now to pay for the extra bennies.

If Walker's single-minded intent to cram change down the throats of the people of Wisconsin are any indication of the future, the people of Wisconsin would do better to shift their efforts towards getting Walker out of his throne before he decides to carry his little crusade to the private sector.

Would not call it it throne. It is the Governors seat and he was elected to it by the people. Just as they will unelect him if this does not help balance the budget and put the state in better shape than the debt he found himself in. Since when are so upset with actuallt Democracy at work. If it fails the Republicans will be kicked out, a Democrat Governor will be elected along with a Democratic majority and they will repeal the law he has enacted.........Or are afraid he might be right and must be stopped at all costs because it will actually work proving fatal to the overall liberal governing philosphy and the people will re-elect him instead?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I start to wonder, do they really believe their own propaganda, or are they just deluded idiots?

Deluded idiots are the ones who have voted for Republican policies over the past 4-5 decades. All over America, we are reaping the results of their wholesale corruption with big business.

The unions using collective bargaining force politicians to accept deals that benefit them.

In the case of Wisconsin, the unions have conceded to ALL of the terms that Walker has offered except for giving up their right to collectively bargain. In my view, and by your own definition, only a "deluded idiot" would interpret this as having forced Walker to accept a deal that benefits the union. In fact, anytime a union makes concessions on pay and benefits, it proves that you are dead wrong in your claim.

Its also why Carter made it so Federal employees don't have these same rights.

The Civil Service Reform Act, signed into law by President Carter in 1978 actually enhanced the collective bargaining rights of federal workers. This doesn't stop the right wing's delusion when making up statements that Carter did otherwise.

In Wisconsin as well as many other states, this corrupt relationship between the Dems and the unions has lead to a huge imbalance between public and private sector workers. Public sector workers tend to take in more, and get much, much better benefits then their private sector counterparts.

How times have changed. Throughout most of my life, public service jobs always paid far less than comparable work in the private sector. What the public sector did in order to compensate for lower pay in order to attract good people was to provide very good benefits, especially retirement and health care.

It was the far greater corruption of Republicans and business-backers, playing itself in full force with the election of union-busting Ronald Reagan, that the deluded conservatives' desire to destroy public and private-sector unions attained full force. (An intent and direction that started way back with the passage of Taft-Hartley over President Truman's veto.)

Now, what has simply happened is that the Republican "victory" over the American middle-class has largely been realized in the private sector. Business leaders could actually get subsidies from taxpayers -- courtesy of the corrupt Republicans -- to ship skilled work out of the United States. Thanks to the GOP, the race to the bottom was on. The proof is in what happened to the real income of the American middle class since 1980.

Now the attacks are directed towards those public sector jobs which used to pay far less than the average private sector job -- but which have now attained a kind of parity ONLY because of decades of "successful" Republican policies to destroy the ability of private sector workers to bargain to get the same nature of deals that executives have given themselves. As a multiple of the average salary of ordinary workers, executive compensation and benefits have risen to an unbelievable ratio.

And so, the "deluded idiots" are the Americans who have voted for Republican policies over the years, expecting that things would be different than what they have become.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And did he run away for more then a month to deny that very same legislation?

He didn't need to. He was dealing with a Democratic opposition in Illinois that was reasonable enough to make concessions.

Where has the Wisconsin governor conceded and shown reasonableness in this circumstance?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Shamed into accepting it I would say instead. After all after it became known that they were getting sweeter deals than any private worker could dream of and bankrupting the private worker to boot to pay for it, is not exactly to win friends and influence people.

To claim that the "private sector" is "bankrupt" is revealing. The policies of the Republicans on a national level -- culminating in the massive Bush tax cuts for wealthiest Americans -- were supposed to increase prosperity.

It's nice that backers of the conservatives are tacitly admitting their whole approach to dealing with the American people has been a sham and a charade. The private sector is not "bankrupt" as a result of what used to be the much lower salary (but decent benefits) of the public sector. What Republicans want to do is to play the "class warfare" card in a very convenient way.

