Wisconsin labor protests it's like Cairo has moved to Madison these days

[Proton Soup]

an old friend of mine was a union worker in the oil industry. he seemed to think that thai elbow boxing had some interesting features that enhanced negotiation.

 

[nismaratwork]

Hey, Nismar. I was the very first person in the history of Scott Paper company to transition from a salaried non-unionized position (process chemist) to an hourly unionized position (machine-tender on the world's most advanced high-speed coated paper machine). The resistance from HR was incredible, but I wanted that experience and the money (I doubled my take-home). One of my best friends' father was president of the union, and he threw the support of that union behind me so that HR eventually relented, though not without throwing lots of barriers in my way.

I became my shift's shop steward, and became the paper machine crew's representative on the contract negotiation team. During negotiations, I grew to be very good friends with the mill's new production manager, and we spent many, many weekends together afterward running white-water rivers in canoes and kayaks. The nasty truth about demonizing unions and their members is that aside from during contract negotiations when they want to make "greedy" union workers look bad in the press, large companies are quite happy about having collective-bargaining contracts. Their wages, benefits, pensions, work rules, etc, are all laid out for years in advance, giving them stability and a sense of certainty throughout the duration of the contract. I have been on both sides of that divide.

BTW, the work rules in our contract were not too permissive. Miss more than one day in a month without medical (or other) documentation? Verbal warning and a notation in your records. Miss another day in the next 90 days? Written warning and 3 days off without pay. Strike 3 and you're out. I mean fired with no chance of reinstatement. Our contract also stipulated that any shift could be held over for a double with no warning. Go into work a 12-hour shift, and get held over for a 24 because of a massive mechanical failure? Suck it up.

My brother-in-law used to rail against unions constantly, and say "nobody is worth that kind of money" regarding wages at the paper mill. I offered to recommend him for a job there, and his response was "no way I'd put up with that crap!" He knew that I often missed family outings, birthdays for the kids, etc, because of the shift-work, and that my wife had to cancel our on engagements for me when I was held over for double shifts. He was jealous of the good wages, but was unwilling to make the commitment necessary to earn them.

See... this is what I mean: I don't doubt your experience either, so what does that leave me with?

My conclusion: Unions are like virtually any other organization, and being portrayed as universally lazy is unjustified. I'd also add, some unions were/are fronts for organized crime, and that taints matters. Yet... criminal or irresponsible acts by corporations don't seem to smear other companies the same way.

I've never had that kind of personal experience, but that just speaks to my point of view, and not reality.

 

[dlgoff]

So... no, I'm not challenging your content... I'm basically asking for more. I don't consider my own anecdotal experiences, however powerful, to be justification for me to damn unions, or praise them. I would also have to guess that unions are very much a product of just what is being unionized. I know I can't generalize from postal workers to police officers, but I also know of some pretty wretched cops. I know more good ones however, and they're not fleecing the system.

So, I'm very doubtlful of declaritive statements based on personal experience by nature, even if I agree with them... especially if I agree with them actually, becuase I WANT to believe.

So yes I find your personal experience interesting, but to bulk it up I need... bulk!

For what you've listed, I'll read through it, and respond once I have an actual answer, because right now I don't. I hope that you understand, this isn't about some particular doubt about you, it's just what I consider to be good process.

Oh there's no problem without discussion. As a mater of fact, when it comes to politics, I'm not qualified one bit.

But since you mentioned police, I'll relay what my CPA mentioned just last week.

He said he did a return for a county sheriff (no names of course) but he informed me his income was over $100K. Do you know the qualifications to become a cop? A high school education. Do Engineers start out that good? Just saying.

 

[turbo]

See... this is what I mean: I don't doubt your experience either, so what does that leave me with?

My conclusion: Unions are like virtually any other organization, and being portrayed as universally lazy is unjustified. I'd also add, some unions were/are fronts for organized crime, and that taints matters. Yet... criminal or irresponsible acts by corporations don't seem to smear other companies the same way.

I've never had that kind of personal experience, but that just speaks to my point of view, and not reality.

Before paper mills unionized, pulp and paper mills in Maine were about the most dangerous places to work. Also, the management was quite arbitrary and wages were very low. In fact, in the early-to-mid 1900s, these mill-jobs were often taken by immigrants who were willing to take a lot of risks and a lot of personal sacrifice to provide for their families. In some Maine towns there are multiple generations of Italians, Poles, French-Canadians, etc that are present just because these mill-jobs existed and most of the natives didn't want to take them.

 

[Gokul43201]

But since you mentioned police, I'll relay what my CPA mentioned just last week.

He said he did a return for a county sheriff (no names of course) but he informed me his income was over $100K. Do you know the qualifications to become a cop? A high school education. Do Engineers start out that good? Just saying.

Is County Sheriff a starting position? Are engineers likely to be shot at work?

I'm a physicist. Do you know the qualifications to become an engineer? A college degree.

 

[dlgoff]

Is County Sheriff a starting position?

Yep. I have a high school buddy who started straight out of HS.

As an EE in the field, 30 or 40 kvolts is worse than a gun shot.

 

[nismaratwork]

Before paper mills unionized, pulp and paper mills in Maine were about the most dangerous places to work. Also, the management was quite arbitrary and wages were very low. In fact, in the early-to-mid 1900s, these mill-jobs were often taken by immigrants who were willing to take a lot of risks and a lot of personal sacrifice to provide for their families. In some Maine towns there are multiple generations of Italians, Poles, French-Canadians, etc that are present just because these mill-jobs existed and most of the natives didn't want to take them.

See, this is what I was taught, and came to believe about the need for unions. Much as we can't say, "tear down all of the banks and corporations" because of corruption and bureaupathologies, I've always believed the same about unions. It seems obvious from history, and the historical resistance to unions that it's a powerful tool for workers.

Any tool can be misused, but I'm yet to see the unions at fault except in specific cases.

@dlgoff: It really depends on the scope of his duties. For one, he's at risk (as Gokul states) and not just due to accident; by definition he's dealing with alleged and convicted criminals. I can't find a relative risk assessment of EE vs. Police officer, but I'd agree that both strike me as a less than safe profession. The different to me is that you can take many precautions as an EE, to the point of utterly avoiding danger. A police officer NEVER has that option.

In addition, a county sheriff is a supervisory role which requires that you fulfill your duties... and not just a patrol. We're talking about mountains of paperwork, from the normal reports, to sorting through LT C's, lectures, and the joy that is testimony (and prep) in court. I'd add, while 100K USD is a nice check, what's the upward mobility there? As an EE, you could live in poverty, or become ridiculously wealthy in the extreme. If you're a Sheriff, that may be your paycheck ad infinitum, and in a job that is also psychologically stressful.

Still... 100K is a lot, but maybe the issue is how EE's are paid, not Sheriffs. That said, with no more info it's hard to make a judgement. When we're left with warring anecdotes on all sides, isn't it time to look to the scientific method for answers?

 

[Gokul43201]

Yep. I have a high school buddy who started straight out of HS.

Things must be very different in your county.

Here's the first page I found with a quick search, for the Summit County (OH) Sheriff's Office: http://www.co.summit.oh.us/sheriff/careers.htm

You need a high school degree
+ 676 hours of Basic Peace Officer Training Academy
+ 165 hours of Corrections Training Academy
+ pass a Civil Service Exam
+ pass an Ohio Peace Officer Training Commission State Examination
+ complete a 1-year probationary period working in the County Jail
and then you are eligible to serve as a Sheriff's Deputy with a starting salary of $35,000.

As an EE in the field, 30 or 40 kvolts is worse than a gun shot.

I also spent a few minutes looking up fatality rates by profession. Law enforcement/police always appeared in the top 20. I've yet to find a list that's long enough to include EE's.

http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2009/09/04/americas-most-dangerous-jobs/
http://www.forbes.com/2008/08/25/dangerous-jobs-fishing-lead-careers-cx_mk_0825danger.html

I don't think it's meaningful to use some random Sheriff's salary as an indictment of the union system. I believe there are much better arguments against the evils of unions.

 

[nismaratwork]

Things must be very different in your county.

Here's the first page I found with a quick search, for the Summit County (OH) Sheriff's Office: http://www.co.summit.oh.us/sheriff/careers.htm

You need a high school degree
+ 676 hours of Basic Peace Officer Training Academy
+ 165 hours of Corrections Training Academy
+ pass a Civil Service Exam
+ pass an Ohio Peace Officer Training Commission State Examination
+ complete a 1-year probationary period working in the County Jail
and then you are eligible to serve as a Sheriff's Deputy with a starting salary of $35,000.

I also spent a few minutes looking up fatality rates by profession. Law enforcement/police always appeared in the top 20. I've yet to find a list that's long enough to include EE's.

http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2009/09/04/americas-most-dangerous-jobs/
http://www.forbes.com/2008/08/25/dangerous-jobs-fishing-lead-careers-cx_mk_0825danger.html

I don't think it's meaningful to use some random Sheriff's salary as an indictment of the union system. I believe there are much better arguments against the evils of unions.

Now that's what I'm talking about... data, not our shared experiences and anecdotes. That is a LOT of training that I presume is not something you're paid for, and 35K to handle criminals in and out of court? I think I'd rather be a teacher in Wisconsin.

 

[turbo]

I don't think it's meaningful to use some random Sheriff's salary as an indictment of the union system. There are much better arguments against the evils of the unions.

In Maine, sheriffs are not getting rich. They hold elected positions (generally after a very long career in law-enforcement) and they are responsible for administration, budgeting, negotiating for funding with the county commissioners, and supervision of their deputies, including scheduling and HR issues. They are also responsible for overseeing the operation of the county jail, health-care for prisoners, transfer to other facilities, etc. It is a really big job. And here, it typically pays less than $50K

 

[Gokul43201]

I thought that was typical. I've never heard of anyone making County Sheriff straight out of High School.

 

[turbo]

I thought that was typical. I've never heard of anyone making County Sheriff straight out of High School.

