Quote:

---

Well, we said we wanted budget cutters, so that's what we have.

In fact, it's a downright frenzy of fiscal rectitude in Washington. You've heard it all: Every cut matters. No cut is too small. Nothing is off limits, even the unkindest cuts of all. After all, the problem is just too large to put off any longer.

Most convinced of their task are the 87 House Republican newcomers. They are not awestruck by Washington. (A good thing.) They are not remotely humbled by the hallowed and marbled halls. (Still good.) Instead, they come with the arrogance of absolute conviction. (Dangerous.) Here's the mantra: We were sent here to cut the budget, and that is what we intend to do. Period.

In one way, it's a devotion that should be applauded. The freshmen intend to test the notion that Washington can be changed, which we would all welcome. They believe that the previous GOP majority -- the one that came in with Gingrich's revolution in 1994 -- was itself co-opted by the system, and its own power and ran up the deficit. And they are also right about that. (Can anyone say Tom DeLay?)

Their brethren in this new movement for change are many of the newly minted Republican governors. They share the House GOPers' single-minded worship of the budget-knife. Again, in theory, it's a healthy shift. Then what's the problem? It's their way of doing business. It's their conviction that compromise is bad. "They could use a dose of humility," says one senior White House adviser. (And he should know: The White House, arrogant in its own use of the majority, got its humble pie in the midterm elections.)

Consider the noisiest business of the week: Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin now has a sit-in on his front stoop in Madison because -- apparently as part of his budget-cutting mission -- he wants to water down the state's collective bargaining agreements. It wasn't enough that state workers agreed to pay more for their pension and health benefits (which they previously got almost for free). That would have been a great start: Declare victory and fight the rest another day.

But the public sector unions were just too juicy a political target. They're influential in a special way: Who else gets to help choose the people who set your salary? Sure, they're potent and dominant Democratic political entities with an archaic hold on power. But did Walker have to take on collective bargaining now if he really wants to control spending immediately?

Didn't he know the fight would take a huge -- and potentially damaging -- detour? Of course he did. He wanted to be Ronald Reagan battling the air traffic controllers union. The point: He wanted the fight.

That's the way the newcomers work. And in the same arrogant vein, do House Republicans have to shut the government down rather than compromise on a temporary plan to fund the government? Their more establishment elders -- who rose from the ruins of the last Newt Gingrich created government shutdown -- would rather avoid it. But they're clearly held hostage by their bulge of freshmen who see compromise as capitulation to the enemy.

Yesterday, House Republicans told Senate Democrats they had a plan to put off a government shutdown for two weeks: Start making some of the $61 billion in House proposed cuts to the budget. It's a non-starter with some Democrats, and it gets the GOP where it wants to be: forcing Democrats to vote against a plan to reduce the deficit.

As for the Democrats, they say that once the public understands what the GOP is cutting, it will turn on them -- and run back into Democrats' arms. It's just more of the same.

The public voted for none of this. They did not vote for the overreach of Gov. Walker. In fact, a recent Gallup poll shows that 61% of the public -- and 63% of independent voters -- oppose the elimination of collective bargaining for public unions. Nor did they vote for a fight over shutting the government down. They just want results.

One of the most level-headed public officials in all of this budget frenzy is Indiana Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels. He's a grownup, having served both outside and inside Washington. Yes he also dealt with the public employee union issue, by signing an executive order ending collective bargaining for Indiana state workers, which cost him politically early on in his tenure.

Yet when state Republicans called for a vote on a proposal to weaken unions in the private sector -- and Democratic members started heading for the hills -- Daniels decided to lower the temperature and shelve the bill. "I thought there was a better time and place to have these very important and legitimate issues raised," he said.

Daniels is right. And at a recent speech in Washington before a conservative group, he was right again: "Purity in martyrdom," he warned his GOP audience, "is for suicide bombers."

His proposition is about to be tested.