Having largely destroyed the private sector and sent it on a race to the bottom with their policies, they now want their minions to turn on any ordinary rank and file worker who is doing a little better than average -- after they've moved the average downwards.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If it fails the Republicans will be kicked out, a Democrat Governor will be elected along with a Democratic majority and they will repeal the law he has enacted

When that attempt happens, the Republican minority in the general assembly will flee the state to deny a quorum. And they will be cheered on by the same Republican hypocrites here who have chastised the Democrats for doing so. Should that happen, we liberals will say "what's good for the goose is good for the gander," being the practical, reasonable, and fair-minded people we are.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am still waiting for yabits to admit he is cool with postponing his retirement till 75 so cops in his state or h.s. lit teachers can retire at 55 on full bennies and have their checks mailed to 'em in Thailand.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm still waiting for yabits to admit he is cool with postponing his retirement till 75 so cops in his state or h.s. lit teachers can retire at 55 on full bennies and have their checks mailed to 'em in Thailand.

Here is what I am "cool with": If we as a society have made a promise to public servants -- especially those who have worked 15 or more years -- I believe we have to make good on that promise. Retiring at 55 only applies to those workers who have put more than 25 years of service into the system.

What people like SolidariTea do is try to represent that little devil that appears on everyone's shoulder when it's time to make a tough decision OR to renege on a deal or promise. (They actually play Satan quite well!)

They show up to play the "class warfare" card, telling people they have to work till they're 75 to support someone who took a contract to work under a system where they could retire earlier. They don't mention that more people will have to work later to support the executives in the public and private sectors -- who have FAR more cushy retirements.

The little Lucifers want people to feel resentful that teachers, fire-fighters, or peace officers might choose a place to retire that gives them a bit more comfort and quality of living than the hellhole these conservatives have made and are continuing to make of the United States.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The little Lucifers want people to feel resentful that teachers, fire-fighters, or peace officers might choose a place to retire that gives them a bit more comfort and quality of living than the hellhole these conservatives have made and are continuing to make of the United States.

The conservatives that are taxed to pay the salaries....A little resentful that maybe their quality of living and comfort depends on them still being to afford it in the first place? Darn those people.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The conservatives that are taxed to pay the salaries....A little resentful that maybe their quality of living and comfort depends on them still being to afford it in the first place? Darn those people.

Conservatives appear to believe that they are the only ones being taxed. I guess that's why they're the quickest and loudest to whine.

Anyone looking at the massive disparity of wealth distribution in the United States today would have to wonder if it wouldn't be better if there were more collective bargaining rather than less -- especially since the correlation between the decline of organized labor has near-identical correlation to the decline of the American middle class.

Yes, any conservative without at least one or two million in the bank is being taken advantage of. But not by the non-executive civil servant. Rather by the ones who are feeding the delusion that ordinary civil servants -- who have wisely chosen to organize themselves against the tyranny of management in the best American tradition -- are somehow the enemy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@yabits- you are not going to win an argument with molenir by using logic, as he is a logical and bright guy. And you are not going to win an argument against Tea, as he will simply deny that he has lost.

Go back and look at the 1:29 PM post. The hole in the argument is a million miles wide. "If you build it they will come." That is what you are up against, 31 years of it.

Or to be more clear, reality is not ideologically based. It is just RealiTea.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The hole in the argument is a million miles wide. "If you build it they will come." -- 31 years of it.

@GJDailleult - In all honesty, I am not trying to "win" against them, but to show how ungrounded and deluded their positions are. They can't even get basic facts straight -- as the falsehood that Carter removed the rights of federal workers to collectively bargain.

Your words above remind me of a political cartoon I saw in the early 1980s. Reagan and his Treasury Secretary of the time (Regan -- post Merrill Lynch) were looking out a window of a tall building at people leaping off in an attempt to fly. It made reference to the "pixie dust" of supply-side economics [sic] and Reagan is saying to Regan: "They're just not believing!" -- as a response to the law of gravity.

Brought up to date, the idea that unions can just give everything up to management and then everything will be wonderful is, to me, insane.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am against this new proposed legislation mainly due to the selling off of assets like UW Madison, and energy assets to global interests. -Take a vacation until calmer minds prevail and people actually read what are in these bills.

