A federal appeals court on Friday reversed a decision by a local federal judge and upheld a state law that sharply curtails the collective bargaining rights of public workers in Wisconsin.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit reversed a ruling issued in March by U.S. District Judge William Conley that struck down key parts of the collective bargaining law. Conley had ruled that the state can't prevent public employee unions from collecting voluntary dues through payroll deductions and can't require annual recertification of unions.

But writing for a 2-1 majority, Judge Joel Flaum wrote that the law's payroll deduction prohibitions do not violate First Amendment free speech rights because "use of the state's payroll systems to collect union dues is a state subsidy of speech that requires only viewpoint neutrality."

Flaum also wrote that unions' arguments against the creation of different collective bargaining rules for two sets of public workers — public safety employees and general employees — were appealing but aren't supported by established law.

"All that matters is whether the statute, as written, furthers a legitimate government objective," Flaum wrote. Once a rational relationship is found "between the disparity of treatment and some legitimate governmental purpose," the law passes constitutional scrutiny, he wrote.

The state, Flaum wrote, reasonably concluded that public safety workers "filled too critical a role" to risk work stoppages caused by labor unrest.

In a partial dissent, Judge David Hamilton agreed with Conley that the state's selective prohibition on payroll deductions for union dues violates the First Amendment. Hamilton otherwise agreed with the majority decision, though he admitted that the state's reasoning for its different treatment of public safety and general employees in collective bargaining seemed "flimsy."

Other suits still in play

The ruling is not the final word on the fate of the controversial measure. In September Dane County Circuit Judge Juan Colas blocked significant portions of the law as applied to municipal and school district workers, finding it to be an unconstitutional infringement on their rights of free speech, freedom of association and equal protection. His decision, which differs from Conley's in that it is based on state law, is before a state appeals court.

Two other lawsuits are still pending. A group that includes the union representing Capitol Police officers filed suit in November over the unequal classes of public workers. And unions representing Madison public works employees and other municipal workers filed suit in federal court in July 2011.

Despite the rulings by Conley and Colas, automatic dues deductions have not restarted. However, some bargaining units whose contracts haven't expired still have automatic dues deductions, along with a few units whose contracts expired after Conley issued his decision.

The Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission stopped scheduling union certification elections after Conley's ruling in March. The commission must decide whether Friday's federal ruling means that certification elections should resume, or if Colas' decision forbids them, general counsel Peter Davis said.

Officials react

Unions said the decision would need further analysis before they decide whether to appeal it to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"Too soon to tell," AFSCME Council 40 executive director Rick Badger said in an email. "Lots of union folks — and their counsel — will be reading the decision."

Wisconsin Education Association Council President Mary Bell said WEAC was disappointed and was weighing its next steps Friday. Madison Teachers Inc. executive director John Matthews said it's possible that unions could ask for the case to be reheard before entire 7th Circuit court, given the 2-1 decision with a strong dissent. MTI is not a plaintiff in the federal suit but is part of the suit Colas ruled on in September.

Union officials said they would keep fighting, noting the federal suit the appeals court rejected Friday was just one challenge to the law.

But Gov. Scott Walker said the ruling provides some finality to the issue.

"As we've said all along, Act 10 is constitutional," Gov. Scott Walker said in a statement. He also said through a spokesman that he was confident Colas' decision would "similarly be overturned."

State Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, whose office has been defending the law in court, said he hopes that federal appeals decision "will pave the way for resolving any remaining challenges in a manner that supports the legislative decisions made by our elected officials."

Democrats voiced disappointment at the decision.

"The 7th Circuit's determination that the calculated protection of political favorites and the targeting of political foes is constitutionally permissible is a sad deterioration of our Wisconsin values," State Senate Democratic Leader Chris Larson said.

Ruling: Not discriminating by viewpoint

The collective bargaining law prohibited general employees from collectively bargaining on issues other than base wages, imposed recertification requirements on them and prohibited the state and municipalities from deducting union dues from paychecks.

Public safety employees, however, kept the same rights that they had before the law.

Unions challenged the limits on collective bargaining, the recertification requirements under the federal Equal Protection clause and said the prohibition on payroll deduction of dues violated the First Amendment and the Equal Protection clause.

Conley invalidated the recertification and payroll deduction provisions, but upheld the law's limits on collective bargaining. He found no rational basis for treating public safety and general employee unions separately. He also said the payroll deduction provision violated the First Amendment because public safety unions, some of whom had endorsed Walker in the 2010 election, had a different viewpoint than the other unions, who supported Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, a Democrat.

Flaum wrote, however, that the law is not viewpoint discriminatory just because the two groups of unions have different points of view. He noted that in the public safety category are a number of unions that did not endorse Walker.

— State Journal reporters Steven Verburg, Matthew DeFour and Mary Spicuzza contributed to this report.

A federal appeals court on Friday reversed a decision by a local federal judge and upheld a state law that strictly curtails the collective bargaining rights of public workers in Wisconsin.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit on Friday reversed a ruling issued in March by U.S. District Judge William Conley that struck down key parts of the collective bargaining law. Conley had ruled that the state can't prevent public employee unions from collecting voluntary dues through payroll deductions and can't require annual re-certification of unions.

You might also like

(140) comments

Norwood44
Norwood44

Typothetes, thanks for the support. It is interesting that anyone who thinks the union model prior to Act 10 was out of balance is branded as a far right wing nutcase. I don't oppose unions. I oppose union abuse. I support unions when they correct injustice and oppose them when the preserve it. My attitude towards unions, public and otherwise, comes from working with them for over twenty years. Unions, in their infancy, created safe working conditions for members in the midst of terrible exploitation. It got them fair wages and benefits. Good. But what is troubling about modern unions is this; they make innovation difficult and very costly, they protect employees who are not competent,..they drive performance of the whole toward the average or below average. They eschew competition and achievement, which is at the core of economic growth. In fact, if you are a high achiever, unions work to diffuse your passion and zeal for your job, lest you make others look bad. But more importantly, re public employee unions, they have become a large political lobby seeking fat contracts with limited accountability by purchasing the state and local Democratic Party. Despite their working man rhetoric,public unions have done little to help private sector working people. It is amazing to vote for Obama, loathe Fox News, and support gun control, gay rights, environmentally sound legislation, and be branded by local unionists as a right winger. The state employee contracts needed to be redesigned. Though clumsily done by Walker, it was the right thing to do for the state and our citizens. It is happening everywhere. Voters are seeing the contracts for what they are; a bad deal. So we are changing them. There is no choice if we are to operate our communities responsibly. And now... let the rabid responses begin.

eclectic
eclectic

Norwood44 - Very well stated.

Government is for the benefit of society as a whole. To the extent that it operates for the benefit of itself (or its representatives/employees) at the expense of the governed (taxpayers), it loses it legitimacy.

Unfortunately, public unions have operated for the benefit of their members, while disregarding the interests of the greater society. This neither promotes good government or respect for government.