---

Quote:

---

His attempt to kill off public employee unions—along with his refusal of $810 million in federal high-speed rail funding—has made Walker the darling of conservatives across the nation and FOX News. Walker’s raised media profile is making him a strong contender for vice president in 2012—or president, if you believe the hype. Because if Walker busts unions in Wisconsin, Republicans and their corporate backers believe they can bust unions anywhere. Their plans begin with public employees in Wisconsin, but they won’t stop until all workers—whether they’re in the public or private sector—lose their rights to have a voice in their workplace.

Fact: Republicans claim the bill is all about money and necessary to balance the state budget, so therefore it could be put on a fast track and circumvent the normal legislative process. Walker has called his union-busting proposal “modest” and claimed “it’s about the money.” State Sen. Alberta Darling (R-River Hills) called it “fair” and a “small sacrifice” for represented workers.

But Walker’s budget repair bill is about far more than health care and pension contributions. The Senate Democrats and unions agreed to those concessions last week, but the Republicans rebuffed the offer, saying that the bill is not negotiable. Therefore, the bill the Democrats would have to vote for would disallow public employee unions from negotiating on health care coverage, staffing levels, seniority, workplace safety, sick days, vacation and more. Walker has even rejected a Republican proposal to suspend bargaining rights for two years.

But that’s not what this whole battle is about. The battle is about “power". Walker wants to bust unions, which will increase the power of lobbyists funded by billionaires like the ultra-libertarian Koch brothers, who own the largest privately held oil firm in the country and fund the Astroturf tea party group Americans for Prosperity (AFP).

The Times confirmed the union-busting-Walker-AFP connection, and reported that AFP’s head, Tim Phillips, plans to repeat the strategy in other states. “The effort to impose limits on public labor unions has been a particular focus in Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, all states with Republican governors".

Wisconsin’s looming budget deficit is overstated. It’s estimated to be about $3.6 billion for 2011-2013. But that’s based on $3.9 billion in state agency budget requests (a 6.2% spending increase). As former co-chair of the powerful Joint Finance Committee state Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Madison) has pointed out, these requests are never approved in full. In fact, Pocan noted, the state LFB reported that agencies had requested a 9.7% increase in spending in the previous budget, but instead Democrats—then in charge—actually reduced state spending by 2.6%. Pocan called Walker’s economic emergency a “lie” and warned: Remember the Trojan War.

“The only way you can slip a bunch of bad public policy into law in Wisconsin is to disguise it as something else,” Pocan wrote on his blog. “Create a crisis, claim you are on the sole path to resolving that crisis, needing to enact whatever measures are necessary and be a hero to the people. Right…”

In addition, by carving out exemptions for unions that endorsed him in his campaign—law enforcement and firefighters—Walker is hamstringing local officials who need to craft a balanced budget while having to cope with reduced state aid.

Take Milwaukee, for example. Mayor Tom Barrett sent a letter to Sen. Darling and state Rep. Robin Vos (R-Racine), the co-chairs of the Joint Finance Committee, explaining his predicament. Fire and police employees account for 65% of the city’s operating budget salaries. They’d be spared from Walker’s shared revenue cuts. Therefore, the rest of Milwaukee’s employees would bear the burden of Walker’s cuts to municipalities.

As Barrett said on Monday in his State of the City speech, “A cut to shared revenue is a cut to public safety. I know [Walker is] trying to wash his hands of the public safety impacts of his decision by excluding Milwaukee police and fire from his proposals, but that just pushes the decision to the city level. There will be an impact.”

Walker’s refusal to negotiate with unions and recognize their right to bargain is nothing new. His 2010 and 2011 Milwaukee County budgets contained tens of millions of wage and benefits concessions that had never been presented to unions at the bargaining table. In fact, Walker’s handpicked labor negotiator had come up with a tentative agreement with most of the county’s unions in 2010, but Walker ignored his own negotiator’s deal with labor and instead created $32 million of concessions in his budget. Walker’s budget was so bad that the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission found that Walker’s team had bargained in “bad faith.”