Public sector (cancer) jobs must be cut and people understand that. Wisconsin Libs need to be a role model for the ObamaGod and Federal Gov.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So a tea partier a business exec and a union rep sit down at a table with a dozen donuts. The business exec grabs 11 of them right away and then looks at the stupid tea partier and says, "you better watch out for that union feller, he's after your donut."

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If you build it they will come." That is what you are up against, 31 years of it.

I am fully with you. GJD. We are trying to clean up the mess these "Supply Side" believers created excluding Clinton. The middle class Americans are victims.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So a tea partier a business exec and a union rep sit down at a table with a dozen donuts. The business exec grabs 11 of them right away and then looks at the stupid tea partier and says, "you better watch out for that union feller, he's after your donut."

Doesn't work, as a joke or an analogy. I joined my first union at 18. Things are different in the WI case. Quit trying to pretend gov unions are the same as the ones you join upon first entering the work force.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Doesn't work, as a joke or an analogy.

It's not my fault it went over your head.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's not my fault it went over your head.

How does an unrelated anecdote/attempt at humor go over someone's head?

The article is about public union employees. There is no equivalent of a "business exec" (who is also a "tea partier" ? - I thought they were all unemployed hicks and racist raednecks); there are the unionized teachers who basically enjoy a monopoly and there are the taxpayers - the hapless "customers" in this scenario - unless of course you choose to forget about the students.

I'm pretty sure if I go thru taka13's previous posts on education in America I could find him lamenting the actual physical condition many of our state-run schools are in: shortages everywhere! Folks got to bring pencils for the kids to use! Why should these WI teachers make 100K/year when we have schools in America where, as Obama tried to tell us, paint is comin off the walls, and there's a train going past, and, uh, it's just turribl???

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But conservatives are dumb and don't care if their children are dumb too so who cares if the states with no collective bargaining agreement for their teachers rate 44th, 47th, 48th, 49th, and 50th in ACT/SAT scores.

I think you've nailed their game plan: Dumb kids convert into more Republican voters in the future. The higher a person's educational achievement level, the more likely they tend to be liberal.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why is it that conservatives are so up in arms about what they term "union greed," and so limp-wristed and subservient towards corporate/executive greed?

Isn't all greed bad?

So why get so angry over someone doing, say, 30% better in the public sector when the main reason for that is because private sector executives have taken so much of pie for themselves, it's driven the salary and benefits of the average private sector worker downwards? So, rather than bring down an executive who has taken a 400% increase of the pie, you're going to go after the ordinary worker who is doing just a little better and bring him down?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

They show up to play the "class warfare" card, telling people they have to work till they're 75 to support someone who took a contract to work under a system where they could retire earlier.

Can you believe Yabits has the balls to talk about playing the 'class warfare' card? Him of all people? So funny and hypocritical. Particularly when his next comment includes this...

Anyone looking at the massive disparity of wealth distribution in the United States today would have to wonder if it wouldn't be better if there were more collective bargaining rather than less

There is no official calculation of the average salary of Wisconsin public school teachers, according to Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction spokesman Patrick Gasper. The National Education Association estimates the average Wisconsin teacher’s salary to be $51,121. The state Department of Public Instruction only calculates average teacher salary and benefits on a district by district basis. As of fiscal year 2010, none of the school districts in Wisconsin had an average teacher salary of $100,000 (as our reader asked) or even $89,000 (the amount Paul said the average teacher in Wisconsin "is making.")

Whats the highest paid teacher, in Wisconsin? Tell you what, they're making over 90k a year. So while your statement is correct, that the average teacher salary isn't that high, the top teachers, who have been there the longest, note not the best teachers, are getting paid that amount.

I think you've nailed their game plan: Dumb kids convert into more Republican voters in the future. The higher a person's educational achievement level, the more likely they tend to be liberal.