If public unions are be a force in the future, they need to align themselves with concepts of competency, efficiency, and an overriding commitment to the public good.

WI_Expat
WI_Expat

Agree with Tomtom33,

Fart proved the trend of spending that needs to end.....unless Fart is willing and able to single handedly pick up the additional cost. Fart?

CentristActivist
CentristActivist

Those on the far left are confused. Those on the far right are ignorant. Just read the nonsense.

Is there anyone out there that can make coherent and sensible comments that inspire fair and considerate discussion on opposing points of view?

I have benefitted from unions, but also believe, like any powerful organization, unions have corruption and dues collected make someone else rich. The business side has the same benefit/corrupt mix.

There is a solution, and sorry to say, it is in the middle somewhere, neither side is right or wrong all the time.

Typothetes
Typothetes

IF you can't see several commenters in this forum that have good ideas, then you are blind CentristActivist. Norwood44, for example, and many others. Is Norwood a far right ignoramus? Not!

Can't you name one commenter that is in the middle that you respect?

Norwood44
Norwood44

Cowboy. This is the 21st century economy. Fart, I think that short term gov relief is correct as a stimulant. But long term costly and inefficient union contracts benefit unions only, not citizens. I am not opposed to unions. I am opposed to bad, fat, protectionist contracts purchased by powerful lobbyists that prevent communities from solving problems in innovative, cost effective ways. Call me crazy.

Fartinthewind
Fartinthewind

I wouldn't call you crazy, I'd call you an ideologue who's pushing a solution that doesn't fit the problems at hand.

Typothetes
Typothetes

Norwood44 is right and reasonble, Farty. You are blinded by something. What is it? Why can't you see that public employee unions do not benefit Wisconsin citizens?

Wasting money on bad government will never solve any "problem at hand."

Cowboy99540
Cowboy99540

Dear Readers:

So the Federal Court of Appeals struck down the prior ruling by U.S. District Judge William Conley, ha?

It was Judge Conley's ruling that struck down key parts of the collective bargaining law by ruling that the state can't prevent public employee unions from collecting voluntary dues through payroll deductions and couldn't require annual re-certification of unions.

And rightfully so.

So now, some of you are trying to ignorantly argue that the unions are the biggest lobbyist on Capital Hill while others are asserting that public employee unions are an "unnecessary drain" on the state's economy.

Those folks had better go back and review lessons from Econ 101, in particularly on how wages drive any capitalist market.by creating the demand for goods and services.

Well to all of you who have forgotten that lesson, and were foolishly naive enough to leave Scott Walker in office,followed by installing a republican controlled (mainly as a result of crooked gerrymandering) majority in the State Legislature, I say this:

You, and more importantly, your children, and then your grand children, are next.

Lets see what you'll have to say when the republicans turn our formerly prosperous state into a right to work state. You think job creation is suffering now just wait!

Right to work is where all labor unions completely disappear like in Indiana, Iowa, and as they have all over the south. Ever been to a southern right to work state?

Everyone who knows anything about the "american industrial experience" also knows that labor unions were a reaction to the heavy handedness, and what could be described as near criminal behavior, committed openly by big business entities (wealthy industrialists) during the 19th and early twentieth centuries.

Many of you seem totally unaware of that fact.

Finally, whether public or private, its is a well known truth (and fact) that labor union advocacy, for collective action taken on behalf of workers, has vastly improved the lot of our entire citizenry since the days of "Robber Barron Rule" in the later 19th/early twentieth centuries.

If you are really serious about knowing the truth, go back and study what has gone on in America since the passage of the Wagoner Act under FDR, which was followed by Taft-Hartley a decade later in 1947.

As soon as the republicans got control or both houses of congress thereby placing them in a position to override a presidential veto they sought to scale back federal labor rights.

Today, with politicians like Scott Walker and others who think like him, that are taking their orders from Corporate-Legislative Conspirators like in ALEC, that dictate you're children will be lucky to have a decent paying job in 20-years or so.

You can lie to yourselves all you want, because it's coming to your town.

If any of you, anti-union busting delinquents out there, had any kind inkling of a clue you'd know for sure that in the United States, since the GOP & Big Business went to work tearing down organized labor, as worker productivity has increased every year to over 100%, since Ronald Reagan was president, actual wages in this economy have been on a gradual decline.

Top that off with the disastrous affects of nearly 30-years of supply-side economics, coupled to several huge tax cuts given by federal/state governments to the wealthy, including under both Presidents Reagan/Bush 43, combined with two unfunded foreign wars costing us trillions, and increasingly higher CEO compensation/benefit packages that actually "steal the rewards of higher worker productivity", and what you've got is a pending feudal society.

It will be a society where all you suckers that voted for Scott Walker will have absolutely no voice or right to question anything that Walker's and his masters decide to do!

Cowboy

Typothetes
Typothetes

Cowboy, you pretend to understand economics, but you only seem to understand communist propaganda.

I taught Econ 101 in 1985. It was actually Microeconomics. Econ 102 was Macroeconomics. And, I taught Economic History of the United States--Econ 105.

I got a Masters degree in Economics focused on Taxation and Fiscal Policy. And, I am a conservative when it comes to Fiscal Policy. It is harmful for governments to overspend unless there is a massive economic problem. Well, the federal goverment had a massive problem, they overspent. And, things are not so bad as they could have been. Now, it is time to be sensible and cut back.

As a student of history, I agree that some union activism has created impressive improvements in worker safety. But, some unions went too far. Corrpution and extortion became the gameplan of many unions. Unions drove entire industries into bankruptcy. But, they were private companies and taxpayers didn't suffer directly.

Public employee unions have succumbed to corruption and extortion and are harming taxapayers and those they are employed to service in modern times. They are only interested in themselves. I don't mean to say that all public employee union members are corrupt, they aren't. But, their leaders are only interested in benefits to the union, not taxpayers and not children.

Pull your head out of your horses butt, Cowboy, and smell the coffee! You are wrong and do a disservice to your neighbors and your family (at least those who are not public employees).

Norwood44
Norwood44

Fart. Agreed. Act 10 isn't a short term economic play. It's a long term solution to many problems, economic and others.

Fartinthewind
Fartinthewind

As usual Norwood, you misrepresent what I said. No surprises there. But in the spirit of agreement, I am glad you agree that Act 10 has had a tremendously negative impact on Wisconsin's economy. It is unfortunate we will never really know Act 10's overall, long-term economic impact. Over time there will be too many other factors at play to truly isolate Act 10's economic impact.

As for your position that Act 10 served to solve other problems? I'd have to say that too will never be truly known. Your entire premise relies on the presupposition that public sector unions and public sector employees were a problem and that Act 10 was the only viable solution to those problems. I find such logic deeply flawed.