Walker broached the issue of a possible National Guard deployment while introducing his budget repair bill at a press conference on Feb. 11. “In state government, we have had, before I’ve taken office, plans for contingencies no matter what the circumstances,” Walker told reporters. “We have updated those. I got a full briefing from all the major, level-one state agencies as well as the National Guard yesterday. We are fully prepared and equipped to handle whatever may occur. So we have every confidence we can move on that. But again, you plan for the worst, you expect the best. And I expect from the good men and women who work for state and local government that they’re going to continue to do the good, professional job they do each and every day.”

Newspapers around the state picked up his comments in their headlines. “Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker says National Guard ready for any unrest over anti-union bill,” the Green Bay Press Gazette claimed. The Associated Press headlined its syndicated story with “Walker says National Guard is prepared.”

---

Quote:

---

It’s been done before, under extreme circumstances. In 2002, the former majority leader of the U.S. House of Representatives, Tom Delay, engaged in illegal activities to elect Republican majorities in both houses of the Texas Legislature so they could redraw the lines for that state’s congressional delegation. This would be the first time in Texas history that the state Legislature would redraw the congressional lines mid-decade without being ordered to do so by the courts. (State legislatures draw the congressional boundary lines for their state’s congressional delegation.)

To try to prevent Tom Delay’s gerrymandered, pro-Republican congressional district map from being passed, in 2003 the minority Democrats went across the state line to New Mexico and Oklahoma to deprive the Legislature of a quorum necessary to conduct business. The Democrats eventually returned to Texas, the new gerrymandered congressional lines were passed and the Texas Republicans picked up six more seats in the Texas congressional delegation. Later, Delay was indicted for his illegal election activity that produced the Republican majorities, was convicted by a jury and sentenced to three years in prison for money laundering in connection with his campaign activities. The Texas Democrats used this last-ditch effort of leaving the state to hold off Delay’s corrupt abuse of power.

---

Quote:

---

Collective bargaining

The bill would make various changes to limit collective bargaining for most public employees to wages. Total wage increases could not exceed a cap based on the consumer price index (CPI) unless approved by referendum.

Contracts would be limited to one year and wages would be frozen until the new contract is settled. Collective bargaining units are required to take annual votes to maintain certification as a union.

Employers would be prohibited from collecting union dues and members of collective bargaining units would not be required to pay dues. These changes take effect upon the expiration of existing contracts.

Local law enforcement and fire employees, and state troopers and inspectors would be exempt from these changes.

Career executive transfers

The bill would allow state employees in the career executive positions to be reassigned between agencies upon agreement of agency heads.

Limited term employees (LTE)

The bill would prohibit LTE's from being eligible for health insurance or participation in the Wisconsin Retirement System.

State employee absences and other work actions

If the Governor has declared a state of emergency, the bill authorizes appointing authorities to terminate any employees that are absent for three days without approval of the employer or any employees that participate in an organized action to stop or slow work.

Quality Health Care Authority

The bill repeals the authority of home health care workers under the Medicaid program to collectively bargain.

Child care labor relations

The bill repeals the authority of family child care workers to collectively bargain with the State.

University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics (UWHC) Board and Authority

The bill repeals collective bargaining for UWHC employees. State positions currently employed by the UWHC Board are eliminated and the incumbents are transferred to the UWHC Authority.

University of Wisconsin faculty and academic staff

The bill repeals the authority of UW faculty and academic staff to collectively bargain.

---

Quote:

---

Authorize DHS to restructure program notwithstanding current law

In order to reduce the growth in Medicaid costs, the bill authorizes the Department of Health Services to make program changes notwithstanding limits in state law related to specific program provisions. The department is expected to develop new approaches on program benefits, eligibility determination and provider cost-effectiveness.

---

Quote:

---

As the standoff in Wisconsin rages on, two new nationwide polls indicate more people support the public sector union workers over the state's Republican governor in the battle over collective bargaining rights.

Forty-two percent of the public sides with the public employee unions and 31 percent backs Gov. Scott Walker, according to a Pew Research Center survey released Tuesday. Nearly one in ten say they don't support either side, with 18 percent unsure.