Thats only if they get the 'right' teachers. If they don't get the teachers to steer them in the 'proper' direction, they tend to wind up conservative, particularly once they get out of college and see just how much waste there is in government, and how much they have to pay to support that waste. If however they can be properly indoctrinated, and taught to ignore reality in favor of 'ideals', then sure they wind up liberal.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

molenir,

If the highest paid teachers are being paid over 90K a year (a claim I find rather dubious), and the average salary is 51K a year, then there are many teachers who are earning less than the that 90K figure.

You want to take away their collective bargaining rights just to get at those mythical 90K people.

In other words, you want to cure a headache by cutting off the head.

Stupid. Stupid. And more stupid.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry, meant to say that for there to be teachers making this mythical 90k a year and for there to be an average of 51K a year, a lot of teachers must be making less than 51K a year.

Apparently those teachers shouldn't have any collective bargaining rights either because it's all or nothing crazy land.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"There goes my boy again and his so-called "conservative truths" which are anything but.

Teachers in Wisconsin do not make 100K/year.

I would be embarrassed to post so much make believe stuff but I guess if you have the mods cleaning up for you, when you're called out, it helps to maintain the fantasy.

From factcheck.org:

There is no official calculation of the average salary of Wisconsin public school teachers, according to Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction spokesman Patrick Gasper. The National Education Association estimates the average Wisconsin teacher’s salary to be $51,121. The state Department of Public Instruction only calculates average teacher salary and benefits on a district by district basis. As of fiscal year 2010, none of the school districts in Wisconsin had an average teacher salary of $100,000 (as our reader asked) or even $89,000 (the amount Paul said the average teacher in Wisconsin "is making.")

Of the 425 public school districts in Wisconsin, only one had a salary and benefits package in 2010 that exceeded $100,000; the Nicolet Unified School District average total compensation was $103,315. And only 22 school districts — about 5 percent of the total — paid average total compensation that topped $89,000.

And what do you get for having collective bargaining rights with your teachers? Better education, that's what. But conservatives are dumb and don't care if their children are dumb too so who cares if the states with no collective bargaining agreement for their teachers rate 44th, 47th, 48th, 49th, and 50th in ACT/SAT scores.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You want to take away their collective bargaining rights just to get at those mythical 90K people.

Actually no. My opinion is, that no public employee should have any collective bargaining rights at all, excepting perhaps for on the issue of wages. They are public employees. If they want to have certain protections given by unions, my own opinion is, that they should work in the private sector. Targetting teachers directly, tenure should be done away with completely, for all teachers. Whether or not a teacher keeps their job should be determined by classroom performance, not how long they've been teaching. Same thing with salaries.

And what do you get for having collective bargaining rights with your teachers? Better education, that's what. But conservatives are dumb and don't care if their children are dumb too so who cares if the states with no collective bargaining agreement for their teachers rate 44th, 47th, 48th, 49th, and 50th in ACT/SAT scores.

I seriously doubt your numbers, particularly since there are currently 8 states that don't allow collective bargaining for teachers, not just 5. Where did you get these figures?

Increased pay for teachers does not add up to better education. Increased money spent on education, likewise doesn't mean better education. Theres kind of a disconnect here. People think that throwing more money at the problem, will yield better results. That simply isn't the case.

Fortunately, Walker and the Wisconsin Senate today did what many of us have been suggesting for weeks. They separated the collective bargaining issue, and passed it as a non budget item. Meaning they didn't need the Dems there to pass it. So the Dems who have been holding up the debate for weeks, now get no debate on it at all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taka313 - But conservatives are dumb and don't care if their children are dumb too so who cares if the states with no collective bargaining agreement for their teachers rate 44th, 47th, 48th, 49th, and 50th in ACT/SAT scores.

From farther down the very same page where you found your factcheck.org info they state:

As for the standardized tests, the SAT and ACT differ in content, both measuring students’ aptitude in a variety of subjects and skills. The e-mail shows a ranking of states based on the combined average SAT and ACT scores, but it’s not clear who ranked the states, what methodology was used or what year it was done.

In other words, your claim that the states with no collective bargaining agreement for their teachers rate 44th, 47th, 48th, 49th, and 50th in ACT/SAT scores is not based on any verified fact but was simply made up and still you chose to parrot the numbers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites