Wisconsin: Why Today’s Court Ruling Means Things Will Get Uglier Before They Get Better
by John NolteToday, a liberal judge in a liberal Wisconsin county at the request of a liberal district attorney has issued a temporary restraining order that blocks publication — and therefore the enactment, of the law Governor Scott Walker and Republican legislators passed that limits Public Union collective bargaining rights to issues regarding wages only. This order, issued by Dane County (Madison) Court Judge Maryann Sumi is strictly based on a technical procedural issue. No one’s arguing the law passed wasn’t constitutional (yet– see #2 below), the question is whether or not Republicans violated Wisconsin’s open-meeting law during the session in which the vote took place. They didn’t.
But whatever the legal outcome, the bill will still pass. In a worst case scenario the Republicans merely need to reconvene and pass the bill again, this time making triple-pinky-sure the Left can’t hassle them in court regarding the open-meeting law. Should this happen, the big question is whether or not State Senate Democrats will repeat their shameful escapades and hot-foot it to Illinois again. But even that won’t stop the law from passing because a quorum isn’t necessary for this part of the bill.
So if this is the case, then what’s going on? If there’s no way the Left can stop the law from eventually being passed, what are they up to?
Three things:
1. The Psychological Game: Yesterday, I published a piece detailing the intensifying threats, violence, vandalism and intimidation taking place in Wisconsin against Republican legislators and their supporters in the form of Tea Party leaders and local businesses. Obviously, the idea here is to use the worst kind of thuggish mob tactics on legislators in the hopes they’ll be too afraid to vote for this bill a second time. If you remember the tension and stress we as a nation went through while the 2000 presidential election was being recounted and litigated, multiply that times 100 and mix it with the continuous threat of violence. That’s the atmosphere hanging over all of Wisconsin right now. Ratcheting that tension even higher today is the fact that there will be no final ruling from this judge for at least another two weeks, which means the tunnel of emotional hell these legislators thought they might finally be emerging from has just slammed shut.
Unbelievably, the judge who issued this ruling did so knowing she’s leaving for vacation until March 28th! So it is more likely than not that the intimidation tactics are only going to get ramped up in the coming days in an effort to change enough Republican legislators’ minds about whether or not going against public unions is worth living through a nightmare.
2. Using the Left-wing Courts: The effort to win in court what the Left couldn’t at the ballot box might move to the Wisconsin State Supreme Court. On April 5th, a state-wide State Supreme Court election takes place. This is supposed to be a non-partisan office, but everyone knows that the incumbent up for re-election, Supreme Court Justice David Prosser, is a reliably conservative vote. His opponent, however, JoAnne Kloppenburg, would be a reliably liberal vote — and local talk radio hosts have been complaining for days that she’s been none-too-subtle in letting the unions know that they can count on her to overturn the collective-bargaining bill once it passes. And she would be the crucial swing vote.
With the whole country watching and so much on the line for public unions and Democrats nationwide, you can imagine the money and volunteer muscle unions are pouring into the state to get the vote out for Kloppenburg. From the Wisconsin State Journal:
Kloppenburg’s supporters were working the crowd at last Saturday’s giant union rally in front of the Capitol, urging people to vote for her as “the next step” in the fight. Kloppenburg’s Facebook page is alive with comments from people trying to mobilize get-out-the-vote efforts for her and criticizing Walker and the GOP.
3. Wisconsin is Being Made an Example: With a wave of anti-public union sentiment washing over the entire country, the White House and unions everywhere obviously want to show the country what could happen to other states should they attempt similar measures.
Life is miserable in my home state right now, for everyone. Families have been pitted against families, neighbor against neighbor. This entire awful episode — that would not have happened had 14 Democratic State Senators not fled to Illinois — hangs over everything and everyone like a dark cloud. The White House and the unions are clearly sending a message elsewhere: This is the terrible price you and yours will pay for following Wisconsin’s example. I’m not sure how effective that message has been (see the good news here), but they’re determined to send it nonetheless, if only to hold onto power in a crucual 2012 swing state.
—-
The stakes here for the unions, Democrats, and President Obama are huge. Public Union money is a major source of campaign cash both locally and nationally. Right now in Wisconsin (and other states), and whether they like it or not, public employees are forced to join the union. Furthermore, their union dues are automatically taken out of their paychecks by the state and guess where millions upon millions of those union-due dollars go? That’s right: to elect Democrats — including President Obama in what will be a crucial swing state in 2012.
This Public Union racket is major source of left-wing power and money in this country. Walker’s bill gives public employees the right to not join the union and stops the State from automatically garnishing union dues. If unions want their monthly dues they will have to collect the money themselves from each employee. Obviously, this is going to mean a lot less money coming in and therefore a lot less money to get Democrats into office.
Those are the stakes, and in my opinion, they couldn’t be higher.
And even then, even after all the hell listed above has run its course, there’s still the threat of recall elections.
Pray for Wisconsin. They’re gonna need it.







Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
151 Comments
Yes, because this pea brained activist judge, emboldened the hard lined union activism to continue. No doubt, as a Chicago payback, Obama will elevate Maryann Sumi into the federal court system. The state will eventually prevail, but meantime, it's still front page!
The whole 'government animal' is in survival mode. If any part of government (including unions) feels cornered and threatened, they will lash out just like a wounded bore….. which is another name for a pig. ;-]
It will get real ugly and hopefully it will get better.
I'm not convinced.
This should be bought up for the 2012 elections. Obama is behind this and we all know it. I hope that whoever is the GOP nominee, he/she needs to bring this up and let the people know that this won't be tolerated in the near future. In the meantime, we're on our own. Soooo, start carrying a gun.
Why wasn't the GOP ready @ the court house with an appeal to be filed immediately? This is the kind clueless, GOP leadership sans strategy that is contributing to our demise. I mean, who didn't know that it was going to a court? Who didn't know that a lib tard DA with a handpicked lib tard judge wasn't in the mix? For crying out loud, the Dems are 8 pages ahead of every possible outcome, and the GOP blathers on about a few tax cuts and de funding NPR.
Man, I tell you we are in a sh*t storm.
The Republicans just need to stay the course. The unions are losing and everybody knows it. Pass the bill again and don't waiver.
Actually a boar would be another name for a pig. A bore would be another name for Andrew Breitbart.
walker should reinstate those pink slips marked CO/ Judge Maryann Sumi!
24-hour notice required by Wisconsin's open meetings law? Seriously? and who was there to meet with?
oh well, Happy Friday to all you rational Americans
The culture of public union entitlement is 40 years in the making by both the dems and repubs. It is common knowledge that liberal judges have swamped the court system. Even if laws are approved by the elected government it must pass through the gauntlet of liberal judges.
Tea Party activities and candidates have only made a dent. It will take years and many elections won by the Tea Party before the court system is cleansed of leftists and RINO activist judges. The question is: will the Tea Party be able to stay unified or will the republican party absorb the movement before there is meaningful reform.
Americans, how do we stop these activist judges from pushing us closer and closer to socialism?
Actually, a bore would be the diameter of the barrel shooting your pea-sized brain out.
When were you lobotomized? Does it still hurt? /S
4 U: http://i54.tinypic.com/r0e0lj.jpg
the protesters… they were there to meet them, obstruct them from getting inside, verbally abuse and threaten them….and then, after the vote? who knows.
I really couldn't care less about any retarded leftist opinion that any Canadian has about "our free republic", keep your nose out of "our business", ruin "your own country" if that's what you want.
True blue Americans are done with you.
You can see that Judge Maryann Sumi is very popular with "Organizing for America"
. http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/OFA...
Judges may make rulings, and thus make laws but legislatures appropriate monies to enforce the laws. Let the courts find a way to fund their judicial fiat!
Actually this article is riddled with falsehoods. Public unions don't require membership and the money they get is from people who choose to give them their own money. Not one penny of taxpayers money is taken from taxpayers by unions, much less automatically given to Democrats. Quite a little conspiracy theory you people have going there. Poor little victims! What a complete crock. Admit, private citizens spending money on campaigns is protected free speech. What's good for the goose baby. Plus, there is no intimidation going on here except from extreme rightwingers who, based on a fraudulent narrative of victimhood, accuse working Americans of being communists. This is insane, and I really hope you keep it up! You are losing this battle. By all means keep waging it.
How are public unions even legal?
Think about this. If public employees were FORCED to shell out a $1000 per employee annually to the Tea Party fund who then turned around and gave it to the GOP at the local, state and federal level, what would the response be? Seriously. The response would make Wisconsin looks tame, but this is EXACTLY what is going on to the benefit of the democrats. This needs to be highlighted to EVERY person we know, and those we don't. It's a scam, a fraud. It's auto-funding the DNC which then uses that money to stuff ballot boxes, lie cheat and steal as only they can do.
Anyone who has read my posts before knows that I have said I fear the judicial system more than any branch of gov't, just for these reasons.
So you're not going to check out Huffington Post even now that Breitbart is lying for them?
http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlla/andrew-brei...
Nolte links to Griffiths opinion on the ruling as if Griffiths is even remotely an expert on the WI legislation compared to Dreps that already gave his well-regarded legal opinion on the matter. Total joke.
Holy S*** are you stupid !!!
Yes, public unions DO require membership (http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/04/obamacares_key_to_the_kingdom.html)
EVERY SINGLE DOLLAR THE UNIONS HAVE IS A TAXPAYER DOLLAR YOU IDIOT !!! EVERY LAST ONE!! Who pays the ysalary of the public unions, you ass wipe? TAXPAYERS !!
95+% of those dollars go to democrats as is WELL documented. Why in the hell do you think the demoncrats are so up in arms. It's an autodraft funding of the demoncrat party.
PLEASE KEEP POSTING !!! SHOW US your intellectual depth. Show us your grasp of the facts. This is enlightneing.
Know what's sad, DESPITE being faced with facts and reality, you will STILL BLINDLY PURSUE your path of economic ruin and tyranny. March on Soros puppet. When the economic tsunami hits, we'll be better prepared than you douche baggers.
Do you masturbate to your statue of Stalin or effigy of Obamugabe more?
By the way, how many more Soros funded web sites do you visit, eh puppet?
Gosh, darn. Don't you hate it. All these "liberal" judges seem to be appointed by Republicans. Earl Warren, Harry Blackmun, John Paul Stevens and now Maryann Sumi.
By all means keep attacking the unions. It's resulting in a big surge in the polls for Democrats.
"That turnaround is stunning over such a short period of time, and appears to correlate to a staggering drop-off in support for Kasich over the same period. Kasich's first few months in office were marked by several mini scandals, topped off with his forecful push to cut collective bargaining rights for the state's public employees. As a result, his approval rating has sunk to 35% in the latest PPP poll, with over half of all voters (54%) saying they disapprove of his job performance."
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/03/kasich...
Bad hair day, doctor?
Great response. Good news is for you is it fits right into my expectations of you. Isn't that nice?
Hey Husker, how many death threats have you made to the Wisconsin folks? Did you meet your daily Soros quota? Wouldn't want to be another lazy union member, would you?
Uh…who's playing the victim card?
Who?
That's what I thought.
Did that stop Obummer from opening up the offshore drilling? No, and if I were Walker I would move forward with this bill! Oazzhole is breaking a judges orders and is not paying any price, why should Walker worry?
Aww…
your crayon box is broke.
The National Guard needs to start putting Union Members in the dirt.
The Governor has the power to end this right now if he wants.
If you lose the fight Walker just fire 3/4 of the union workers. That will fix the budget! Don't worry about the kids, by the percentages they aren't learning anything anyway!
D-This really isn't a challenge. They are fine with "activist" judges overturning the Affordable Health Care law because of "inactivity". But this is an outrage. By the way they have a real difficult time answering if someone crosses state lines and gets seriously injured in an accident, whether that person would want "active" medical care or "inactive" care. I wonder why?
It should always require a panel of state level judges to alter/supsend legislation as signed into law by elected officials.
In no case, should a single rogue judge should be able to do decide which laws are good and which are bad.
Than you should be fine if Walker, like Obama,…….
ignores this,…"court ruling".
OOPS
Well if they are at the state level, they are on a ballot somewhere. If they are federal judges, we must be sure to elect responsible Americans to select responsible judges, and finally we must elect an American president.
Jim Skankman, Ladies and Gentleman…..How about a big round of applause….?
Jim Skankman, noted unemployed dishwasher and legal scholar, flinging his poo right here at Big Government.
What an honor!
So, Jim, tell us, in as many four letter expletives as possible, your opinion on this matter.
It's on like Donkey Kong, M$&#^$&erfu*ker!
Donkey Kong. Is that a legal term?
F*ck you. I know where you f*kin drink coffee, M$&#^$&erfu*ker!
Jim Skankman, Thank you for that learned opinion.
If you also live in Wisconsin get out to vote April 5th…if your neighbors, family, friends, co-workers, or anyone you know thinks like you get them out also!
been doin' that forever–just adding clips
I grew up in Wisconsin and am a UW Madison alum. Madison is an island of insanity in the middle of some very good people. I fully believe Walker will be vindicated and the Dem walkouts will pay a price at the ballot box. In the end reality and reason will win out over demagoguery. Watch for it.
LOL!
You are just whistling past the graveyard.
BTW
We will see who laughs last….
we'll see who absorbs who. I know who I'm betting on.
Oh, you mean like this: http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/another-i...
Popping the reality bubble of the Trotsky-Lovin' progressives is very similar to trying to make a Tibetan Monk out of a Arab Terrorist. They have been programmed since birth to have a warped view of the world and until they self-destruct (this is usually not very pretty) they will always think they are right and the world is wrong. When I lived in Berkeley I kept trying to argue with them and it was futile – logic doesn't work, facts don't work, visual evidence doesn't work and history doesn't work. Eventually I realized it was a lost cause and left CA at age 18.
When communism is tried in the world, the folks that understand reality are usually the first to be re-programmed or terminated. Eventually reality, the laws of physics, and humanity catch up with their "reality" bubble and once again, it is not pretty. We are humans, and not gods.
Say, you do not want to answer my question. If an uninsured individual crossed state lines and was seriously injured in an accident that was there fault, would they want "inactive" medical care or "active" medical care.
When communism is tried in the world, the folks that understand reality are usually the first to be re-programmed or terminated.
"How do you tell a Communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin."
– Ronald Reagan
I miss Ronnie!
If the repubs are smart they will change one word of the current legislation, vote on it, and have the gov sign it into law. Otherwise the legislature can began a recall of the errant judge since she is an elected official. I'm sure the state attorney general can find enough on malfeasance alone since she is an activist and rules from the bench rather than from law.
Democracy. Elections. Voters. Choices. Consequences. WHAT A REPULSIVE IRONIC JOKE THIS COUNTRY HAS BECOME.
SUIBNE
I did predict that things would get quite testy on the runup to the 2012 elections, but I didn't think it would happen so soon. So I say now, get up and gear up for a real fight.
I grew up here in rural Wisconsin, have lived in Madison for a time & retired rural. You speak the truth.
Left_Hip,
Your understanding of the Constitution is lacking. The right for the people to determine whom should work for the government and whom should be paid what is, as a matter of fact, the decision of the people.
They elect their representatives, they enact or repeal laws. Just the facts.
If you think that a LAW is Granting someone a RIGHT.
Then vote-in those whom would re-enact the law again, in the next election.
OHHHHH… I UNDERSTAND… the FORCED PAYMENT OF $35 to $75 PER MONTH FROM EVERY EMPLOYEE OF THE STATE THAT EQUATES TO MILLIONS IN DOLLARS THAT GO DIRECTLY INTO THE DEMOCRAT COFFERS IS WHAT YOUR REALLY UPSET ABOUT…
Yes?
Your a very sickly, uneducated moron. You remind me of those tiny grubs that sit at the bottom of the garbage can… kind of pale squirmy little smelly things with little better to do than wiggle wildly at the bottom of a smelly can in hopes more trash comes your way… and when it doesn't you wiggle like a little freaky grub hoping the more you wiggle the more your wiggling will bring the trash your way…
….we whom work for a living, know that our abilities and skills result in products/services that people either choose or do not choose, and our relationships, our love for our fellow citizens and our goal to serve them so that they come back to be served again is what drives the human spirit.
Not tiny little grubs at the bottom of a trash can… wiggling in hopes of getting more…
Hahahahaha… your such a joke as a human…
Publius
Please donate to the WI RNC! There is projected to be about $30 million coming from out of state to recall these Republican Senators who were DOING THEIR JOB! Only the Left would think it's okay to throw a state in upheaval and ignore November's elections because they didn't get their way. I'm embarrassed and ashamed that those 14 cowards, some of whom represent me, allowed for all of this to happen. Truly pitiful!
Why do you keep repeating this over and over again with regard to the health insurance mandate?
If you're so worried about uninsured folks leeching off the taxpayer, repeal the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act — which mandates emergency treatment regardless of ability to pay.
Once again, it's government intervention that created the problem with people gaming the system. Why on earth would someone who's irresponsible buy insurance if they can get free treatment?
The obvious solution is not to force everyone to buy insurance. The obvious solution is to let people take their risks if they so choose (this is, after all, supposed to be a free society), but don't make all of us pick up the bill.
p.s. The same gaming of the system will inevitably occur even if the health insurance mandate is upheld. People will forego paying for insurance and opt for the much cheaper fine instead. Then, when they actually need the insurance, they'll go out and get it and insurance companies will be forced to cover them regardless of their irresponsibility.
And all of our rates will go up. Exactly as expected.
"Unbelievably, the judge who issued this ruling did so knowing she’s leaving for vacation until March 28th! "
Unbelievably? I think you mean conveniently. That was almost certainly part of the plan, not a coincidence.
UNIONS SUCK. PERIOD.
I have ALWAYS been able to negotiate a better deal than ANY union.
DO the BEST you can do, and you do not need UNIONS.
Union are for lazy or mediocre hacks.
I HATE UNIONS. You want UNIONS?? Fine.
Go get a job in DETROIT. Oh,.. wait you can't.
THERE ARN'T ANY!!!
AND THE REST OF AMERICA pretty soon too.
Thanks UNIONS. AFL-CIO, UAW, SEIU, TUA, WGA.
UNIONS are Destroying America.
Look at Detroit MI to see what the UNION's AND the
DemocRAT Party have planned for America.
A ONCE Great American City COMPLETELY DESTROYED
BY the DemocRAT Party and their UNION masters.
WAY to go AFL-CIO, UAW, AFT, and SEIU.
This IS what they WILL do to YOUR town if you LET them.
"The same gaming of the system will inevitably occur even if the health insurance mandate is upheld. People will forego paying for insurance and opt for the much cheaper fine instead. Then, when they actually need the insurance, they'll go out and get it and insurance companies will be forced to cover them regardless of their irresponsibility.
And all of our rates will go up. Exactly as expected."
Or people stop standing on ridiculous principle and actually buy insurance when it is cheap initially after the law is upheld as constitutional, instead of waiting until they actually get sick and insurance companies have a reason to charge higher rates?
And also, there's only one economic basis for your theory – an individual has significantly less power to control the rates charged by large corporations for any service or good (insurance included), whereas those who come together in a group form a much more powerful bloc against such corporate tactics. In order to get around this problem, there are these things called collective bargaining rights…which, of course, are those same rights that Mr. Walker and the Republicans got rid of in Wisconsin.
Hey mental midget.,… silly libratard.
TROLL ALERT – do not waste your time responding
NOTE: (Left_Hip) IS a leftwing-NUT, libratard, progressive, Dumb-O-cRAT TROLL.
HUF PO refugee, looking for a home since Arianna Huffington tossed them overboard.
Expand IT'S profile to confirm.
BE ON THE LOOKOUT for HUFFINGTON POST Trolls that are lose on the web.
If you find any use the above cut and past to help locate them.
Thanks in advance and good hunting!
I would actually take your comment seriously if you knew the grammatical difference between "you," "your," and "you're." And if you could spell your own name right.
Oh, and if the economics degree I have didn't inherently disagree with you.
Like I said, what needs to happen NOW is a big layoff of Union workers. They were going to layoff 1,200 to 1,500 State Union workers. Now that this maneuver has been made, IT'S Time to follow through and can them.
"Why can't it all be free?!?" — the typical leftist
"Or people stop standing on ridiculous principle and actually buy insurance when it is cheap initially…"
Cheap? Premiums have already gone up, genius, and it's solely because of the bill. How would rates go down if insurance companies are mandated to keep kids on their parents' insurance until the age of 26?
This is simple cause and effect.
Some asked if the Madison judge could be recalled. The answer is "yes," and that's why she ruled this way and is likely to rule against. She doesn't want to be recalled. This IS Madison.
Everything Walker passes that's controversial will be stymied in a Madison court — Voter ID, concealed carry, education reform — and end up in Supreme Court of WI. That's why the election on April 5th is for all the marbles.
For every ONE you show us we can show TEN of your idiot thugs. Show some dignity for once if you can find it.
The only rate increases due to the bill at this time would be related to persons who had a bare minimum policy that had to be upgraded (good, because I do not want to pay for their care) or to cover children with pre-existing conditions. Both of these provisions are supported overwhelmingly by a large majority of Americans.
Really?! Tell that to the people that have already had their premiums go up by 20%. You're a useful tool aren't you?
Oh, I get it. The judge is your momma. I hope she comes out from under the porch and bites you on the booty when you get home. And, by the way Darth Vader has been porking the old girl so I don't expect she will be moving too fast. You could get away……
Poor little victims? Wow dude, you need meds. It's the leftie idiots like Jackson and sharpton and their little brainless followers that constantly play the victim and race cards… All you losers are suffering from Chronic Victim syndrom.
+10
Insurance companies are trying to do what they can now because they know they can't raise rates once the law goes into full effect. That's because they know the law is very strong against their tactics.
Explain why this is all simple "cause and effect?" Parents have been allowed to keep their children on their healthcare until the age of 26 for a very long time. That's the point of the COBRA program. Explain how mandating COBRA instead of having it as an option is going to raise rates because it actually would seem to lower them as traditionally companies give larger discounts to families, especially in insurance.
Judges DO NOT make laws. They only suppose to uphold them.
Judges DO NOT alter Legislation. They only can rule on the Legality.
Huskers, you assume the people on this site actually look at the polls that show that if you were to deconstruct the healthcare bill into individual programs, that the majority of Americans support each of the bills. The issue has been in conglomerating them into a single bill because it makes it appear as if the government is taking a significant negative intrusion into people's lives (of course, rational people would realize healthcare is a good and not a negative). This bit of propaganda is, of course, espoused by the likes of Breitbart, Beck, Hannity, Rush, all of Fox News, etc.
Most people don't keep their kids on their insurance until 26. What this law does is increase the pool of people chasing the same amount of goods and services — hence the increase in costs. It's supply and demand.
There's a reason the popular Christmas toys end up being sold on e-bay for a ton of money. It's because demand outstrips supply. Now imagine if the government mandated that everyone buy a Tickle-Me Elmo or something. Still think the cost wouldn't go up?
There is an inherent problem with what you are saying. Insurance is not actually a tangible commodity, like a Tickle-me-Elmo. Insurance is actually a good for which there is an infinite amount, i.e. so long as an insurance company wants to issue a policy to someone, they will. When a good has nearly unlimited resources, the idea of a secondary market developing because of too much demand and too little supply doesn't follow. People don't buy insurance on a secondary market, i.e. they try and pick up someone else's policy that they do not own. That's obviously illegal.
And you're right, most people don't keep their kids on their own insurance. The problem with your reasoning here is that you assume the market is expanding simply because there is another person added in the pot. Given that they are on the same policy, the actual coverage being extended is not to a "new" person since it isn't a new policy. I would agree with you if that was the case as that does increase the absolute demand in the market, but that's not the case here.
"…if you were to deconstruct the healthcare bill into individual programs … the majority of Americans support each of the bills."