A new CBS News/New York Times survey indicates that six in ten oppose the elimination of collective bargaining rights for the public sector union workers, with 56 percent opposed to the cutting of pay or benefits to reduce state budget deficits.

A new CBS News/New York Times survey indicates that six in ten oppose the elimination of collective bargaining rights for the public sector union workers, with 56 percent opposed to the cutting of pay or benefits to reduce state budget deficits.

A USA Today/Gallup survey released last Wednesday also indicated that 61 percent of the public would oppose a move in their state to pass a bill that would take away some of the collective bargaining rights of union government workers.

---

Quote:

---

Walker has a 10% net disapproval -- 39% approve, 49% disapprove.

---

Quote:

---

It goes without saying that this poll is sponsored by an interested party, though as I said it's done by a highly credible polling organization and is not loaded with leading questions -- specifically, neutral support/opposition questions come first and are only later followed by so-called 'messaging' questions. I'd still like to see a few more independent polls of this situation. But it is worth noting that these results are broadly in line the results released a few days ago by the GOP-aligned group WeAskAmerica.

More sections from the poll write up ...

Quote:

---

Voters in Wisconsin strongly agree with the working families at the state capitol and oppose Governor Scott Walker's anti-worker agenda. Moreover, since the protests began, Governor Walker has seen real erosion in his standing, with a majority expressing disapproval of his job performance and disagreement with his agenda. Strong majorities disagree with eliminating collective bargaining for public employees and believe that if workers agree to concessions on pensions and healthcare benefits that the Governor should drop his plan to eliminate collective bargaining. Walker's Standing is Poor, while Most Agree with the Unions and Public Employees

Overall, a majority (51 percent) of Wisconsin voters disapprove of Walker's job performance and give him net negative favorability ratings (39 percent favorable, 49 percent unfavorable). In contrast, 62 percent of voters offer a favorable view of public employees (only 11 percent unfavorable) and 53 percent of voters rate labor unions favorably (31 percent unfavorable). When asked if they agree or disagree with the position different groups and individuals are taking in the current situation, voters side with the public employees (67 percent agree), the protesters (62 percent agree), the unions (59 percent agree), and the Democrats in the state legislature (56 percent agree). In contrast, 53 percent disagree with Walker and 46 percent disagree with the Republicans in the legislature.

Just over half of Wisconsin's voters oppose the agenda offered by Walker and the Republicans in the state legislature. Only 43 percent favor it. It is striking that there is a real intensity gap with 39 percent strongly opposing their proposals and only 28 percent strongly favoring it. When voters are presented with Walker's specific agenda, including cutting benefits, freezing wages and eliminating collective bargaining, 52 percent oppose. The intensity gap actually increases to 41 percent strongly oppose and 24 percent strongly favor. Finally, voters are convinced that if public employees accept concessions and pay more for retirement and healthcare that Governor Walker should drop his attempt to eliminate collective bargaining. Three quarters say that public employees should not have their collective bargaining rights eliminated including nearly half of Republicans.

---

Fifty-three percent of those surveyed said they opposed reducing pay or benefits for government employees, while 44 percent said they would support such a move.

---

Quote:

---

Many now consider Wisconsin a swing state, so the political implications here cannot be ignored. And when President Obama jumped into the fray yesterday, his involvement was not by accident. Earlier polling showed a large margin of support for Gov. Walker’s initiative, but the national reaction since then has been truly remarkable. And when the President addresses the subject, it is bound to have an effect.

For those reasons, we polled nearly 2,400 Wisconsin residents last night about the issue and their views of the Senate Democrats’ disappearing act. Besides some demographic questions we asked two main questions. The first one was:

Quote:

---

As you may know, Gov. Scott Walker has proposed a plan to limit the pay of government workers and teachers, increase their share of the cost of benefits, and strip some public-employ unions of much of their power. We’d like to know if APPROVE or DISAPPROVE of Gov. Walker’s plan; 51.9% disapproved; 43.05% approved.

---

It would appear that–for now, at least–the public tide has turned against Gov. Walker’s proposals.

---