Many states have long used public employment policies similar to Act 10. Many of those states suffered more damage during the economic collapse than Wisconsin suffered. Many of these same states have enjoyed economic recoveries that are every bit as tepid as Wisconsin's post Act-10 recovery. These inconvenient truths calls into question whether public sector employment policies were ever Wisconsin's problem.

We shouldn't forget that many states didn't suffer the economic fall off Wisconsin suffered and many states have enjoyed a far more robust recovery than Wisconsin. Since many of the states with better economic climates before and after the recession had and continue to have public sector employment policies that mirrored those in Wisconsin prior to Act 10, it just isn't possible to demonstrate that Wisconsin's "problems" were the result of public sector employment policies.

But alas, I'm sure none of this will prevent conservatives from showering Act 10 with disproportionate credit for the next natural uptick in the normal business cycle.

Typothetes
Typothetes

Farty, you are mistaken when you use terms like "Keynesian" and "austerity" in your arguments. Wisconsin State government is not like federal government. One commenter made the point that a "rainy day fund" can provide some means for Keynesian-like fiscal policy, but it is still extremely limited, unlike the federal government.

The US Federal government can use deficit spending for economic goals. Wisconsin, under its Constitution, cannot. Farty, name one year in Wisconsin's history when they did not spend every cent of tax revenue! That year, if it exists, might be considered a year of austerity, but I doubt it actualy exists more than once or twice in history. Otherwise, Wisconsin spends all the money it receives in almost every year.

Farty, you reject the commenters that remind you that tax spending comes from revenues from taxpayers--the net "Keynesian" effect being zero. So, you think there is some multiplier effect that makes taxes boost an economy. YEs, that CAN happen is some situations, but those situations are more rare than the usual situation when taxes harm an economy.

Sorry, your economic knowledge is lacking and your are misinformed. Higher taxes for Wisconsin is bad for Wisconsin citizens. Luckily, Wisconsin has a balanced-budget Constitution so your dumb ideas cannot bankrupt our state.

Norwood44
Norwood44

Adios. I meant, in aggregate over the years the state employee unions have spent more than any other single lobby. They don't lobby for labor, they lobby for government workers. Just ask the auto workers in Janesville. The state worker as friend of working man rings hollow. Further, lobbying politicians to the point where the Dems are in the pocket of the gov unions whose contracts they oversee is just plain awful for the rest of Wisconsin citizens regardless of political preference. Gladly, we changed the model, never to see it again.

LiveForward
LiveForward

It's so invigorating to read all the various opinions from people who care so much about their view points. In a way this is what is so great about our country. People can make a difference. For those state workers who have seen their wages reduced read any one of the many blogs on ways to stretch your familly's dollar. When you eat out have water instead of high calories soda. Saving is easy when you break it down to smaller bite size items. Ride your bike instead of driving your car when you can. You all still have your jobs!

Tricolor Dog
Tricolor Dog

Roughly 300,000 public sector employees in WI lost anywhere from 5 -20% of their take home pay over the last 5 years - most of that in 2011-2012. If you right wing morons think that this is helpful for our local economies and the creator of 90% of all jobs - small business - you've been drinking way too much kool aid. The long term effects of this Act hasn't been seen yet, but you can expect stagnant wages, job growth of middle class workers and the largesse that was handed to Walker's pals (the 1%) to end up leaving the state. It's like the proposed mine. Most of the money that a mine like that would generate would be transfered to the home state of the mining company, in this case Florida. The new tax cuts that Walker is proposing will be for incomes in excess of $250K. How many of you posters here make that kind of money?

tomtom33
tomtom33

Any losses by public sector employees were dollars that were not taken from taxpayers in general including public employees. The net result is zero.

Do you believe that we would jump start the economy by giving public employees a big raise? The effect would again be zero because all taxpayers would have to foot the bill.

Fartinthewind
Fartinthewind

How many times do we have to go down this road tomtom. In reality things just didn't work the way you suggest.

The drop in expendable income forced upon public sector workers did not result in dollar for dollar savings to taxpayers. As ski has pointed out on numerous occasions much of the money public sector employees lost went to pay for medicaid increases and not into tax cuts. The rest of the money went to tax cuts for a small sector of our economy that has obviously not taken those savings and created jobs.

At best you could argue that a de facto tax increase on public sector workers (to replace lost federal medicaid dollars) avoided the need to raise taxes on the larger pool of taxpayers. But even that begs several questions. If taxes didn't actually go down how could we have a the kind of zero sum gain you fantasize about? Did the de facto tax increase on public sector workers damage the state's economy? Would it have been better to spread the tax increase over a larger pool of tax payers?

The answers are no, yes and yes.

eclectic
eclectic

Money does not grow on trees. If there is an expense (whether it is for medicaid, health care, pensions or benefits) it has to be paid by someone. The only question is who will pay.

The public sector workers paying more of their health and pension costs avoided the taxpayers having to pay those costs. If the State workers had not paid more, the taxpayers would have paid more. It is a zero sum game.

Fartinthewind
Fartinthewind

Your math is correct as far as you go but you don't go far enough. You are leaving critical variables out of your equation. So yours is a fine rouse but that's all it is eclectic. At least it's the same ruse tomtom parrots.

196ski
196ski

My ears turned red, I figured somebody mentioned me.

From WisTax: "Federal Medicaid funding for Wisconsin will be more than $1 billion less in 2011-13 than in 2009-11. As a result, general fund tax dollars are needed just to maintain current spending. In fact, general fund spending at the Department of Health Services—the state’s Medicaid agency—is $1.4 billion (32.5%) more than 2010-11 base spending. With school aids accounting for the biggest chunk of GPR spending (about 40% in 2009-11), lawmakers looked there for money to fund Medicaid."

One billion dollars was removed from circulation in Wisconsin with the loss of this revenue. We could argue all day as to whether the having the public sector employee's bear the burden or whether it would have been better to spread the pain but at the end of the day that billion dollars is gone. The ONLY way to make that money up, assuming the Federal Government doesn't give it back, is for the private sector to generate wealth in the State.

Easier said than done.

Fartinthewind
Fartinthewind

Are you sure it wasn't the wind turning your ears red ski?

Hey, I hear all the time that federal medicaid funding is going to be 1 billion less for this budget cycle. I haven't found anything that proves this to be true. I am beginning to think that most of this billion dollar cut was just a cut in the growth of federal medicaid spending.

Everything I read shows federal medicaid spending dropped less than 200 million in 2011 and 2012 and that there's actually a jump of 80 million in 2013. It's just that the fed's percentage of total spending is going down. You can check this with the Kern foundation and this link http://www.wha.org/Data/Sites/1/advocacy/2012-MAFactSheet.pdf

My position is that Walker's austerity plans have hurt the Wisconsin economy. Even if we accept that this was the result of changes to federal medicaid funding, one way or another it's the economics of austerity. Austerity during an economic crisis, whether from state or federal governments isn't necessarily a wise idea. Since other states tackled the issues differently it's fair to lay the blame at Walker's feet.

196ski
196ski

Pretty sure. I don't see why WisTax would lie do you?
or

"The mission and cost of Medicaid in Wisconsin have expanded dramatically over the years. One out of every five citizens are now served in one of our various programs (traditional Medicaid, BadgerCare Plus, SeniorCare, and Family Care). Medicaid pays for 45 percent of all births in the state. Medicaid recipients occupy roughly 60 percent of nursing home beds.

State funding for Medicaid had to be significantly increased above last biennium's budget, primarily for two reasons – federal matching funds decreased by $1.33 billion and the previous budget estimates were based on a projected decline in enrollment. But even after an infusion of $1.2 billion of additional state funding for the current budget cycle, we need to find savings to keep the program in balance with the state budget.

Current enrollment in Medicaid is now 1.1 million individuals. Over the past 20 years, the total population of Wisconsin has increased 16 percent, but Medicaid enrollment has jumped 156 percent.

note the "federal matching funds decreased by $1.33 billion". This is from the State.

Link
http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/mareform/

196ski
196ski

This is the Politifact link. It does cover the Medicaid funding as well as some half true Walker statements which I am not concerned with.

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/jun/24/scott-walker/governor-scott-walker-says-critics-are-wrong-he-cu/

If you use the google machine you can also find numerous links explaining how the States used their share of the Stimulus money to beef up their Medicaid budgets. That money was a one time deal, they were betting the economy would be on the mend when those funds were exhausted. They were wrong.

Fartinthewind
Fartinthewind

Look at the link I provided. I think it was chart two.

Federal Medicaid spending in Wisconsin.
2010 - $4.187 billion
2011 - $4.077 billion
2012 - 4.007 billion
2013 - 4,267 billion

I'm not seeing a 1.3 billion dollar cut. Sounds to me that this is one of those phantom spending cuts conservatives are always blowing up over.

Don't get me wrong. I get it. We lost matching funds. Even though the government is spending the same amount, demand for services is up and the state has had to fund that.

Austerity is austerity and it failed us.

196ski
196ski

This is from your link,
"Even though state funding for the program increased dramatically in the last biennial budget, those funds merely replaced lost federal dollars, and the program was still left with a deficit of nearly $500 million"

And also from your link:
"In 2007-2008, the state share of the Medicaid budget relied on transfers from the Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund, the resale of the state’s tobacco settlement funds, a claim on UW Hospital and Clinics costs, and a tax on hospitals. The reliance on other funding sources for the state’s support of the program continued in 2009-2010 with the increasing number and size of provider taxes and, for a limited period of time, a higher federal funding match."

Wisconsin was funding its Medicaid program with one time transfers some of which were deemed illegal (Compensation fund). The money ran out, Walker and the legislature had to deal with it and they did. They boosted Medicaid funding and made the cuts from other programs.

"Austerity is austerity and it failed us"

And the other option was exactly what? Raise taxes which is austerity for the taxpayer. If Wisconsin had a substantial rainy day fund Keynesian economics might have worked. Interesting that is what Walker has proposed to do for future downturns. If you can't borrow the money, can't print the money, can't devalue the dollar, then what is left other than cuts?

tomtom33
tomtom33

It doesn't have to be dollar for dollar savings, Fart. It can be less dollars taken from our pockets. Taxes fund 100% of State expenditures. The dollars do not grow on trees.

We have reached the limit on spending. No more spending increases. Period.

notakers
notakers

For every dollar that a public employee lost through Act 10, a dollar stayed in a taxpayer's pocket. Net effect on our State's economy--zero.

Norwood44
Norwood44

Nav. I voted for Obama. I voted against the recall. Nearly ten percent of Wisconsin voters did the same. None of us are right wingers. You don't have to be right wing to see big flaws in the union contracts and their political cash game. The unions aren't noble. They are lobbyists. The biggest.

AdiosScott
AdiosScott

Norwood

When you say unions are lobbyists. The biggest....

I know they do lobby, but you do realize that is not all they do, right? And what do you mean by the biggest?

I feel they are the biggest lobbying group for the working class, but by no means are they the biggest of all lobbyists. If the union lobby is completely eliminated, who is left to balance the power of the lobbyists who feel working Americans hovering around the poverty level is not a problem? I've paid union dues my whole career , as a worker and not as a union rep, and I have never been against some of my dues being used to lobby against those who put my interests at the bottom of their list of priorities.

Being unaffected by the current decision and state of labor relations, I personally don't have a dog in this fight. But experiencing a lifetime of labors' struggles to maintain a living wage, along with the history of labor I've learned, tells me that the working class is in for a long rough ride ahead.

Nav
Nav

Wow! The Right wingers on here seem like they have won a an irreversible victory. The people who should be celebrating an irreversible victory are the Democrats because the entire nation RE-elected a Democratic President, who will now stand up to the Republicans who want to hold the nation a hostage.

Did you guys see how the House Republicans capitulated yesterday on the Debt ceiling when all this time they were saying they are going to this, they are going to do that. The President had none of that, and was ready for a fight. As usual the Republicans meekly surrendered.

The moral of the story is that when the people support your cause, the other side can win a battle or two, but they would lose the war. The people of Wisconsin do NOT support Act 10 and, therefore, in the end it will be repealed...judicially or legislatively.

tomtom33
tomtom33

WI does not support Act 10 but we elected Walker and gave the GOP solid control over both houses? The US supports Obama's policies because they elected him and gave the Democrats control of one House? Non-sequitur.

Fartinthewind
Fartinthewind

Your post doesn't represent a non sequitur tomtom. It represents a false dichotomy.

But nice try.

Thurston Howell III
Thurston Howell III

Unions are rarely led by the most intelligent person, or the highest caliber leaders. They are usually taken over by the biggest loudmouths and the biggest bullies. Members think that they're the kind of people who will really "stick it to them" in management. But the dimwit, loudmouth bullies always overplay their hands - whether it's the steelmills, the autoworkers, the Hostess employees or, soon the postal workers. Marty, Mary, and the rest overplayed their hands as people like them inevitably do. Things have a way of evening out after awhile, and they finally did here when people just had enough and elected Scott Walker. It's not a setback for the unions, its a sea change for them. Public sector unions are done in Wisconsin and eventually in most states. And union members really have no one to blame except the people who elected Marty, Mary and their ilk - themselves.

JoeBiteme
JoeBiteme

Mary Bell should put her fancy digs up on Nob Hill for sale. So sad.

How are Mary, Marty, John, and Rick still in charge of their various Unions when they have led them to defeat on numerous occasions and practicaly every fight? They've cost their members Millions, lost memebers, and their bankrolls Must be dwindling. Maybe if they had led them in a more reasonable manner to begin with and not overstepped so far in the first place they wouldn't have caused this major reining in. So Long CB! I already don't miss ya.

Norwood44
Norwood44

Walker was clumsy in communicating his action, but no voter gets excited about people fighting for justice they already have. The square was filled with average white people with protectionist job security regardless of performance while the rest of America was staggered by unemployment. And when challenged a lot of union members would begin by saying, "Well I have been a nurse/ teacher/prison guard for 24 years etc..." As if somehow they were doing charity work. No. This is a job you took. You were paid. And trained. This is your deal. If you don't like it, test the market demand for your skills elsewhere. Like the rest of the citizens of the state. It is a real problem when the workers for the government demand more protection and political power than the rest of the citizens. Fortunately, this has changed. Even if the unions don't understand.

keltic1
keltic1

Life is good, my property taxes are down & Walker now wants to lower the income taxes. No small wonder his approval ratings are above 50%.

magnum1
magnum1

When it comes to getting raises and other benefits the people that are not paying union dues can fight for their own benefits, they don't even have to be in a union, but when it comes to them trying to get a raise they can all be on their own! Good luck

JBANK
JBANK

Marty Beil and Mary Bell overplayed their hand and lost ... BIG TIME. All the press releases in the world aren't going to change the fact that public employees in Wisconsin were duped into following these two over the cliff. Act 10 isn't going away anytime soon. There will be Act 11 and Act 12 down the road too. Why? Economics 101. The pay and benefit structure in the public sector is still too lavish compared to the private sector. The pressure for more reforms is only going to continue to build in the coming years. Beil and Bell would be better off getting their members ready for a very different looking future rather than hoping to return to a past which is gone forever.

magnum1
magnum1

Nope. It isn't constitutional to have anyone represent you. Let's say goodby to the lawyers, and we won't need any judges anymore, we can also get rid of our Government and everyone else that represents any American. We won't need any cops anymore either. Should I go on!

epic
epic

This ruling demands strong action! I suggest legislators once again don their orange t-shirts and scream "shame" on the floor of the Assembly. That will show 'em. Alternatively, I can offer tissues to anyone who needs them.

gdp
gdp

QED. Wonder how the socialists feel about 'rational relation' tests now!? Too bad it took the 7th Circuit to straighten things out for the enligtened proletariat, something they all knew, or should have known, from the git-go because they established the diminished standard that torpedoed 'em. Forward Wisconsin!.

MSNbubble
MSNbubble

Tate and Zeilinski must be having dry heaves this morning.

jon
jon

It would be amusing, were it not so sad. The leftists claim they find freedoms in our Constitution to support their snuffing out unborn life---I'm still looking for that in the Constitution---and confiscating member wages for use in partisan political activity, but yet claim "shall not be infringed" does not protect the freedom of others.

OTOH, I must agree that it is wrong to treat some unions differently---the cops & firefighters should not be allowed to confiscate members' wages either.

Norwood44
Norwood44

But seriously. The unions keep making a rights case. They have more employee rights than anyone in the state, so that tactic doesn't move voters. What they need to do is make a value case. But they don't, perhaps because they can't. Also, they chose to become a political lobby. And they lost by going all in with the Dems. Such are the stakes when you play that game.

Ballblaster
Ballblaster

Very well put.....any body willing to follow Barca and the crazy former radio guy up here in Waunakee - over the edge, deserves whatever fate behoost them !!

ButSiriuslyFolks
ButSiriuslyFolks

I'm not talking about a tactic. I'm talking about the fact that people are still talking about unions, when Act 10 has alkready smushed them. Yet we continue to talk about public sector unions as if they are still some sort of threat to the well-being of the state. They're not. We have a surplus and a rainy-day fund, funded by the savings from making them unionistias "pay just just a little more for their outrageous benefits".

There's a difference between the unions and the people who live next door to you, the woman who stays after school to work with your kid, and the guy who plows you out when there's a snowstorm. My point is that, eventually, people are going to figure out that continuing to call any public sector worker a "unionista" while simultaeously bragging about saving money on property and state taxes are mixed messages.

Typothetes
Typothetes

I agree with the second half of your post, Siriusly--this is not about union members in the sense that they are more than just union members, they are neighbors and good people. But, I disagree that public unions are not a threat. If democrats/progressives/communists gain control of government again they will reinstate public unions to special status and rape taxpayers as long as they are able. No one will win under that scenario. Certainly not our school children.

knittingnancy
knittingnancy

Much ado about nothing. Appeals will probably continue, more suits are in the offing and Walker will be long gone before the whole business is finally out of the courts and tons of taxpayer money has been wasted.

Lionhear
Lionhear

Nancy--in your dreams.

Norwood44
Norwood44

Nav. You assume that only right wingers celebrate this ruling. Wrong. Moderates and democrats also opposed the recall. Best example? The recall lost but Obama won Wisconsin. Staunch unionists are deluded. And becoming politically irrelevant. If you think a Dem candidate for gov can issue a wholesale endorsement for the old union contracts and win, think again.

ButSiriuslyFolks
ButSiriuslyFolks

I will actually agree with part of your statement: Walker has been very successful in changing the public view of unions, and I don't believe a Democratic candidate can really tout a union platform against Walker (ie Falk).

However, I do think a Democratic candidate can win simply by championing the people who've lost their rights from Act 10, without vowing to return the "rights", he or she can send the message that those people deserve to be treated better and respected more than what Walker and the Republicans have shown them.

Assuming the Democrats could actually message something like this, I think the GOP would have plenty to worry about. How can you continue to demagogue unions when they are already neutered and powerless?

Renaissance Man
Renaissance Man

Wonderful news!

Norwood44
Norwood44

It is good to see the vote of citizens upheld. We need a better deal with the unions. One that gives citizens more cost effective government and increased accountability. Here's hoping that the unions shed their current leadership and come to the table with a new sense of reality and responsibility to citizens. The old model is gone and should not return. It's time to stop singing about Solidarity and get back to work for our state.

LeftCoastConservative
LeftCoastConservative

Nav, please don't confuse the United States as a country of states that all do the same thing and have the same laws. The beauty of our individual states is they are allowed to make their own laws unless they conflict with the Constitution. If libs (and some conservatives) would acknowledge the constitution every once in awhile, our nation would be a much better place..

And why do I have to keep reminding liberals that 'collective bargaining' is a great concept when it's within a private sector business/employee scenario. It is NOT ok when public sector workers are bargaining with other government employees using the public's money. It's really easy to spend someone else's money.

skippie
skippie

Nav, do you think we will have a screamer at the Obama event like we just had at the state of the state here? Was it again a teacher this year like last?

Wiredup
Wiredup

You mean like Joe(you lie!!)Wilson? I'm not defending Obama, only the office it self. See if you can find anywhere in history, someone on either side of the isle disrespected a sitting President during a State of the Union.

"Your" side does it just as much as "Theirs". Own it!!!!

sherlock1
sherlock1

I thought all along that no law was broken and now it is final. It seems illegal to require dues of any employee other than government taxes and some even debate that.
Everyone has the right to work and should not have to pay from their salary to keep that work. Gee, that sounds so strangely sensible that I wonder if common sense is not so common anymore.

it is fairly simple and common sense is a lost art

JoeBiteme
JoeBiteme

A big victory for Governor Walker and the tax payers of Wisconsin.

Cheezer
Cheezer

Thank You Gov Walker for reducing our taxes, creating jobs and moving Wisconsin FORWARD!

ButSiriuslyFolks
ButSiriuslyFolks

It's amazing what transpires in every single comment section on this website.

The topic is generally hijacked, mostly by folks who claim to be on the right, with accusations and vitriol. Articles that favor their views are punctuated with name-calling and taunting, while those that go against their views are straw-manned with equally insulting double-switches, with "Obama", "Illinois", "Solyndra", and other false equivalencies diverting the actual conversation back to the same old tired talking points.

Don't blame those on the right for doing so. It's pretty much the mantra they've been conditioned to from Fox News and Brietbart: keep the attacks heavy and divert away from intelligent conversation to emotional, fear-based winner/loser arguments. "skippie" appears to be the newest member of the club.

But what never ceases to amaze me is the naive response from those who claim to be on the left, who constantly respond to every taunt with their attempt at reasoned counterarguments...as if it is even cared about. Those on the left are so absorbed in their own intelligence and rationalizations, they respond to every "Solyndra" and "slob protester" comment, willingly allowing their own conversation to be diverted. Every time.

Honestly, the number of times I've seen Lynne4300 pull the virtual equivalent of walking into a room, dropping a piece of poo on the carpet, and walking out, followed by liberals screaming and stressing and demanding a response from her is through the roof. Do you honestly believe she posts her drivel for the purpose of rational conversation? You can't rationalize with those who don't want to be rational. Yet, the lefties fall for it, hook/line/sinker, every time.

And every time a leftie sinks to the level of returning angry vitriol with angry vitriol, the righties congratulate each other on another victory. Every. Time.

This isn't just here...its playing out on a national stage. You're not going to present an argument that is going to make Lynne or Skippie or any of the others suddenly say, "Oh, my gosh! I didn't realize that! You're so right!". Ever.

Let me repeat that. Never, ever.

I know a lot of rational Republicans, and count many within my family and friends. The folks who find it necessary to spout the vitriol here are not your traditional Reagan Republicans, but the Tea Party, ultra-evangelicals, and wacky libertarians that the GOP has allowed to drive the station wagon.

As we've seen on the national stage, there's no way to make them force the wack jobs back into the back of the station wagon than removing their political power. When Wisconsin has non-Republican majorities in the Legislature and the Governor's mansion, you'll be surprised how quickly the rational Republicans will be willing to "discuss" and exile the loudmouths back to the fringe where they belong. In fact, you can see the left has already done that with their extremists for the same reason.

Until that day, the right-wing extremists will continue to be the mouthpiece for the GOP in Wisconsin, and here on Madison.com. And very little will change if those in the middle and the left continue to acknowledge them, much less believe that rationalizing with them will make any difference in the balance of power.

The combination of the angry, indignant Republicans against the whiny, over-intellectual Democrats will continue to be the shame of our nation and our state, until one side says "enough". I wonder which it will be?

Nav
Nav

While I agree with most of what you said, I have no problem seeing the Right wingers celebrate a little, even if I think that celebration might be premature. They have won this battle, and it is natural to gloat.

I am just going to enjoy my long weekend, and watch our President's inaugural ceremony on Monday, where he will call out for bi-partisanship and the need to work together to solve the nation's big problems. I hope we all watch his speech and reflect on it as we do, after all, live in the UNITED states of America, if only in name at this time.

We have heard this before many times, and how true it is. Before we are Democrats, Republicans, Independents or whatever, we are all Americans. United we will succeed. Divided we WILL fail.

Norby
Norby

Nav,
To quote the Beatles "It's a long and winding road...".

Nav
Nav

It sure is, Norby!

tomtom33
tomtom33

Did you ever stop to think about the kind of person who comments? Are they, in the main, representative of anything? I do enjoy trading barbs with a few. And I do respect many of the comments of a few. Many of the rest I simply do not read, my own little ignore list.

ButSiriuslyFolks
ButSiriuslyFolks

Agreed, tomtom.

So you are the voice of reason here? The entire tone of your editorial was that anyone on the right was obviously influenced by fox news and was a right wing nutcase. While the liberals were merely overzealous and impassioned. You couldn't find the middle with a GPS and compasss tied to your foreheead.

ButSiriuslyFolks
ButSiriuslyFolks

I would love to believe I am a voice of reason here, and appreciate your willingness to place that title on me. However, being a rational voice depends on other rational voices respecting it as being as such, and I'm not sure that's happening here right now.

And no, I never said that "anyone on the right...was a right wing nutcase". In fact, I said that most of the folks I know that claim to be Republicans would likely be called "RINOs" by many of the folks who regularly post here. They are passionate and opinionated, but don't resort to the low blows that often accompany the vitriol here.

I also never said that liberals were overzealous and impassioned. I said they often intellectually approach the issues and believe that others should be able to see that logic. And often, they fail to notice that those they are arguing with don't have an agenda to debate anything at all, and fall into the same trap over and over again.

I appreciate, however, your efforts to not only restate my statement in your own words, but your ability to alter them to make them more attackable. You truly are a great representative for your side. If you don't mind, I'm going to try and apply some Crazy Glue to my forehead to see if I can make this compass stick. Which way is North?

Typothetes
Typothetes

Siriusly: your conlusions about the sources of anger and vitriol in these forums show your bias.

There are examples of "good" and "bad" commenters on all sides of the issues we discuss on these forums. There does not apear to be one side that is worse than the other. Futher, I have been guilty of being wise and considerate, while at other times losing my cool and being downright obnoxious. The great thing about these forums is that the authors actually care!

So, what can you and I agree on, Siriusly? What fact can you impart to me that will make me think that Act 10 is a bad idea? If you truly look at the issue as an "intellectual" I think you will find few concrete facts to support public employee unions, rather you will have to resort to touchy-feely communistic stances that supposedly support "workers" when instead they just support the pulic employees, not all workers.

I don't think you are evil or stupid Siriusly, I think you are misguided and misinformed about what makes America great and what makes government better for the people of Wisconsin.

I'll bet that you think that businesspeople are more corrupt than democrat politicians. I, on the other had, think that there is corruption everywhere, including governments led by both parties. But, most business people are not corrupt. And, I think most politicians are not criminals. Can we at least agree on that? Or, do you want to single out some particular group and make them the bad guys all the time?

I don't think you are part of the solution Siriusly--I think you are biased and don't take your own advice (listen to facts). Public employee unions equal incentives for corruption and encourage bad government. There are no facts that contradict that statement.

ButSiriuslyFolks
ButSiriuslyFolks

Of course I have bias. Would you be posting here if you didn't? Politics are about getting the policies passed that best serve yourself and your personal situation.

My point was not to debate Act 10 in my post, and your efforts to try and pull me into a debate we've seen played out time after time over the last two years are, in my opinion, as tired as the debate itself.

Your attempt to place me in some sort of pigeonhole as a "not evil or stupid but definately some sort of communist" is interesting. Why? I made no attempt to take a side on Act 10 one way or the other in my post, but commented on the behavior of people within partisan politics? Does it make you more comfortable to make sure I'm "labeled" before you engage me in a discussion? What would you do if it were impossible to label me as a "good guy" or a "bad guy"? Kind of scary, isn't it?

Typothetes
Typothetes

I don't recall many of your posts in the past Siriusly, so I am not trying to pigeon-hole you. You on the other hand seem to be doing what you accuse me of doing.

I did "bet that you think business people are more corrupt than democrats." Am I wrong? I don't think you are a communist. Are you?

Why are you posting on an Act 10 article when you are unwilling to take a stand on Act 10? Just to stir up trouble? You started the off-topic labelling, not me.

consider this. While it's likely these boards attract the most passionate and probably fringes of both sides of every arguement, they also show the most effective points on each side. The only thing that actually matters is who we vote to represent us and what they vote for. If we like what they do we vote for them again. If not we don't. Each election cycle provides another opportunity to make changes or adjustments to our direction. The words shown on this site mean nothing. So you complaining about the words your counterparts use will only help you win or lose the debates here among the extremists. Not at the polls

ButSiriuslyFolks
ButSiriuslyFolks

I wish I could believe you. Next time you roll through the comments, see how many time inflammatory language must be used in order to communicate those "effective points". There's no respect, and I will agree it is both sides. However, most of the left dismisses their own fringes at this point, while the right embraces them and allow them to dictate the tone.

koala
koala

Voting to uphold Act 10 (ie, Walker's side) were Judge Flaum (Reagan appointee) and Judge Bauer (Ford appointee); voting in partial dissent was Judge Hamilton (Obama appointee).

When the votes line up that way – on both sides of the aisle – it does NOT give me the warm fuzzes about the triumph of logic and reason. Makes the 7th Circuit look like ... well ... the Wisconsin State Supreme Court.

tomtom33
tomtom33

As far as I know, the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco is the only one that issues screwy decisions on a regular basis. You and I may not agree with a decision, but that may be more a function of our lack of judicial breadth.

PatrickL
PatrickL

I think many people felt that the judges would have at least ruled that it was unfair that certain groups were exempt from the Act 10 legislation. It was a very thin line. The bigger issue was the real reason for the legislation in the first place. It was to "divide and conquer." Destroy the collective voice of the unions. Although it didn't work in the last presidential election cycle, the future will be impacted by the long term affects of Act 10. But another huge impact of Act 10 that has not been studied, is the loss of income by state/local employees as it relates to small businesses all over Wisconsin. You can't take billions of dollars out of the economy and then expect no residual effect. Tax savings for most Wisconsinites has been minimal, while people who have has their wages cut as a result of Act 10 have many fewer dollars to spend at their local retailers. This is situation where local Chambers are starting to realize that they supported legislation that took potential dollars out of the local economy, in exchange for tax cuts for large corporations.

tomtom33
tomtom33

Judges can only rule on legal or illegal, Fair has nothing to do with it.

Because of the concentration of public workers, Dane County may have suffered a small loss in disposable income. Statewide, the effect was zero.

tired union talking points. For every dollar the union memebers lost, the Rest of us Gained an equal $$.. Net differenece to the economy is ZERO. Funny how suddenly a dollar in Your pocket is worth more than the same dollar in Mine! sounds kind of selfish when you look at it that way. No wonder we voted for act 10 and Walker

Fartinthewind
Fartinthewind

We have been down this road many times MotR. The expendable income lost by public sector employees did not result in a zero sum game.

Comment deleted.
Thurston Howell III
Thurston Howell III

Why worry at all? The Dear Leader, Komrad Obama will take care of everything.

You will have free healthcare.
A job will be assigned to you and a "fair" wage decided for you.
You will be assigned free or subsidized government housing.
You will be instructed where to live and where your children can go to school.
You will be taken care of, cradle to grave...no worries at all.

And everything will be free - the rich people will be taxed to pay for it all by your Dear Leader - no cost to you.

And you will live free and prosper, just like they do in North Korea, and Cuba and Venezuela.....

skippie
skippie

Jackjones, one of the long line of liberals wrong today. Keep up the poor work!

jackjones
jackjones

Ignore Skippie- he is a Heritage Foundation paid message board troller.

skippie
skippie

Dora, no problem with public workers taking a pay cut when much of the nations private sectors workers have done that already. I too would prefer to see everyone's income go up but Obama has not been able to make that happen.

B-Man
B-Man

Dora, if you feel so strongly, why didn't you hire a union roofing company in.the first place?

farming
farming

Good news on a Friday

Comment deleted.
dora1
dora1

I know. It is frustrating to see people drag people who make good wages down to their pay scale instead of doing things that will raise the pay of all workers. CEOs make 400 times what a worker makes, but people still support the true welfare queens, the corporations. The next thing will be right to work (for less). Stats show people in RTW states make on average 4% less than others, no benefits, and no dignity. I lived in Texas and those workers we hired to roof our house were nervous to speak up about anything to do with union organizing during our conversation. They are forced to be "independent contractors".. even though they worked for a company.

Dode
Dode

I am glad the courts finally see forced confiscation of union dues from employees is theft.

skippie
skippie

No Nav. It won't happen. We will just Bork the judges. You can't complain about that.

skippie
skippie

This lawsuit was the lefts best hope. The other lawsuits have much less of a chance of standing than this one. All we can hope is that the left keeps throwing money away at things like this and like defeating Walker.

With this decision it will make it easier for things like act 10 to go through in other states! All thanks to Walker and the republicans!!!

Lynne4300
Lynne4300

Right to Work....the time is now.

it will probably come soon. Then unions will truly be on fair ground. If they are needed and good in a certain situation then the workers there will choose them. If not they won't

skippie
skippie

Nav you will be wrong about that just like you were wrong about the Dane count decision on Act 10 standing. Your logic is flawed. That is why you keep picking the losing side.

tomtom33
tomtom33

Logic? More like blind partisanship.

skippie
skippie

Union membership under Obama has declined more than under any other president. Obama talks like he supports unions but deep down he doesn't just like the "balance cuts" is no really what he wants. Lol.

midwestguy
midwestguy

Ironic that the ruling comes almost exactly one year after the demonstration in the Capitol against the current regime. Sadly, the average worker will continue to be marginalized until enough people wake up and realize they are being played.

Ariel12
Ariel12

The people have already awakened and realize they are being played. That's why they voted for Walker - twice - and for the union slugs and their bosses zero times.

Nav
Nav

The Democrats would be wise to send this case to the Supreme Court after President Obama has replaced a couple of Supreme Court judges to insure complete and ultimate victory!

PapaLorax
PapaLorax

an Obama appointee found everything fine except allowing some unions to payroll deduct and not allowing other...

Ariel12
Ariel12

So you're confirming what everyone has long suspected, and the left continually denies - that the ultimate goal of the left is to transform the Supreme Court, not into the impartial arbiter of the Constitution, but into another political arm of the Democrat Party.

Thanks for confirming that for us.

Nav
Nav

No one is "confirming" anything. All I am saying is that President Obama ,ay well get an opportunity to replace one, possibly two, Supreme Court Justices, and he will replace them with Justices of his choosing. All Presidents do that!

Ariel12
Ariel12

Except that if Republican presidents do that, it is a partisan abuse of power while, if Democrat presidents do that, it is simply restoring fairness and balance to the Court....right? I thought so.

He will and I will pray for the 50 million babies that have been aborted in the past 40 years

Hogzilla
Hogzilla

Yes, Mein Fuhrer. Yes! Seriously, WTF is the issue here for people on the left? I don't get it. Walker took down a bunch of unions and unconstitutional stealing from the taxpayers. Why exactly is this a bad thing?

Comment deleted.
kickapoo101
kickapoo101

that's what king obama wants!!!

HockeyTeam
HockeyTeam

Wait so why did the Wisconsin government have a problem having the Unions (or any other group) set up a automatic payroll deduction for a voluntary fee? That doesn't cost anything to set up. That is just an a**hole move.

That is like US Bank suing to make direct deposit illegal, and then charging a fee for deposits in person. It's just for spite.

deezus
deezus

Because it wasn't voluntary.

you have to choice to have direct deposit. These people weren't given a choice.

Nav
Nav

I see this Republicans celebrating as if the Supreme Court has made a decision that Act 10 is permanent.

Not\only will this decision be appealed to the Supreme Court, but there are at least two other cases in courts on this subject matter. The outcome of these cases may be entirely different.

Whatever happens in courts, the death of ACT 10 in Wisconsin is inevitable! In 2014 when the Legislature turns Democratic, Act 10 will be repealed if it has not been declared unconstitutional by the court by then.

Ariel12
Ariel12

I sincerely hope the unions DO run this all the way up to the Supreme Court...where they will get stomped definitively. Act 10 will be declared constitutional and legal. It is already the will of the people of Wisconsin.

Wake up.....it's morning and you were having a bad dream. Even if people agreed with you It would take several election cycles to flip all 3 branches and change the law. This will become increasingly difficult as people continue to see the positive results. Deficits cleared, no reductions in services, taxes reduced, jobs increasing. It would be extrememly weird for people to vote against those results and the people who provided it.

skippie
skippie

Shake, leave the nation now, before its to late!

skippie
skippie

Judges appointed by Ford, Reagan, and, Obama. Once again, the liberals here were wrong. It seems to happen so often!

Comment deleted.
deezus
deezus

Who needs wages when daddy Obama will take care of you?

Liberalsmakesense
Liberalsmakesense

Of course it will be appealed, as it should be! It is a temporary setback.

skippie
skippie

This can't be. Libetalsmakesense told us all the law would stay struck down and would never be reinstated. Most liberals here were sure that was true.

The people spoke, Liberals objected.
The representatives acted. Liberals protested.
The courts ruled. The liberals raged.

FantasiaWHT
FantasiaWHT

A copy of the opinion is available here:

http://www.will-law.org/Home/Our-Cases/Act-10-Litigation/Act-10-Documents

powmda
powmda

I suspect the court will make a similar decision on the other frivolous Dane County suit. Then, we will see Voter ID upheld. The state will pass a mining bill, the Left will (naturally!) sue, and after a time the adults on the court will also uphold that law. I highly doubt that these suits are being handled pro bono. So, sooner or later even the most fervent union member is going to wonder how it is that his extorted union dues are being spent so that lawyers can file frivolous suits. And, I suspect that there will be much wailing and ganshing of teeth tonight, in the hallowed halls of what's left of WEAC and AFSCME!!

Dode
Dode

I wonder if 8033 Excelsior Drive, Suite C will be vacant in the near future.

spot on. They will waste their limited and dwindling funds on lawyers for frivolous lawsuits and then will have nothing to show for it and nothing left.

snoopy-one
snoopy-one

The Gavel has slammed. Common sense dictates and prevails!

WinnerWinner
WinnerWinner

If appealed, it would go back to the 7th circuit court of appeals to be heard by the court in its entirety. This ruling was issued by a three judge panel.

tomtom33
tomtom33

Why do I think that this may be appealed? The question is whether or not the Supreme Court will accept the appeal.

wiprof
wiprof

Not likely. SCOTUS is more likely to take on cases where lower courts have issued conflicting rulings in similar cases. In other words, they like to give appellate courts the chance to hash things out before taking on a case.

Hogzilla
Hogzilla

Common sense does have a place in the conscience of the judicial branch of our government. As a citizen member of the population, I am very pleased with this decision.

wrkrbee1
wrkrbee1

What you got now Nav?

Dick Dastardly
Dick Dastardly

Horrah! Conservatives win big time. Thank you Tea Party for your unyielding support. Now, let's get voter ID done.

The key to voter ID is to make IDs for all mandatory. Once we all have 1 it will no longer be an infringement on anyone to be asked to show it at the polls

jacobjg
jacobjg

Anyone care to guess which Presidents appionted the two who voted to uphold the Gestapo law? I'm taking bets. I'm sure that a future article will mention it. I'm guessing they were both appointed by King George I or King George II.

Hogzilla
Hogzilla

So you don't like the executive branch of the state government and you also don't like legislative branch of the state government and now it appears that you don't like the judiciary branch of the government either. Maybe you should ask yourself if this is the best country for you to live in. I hear Russia is taking applications for immigrants, maybe you should fill one out and see where that gets you. Toodles....

Dode
Dode

I think he should just make a run across the border without permission, like illegals coming in here, and see where that gets him!

PapaLorax
PapaLorax

Ford and Reagan

PapaLorax
PapaLorax

The dissent was an Obama appointee...so who was doing their job and who is a political hack? depends on what you think is right.

tomtom33
tomtom33

I prefer to think that they are all doing their jobs.

Hogzilla
Hogzilla

Why would anyone think freedom is wrong?

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it clean. Exchange ideas and opinions on posted articles. Don't promote products or services, impersonate other site users, register multiple accounts, threaten or harass others, post vulgar, abusive, obscene or sexually oriented language. Don't post content that defames or degrades anyone. Don't repost copyrighted material; link to it. In other words, stick to the topic and play nice. Report abuses by clicking the button. Users who break the rules will be banned from commenting. We no longer issue warnings. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.