And if this were a democracy, you might have a point. But seeing as it's a republic, complete with a Constitution that places strict limits on what the government is allowed to do, it really doesn't matter if something is "popular" with the majority. If it isn't allowed by the Constitution, it can't be done.
Health care is, at most, a state issue — and even the states that have tried a similar approach to this bill (like Massachusetts) have found that it has failed. Government intervention into the economy rarely has the outcome that is promised or desired.
Actually, healthcare is very much a federal issue. I think Medicare and Social Security, both of which the Supreme Court have held as Constitutional legislation, would indicate the federal government has the right to intervene on healthcare.
Oh, and I'm not exactly going to be told that two district court judges in generally conservative circuits are correct as to whether or not the healthcare law is constitutional or not. I'm waiting for SCOTUS to make this determination since there are an equal number of judges who have held it is constitutional.
Also, in terms of standing, what is the actualized or imminent harm to the states as a result of the law's passage? Assuming we are pushing people towards private insurance, mandated by the government but not sold by the government, the cost to the states would be decreasing. Additionally, at an individual level, people are getting health insurance and I have a hard time understanding how this is a harm.
The Supreme Court once held that blacks were "beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect." It has made mistakes in the past, and it will continue to make mistakes in the future. I fail to see how the court — itself an instrument of the federal government — should be the sole authority on what is and what isn't Constitutional.
The federal government and the Supreme Court have incorrectly justified any number of things under the guise of the Commerce Clause. Even a cursory reading of Jefferson and Madison reveals precisely what was intended by that clause (as well as the General Welfare Clause), and it in no way resembles the modern misinterpretation. I would urge you to do a Google search on Jefferson and Madison and the Commerce Clause. You'd be amazed at how plainly they spell out the original intent.
Furthermore, your assertion that the states aren't harmed is beside the point. As you say, the federal government is "pushing people towards private insurance, mandated by the government," and I'm sorry, but that reeks of fascism. If the government can mandate the purchase of insurance, it can mandate the purchase of anything.
If this bill stands, it will be the clearest sign yet that our republican form of government has been replaced by corporatism.
You have an economics degree?! Wow… that's really sad. You have an economics degree and yet no understanding of economics. As a matter of fact, your knowledge is so weak you had to resort to pointing out the commenter's silly grammatical errors rather than post anything of fact or reason to make your point. That is the last gasp of a dying liberal loosing the argument.
mine went up 59%
Why are judges who agree with Democrats "activist" but judges who disagree, like the one who ruled Health Care unconstitutional, true judges. Is it truly possible that you believe the judge can't make a decision based solely upon what was presented? If you think that judges should uphold the law that is exactly what the judge did, uphold the open meetings law.
You are dead right John I live here too nearby Madison….nice job. Out state as I'm sure you are aware folks are a lot more conservative…
This is just a sign that the democrat party doesn't care about the law if things don't go their way.
The Supreme Court has been since the time of Marbury v. Madison been the final arbiter of what is or what is not Constitutional. I'm not saying SCOTUS doesn't get things wrong on occasion (obviously Dred Scott comes to mind as you mentioned), but that doesn't mean they still aren't the final authority. I'd also like to know what you think should be the final arbiter of Constitutionality if not the Supreme Court as you seem to be insinuating.
The commerce clause, and the dormant commerce clause doctrine, have obviously been used in some inconsistent methods in the past and probably will be used in such inconsistent ways in the future. I also have read what Jefferson and Madison initially intended the commerce clause to mean, but the interpretation of two of the drafters isn't necessarily holding. The language of the Constitution's commerce clause was written in an extremely broad manner and should be interpreted as such. Even the most ardent of originalists, Scalia and Thomas, have accepted this more modern viewpoint.
And my point of the state harm is entirely crucial. If you were an attorney you would understand that to file a lawsuit you have to have standing, which in this case is some kind of actualized or potential harm. In this case, a lack of that harm would dismiss the case before you even considered the constitutionality of the legislation itself.
Given that healthcare, "the right to life," is an inherent human right, I believe that the government has the right to mandate such a law. Obviously people disagree, but in my interpretation of the Constitution, healthcare is a fundamental human right.
This government was replaced by corporatism and special interests 200 years ago. It's not a new phenomenon and it will continue down that road since they have the economic resources and interests to lobby the government, whereas individuals have too divergent of interests to generally come together for a single purpose…even more reason to keep collective bargaining.
I think you watch too much MSNBC, CNN and CBS is teh reason your not seeing the intimidation from the left. Why are you liberals so blind to the truth?
You clearly have not been following the rest of this thread. Please read ahead accordingly and then come back to me.
Oh, and what are your economic credentials? And after you read through the rest of my comments here, please tell me where my understanding of economics is incorrect.
Thanks for the ad hominem though. It was lovely.
A disempowered federal government would make lobbyists impractical, as they would not be able to win the favor of a pliant legislature. In a truly free market, insurance companies would be forced to compete across state lines instead of enjoying the almost monopoly status they currently possess; they would not be able to co-author regulations that stifle competition; and the government would not be able to mandate that Americans purchase their products.
Corporatism is the natural result of an enormous government with its tentacles reaching into every sector of the economy. Neither the Right or the Left seems to understand this. In the quest to make a "better" government, we have inadvertently taken power away from the individual and handed it to faceless bureaucrats and wealthy special interests.
This is the last thing the founders intended.
Can anyone tell me how a county circuit court judge can issue a restraining order blocking the State of Wisconsin's legislative actions?
How can a "county circuit court" judge rule on State legislative action?
A disempowered federal government also would be able to protect its citizens properly. Also, part of the problem is that some lobbyists are good and some are bad. Yes, the bad generally outweigh the good, but you can't say that some lobbyists are allowed and others aren't.
The problem with a truly free and unregulated market is the fallacy that it will lead to reasonably priced, well-created goods. At a certain point, the quality/price levels off and that becomes the staple. Innovation is also heavily funded now by federal grants since most corporations do not want to reinvest their profits back into their businesses.
I think one of the inherent differences the Right and Left has is with regards to how they understand government. I see government as reacting to market conditions that need adjustment or improvement. I think most of the Right sees the government as causing preemptive strikes on problems that they would like to see the market handle. On the left, we think the market has not worked as well as it should given the amount of time that it has had so far.
Also, thanks for a very civil debate. You've been by far and away the most reasonable person I've debated with on here.
An upper Court will have to rule over Her.
Yeah, thanks for avoiding the usual name-calling. It makes debating a lot more pleasant.
I will say, however, that we haven't had a market that's been given a lot of time to work. The government has been intimately involved in the market for over a century. That's not a free market; it's a manipulated one.
Also, I didn't even touch on the role of the Federal Reserve and fiat currency in all of this. And believe me, it's all tied together.
Dear Rita,
The organization is called OFA, Organizing for America, which used to be called Obama for America. Pres. Obama controls this ' community organizing ' group and they are the ones behind the protests.
Sincerely,
John Lepant Brighton CO
The American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees is a private citizen?
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D0...
BS… what about the cost to the state in handling of union dues. What about the rights of the voting public? Goose gander thing. So in your mind voters should be second to public unions when it comes to spending tax dollars?
Hey judge, how much are you selling your soul for?
It looks like the fuse has been lit on the balloon. It's probably a short fuse at that.
The real civil war is brewing up to be something really bloody, lots of judges will be hung lots of lawyers will be impisoned and executed , it happened in France it will happen here. History always seems to repeat, and will go after these elite idiots with schit for brains..
I am not afraid to meet the unions toe-to-toe. the country is at stake.
start carrying a gun.
Well it is going to come down to us and guns anyway. Every time we get a victory some judge just steps in and says no. Why elect people to do your bidding when all it take is one judge to stop the law? That is not a democracy the is a dictatorship. As we all know that scum Holder probably made a call. Also with that limp dick Boner in charge of the house I do not see much hope.
Hey Stan,
If you see canucksheet let him know George Soros is missing his timecard for today.
canuck is something of a celebrity among us, He's the scale they use to measure how dumb a rock is.
You must be logged in to post a comment.