Me either. Our county sheriff is pretty typical. Got elected to the position after retiring from 25 years as a Maine state trooper. He is one of the most decent people you'd ever want to meet, too. One day in the 80's (I was putting a combo together with another guitarist/singer at the time), my friend called me up in tears because he had been busted for operating under the influence and wouldn't be able to fulfill his commitments to me due to loss of license. I went to his place and tried to calm him down and see if we could work out some options, like him moving really close to me instead of 35 minutes away, so we could rehearse and travel together. There was a knock on the door and it was the arresting trooper checking into see if my friend was OK (small-towns here). As long as he wants to run for sheriff, he has my vote.

 

[nismaratwork]

I thought that was typical. I've never heard of anyone making County Sheriff straight out of High School.

He could have meant "Deputy Sheriff", but that's a hugely different job.

 

[dlgoff]

I don't think it's meaningful to use some random Sheriff's salary as an indictment of the union system. I believe there are much better arguments against the evils of unions.

You're right. I did say however:

As a mater of fact, when it comes to politics, I'm not qualified one bit.

touche

 

[dlgoff]

He could have meant "Deputy Sheriff", but that's a hugely different job.

Yea. You're probably right. He would have been a Deputy Sheriff. Sorry.

 

[nismaratwork]

Yea. You're probably right. He would have been a Deputy Sheriff. Sorry.

Not a problem, it's an honest mistake.

 

[turbo]

There are other considerations regarding sheriff's deputies. Here they are hourly, not salaried, like the sheriffs. When the work-load gets nasty and the department is understaffed, they have to work long shifts and they get paid overtime. That inflates their yearly earnings. In central Maine, little towns have no budget for police staffing, so the county and state police have to take up that load and split up the coverage.

Also, every deputy I have known personally took on extra work. Sometimes it something as simple as serving papers. That can pay quite well, and they get compensated for use of their personal vehicles and extra time along with the serving fee. A senior deputy in this county moonlights as chief security officer for a private art school, as well. I'd hate to do his taxes and have to sort out his public and private earnings, allowable expenses, deductions, etc.

 

[Evo]

Also, every deputy I have known personally took on extra work. Sometimes it something as simple as serving papers. That can pay quite well, and they get compensated for use of their personal vehicles and extra time along with the serving fee. A senior deputy in this county moonlights as chief security officer for a private art school, as well. I'd hate to do his taxes and have to sort out his public and private earnings, allowable expenses, deductions, etc.

That's what I was thinking, he must be doing other "jobs" to make that much.

I was watching the new show on Alaska state troopers last night and they were talking about how dangerous their job was because everyone there has guns and the people that move to Alaska are mostly loners, survivalists and people that just can't get along with other people. Makes for a very deadly mix.

But, this has gone off topic.

 

[nismaratwork]

Well hold on now cowpokes... mebbe this here feller was DepYuTized fer a posse! Why, he could be Doc Holiday his own consumptive self.

OK... he probably moonlighted, but don't you like my version more?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Passion inside the chamber
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/represenative-gordon-hintz-tears-the-republicans-i

 

[cobalt124]

No one could begrudge you though, getting a job after retirement—you’ll probably have to anyway, because you’re pension is only a percentage of your last years salary (which in New York at least, is usual a pittance). Frankly, the pension sucks.

I still take issue with this, personally. I sympathise with the "no one could begrudge you" argument for gaining financially from a poor system. I don't see how whether it's taxpayers money or not changes the principle of what is being done, whichever side of the principle you land on. IMO, a lot of these problems can be solved by calling a spade a spade. So to my mind, a pension is a fund you contribute to over a lifetime of working, so that you can receive payments when you no longer work. Why does it have to be made so complicated?

You never get “overtime”—it’s just a salary position.

I suspect here that you are doing work on "good will", which presumably is unpaid, but has intangible benefits to yourself in your job, your colleagues, your employer, and in the case of teaching, to pupils. I think good will is fine, as long as it works both ways. From my experience, many government functions would not, without the presence of good will. Employers and unions who trample on this cause a lot of damage.

Freedom of Association means I have the right to associate, or not, with whoever I want with no regard whatsoever to anyone's idea of fairness. If a right is limited to what others think is fair, it's not a right.Of course not, not naturally. Such an entitlement could be the result of a specific agreement or contract, but it obviously doesn't and logically can't exist a priori. I wasn't making such a comparison. I made no mention of any right to either, I was referring to a right to negotiate one's own agreements, which applies to cars and jobs. Of course jobs are generally more important than cars, but the right of an individual to negotiate terms applies equally to both.

Yes I'm possibly missing your point. I would say an individual negotiating with a government employee backed by corporations seems a lot more intimidating than an individual negotiating with a few salesmen to buy a car, hence the need for collective union representation. Personally, I'd find both a terrifying prospect.

I'm totally with you here Evo. Unions are one thing but I've yet to see hard working union workers. BTW I'm retired and have "seen it all" and have never been a union member.

I don't see a relation. In my experience people work hard or they do not, irrespective of union membership.

 

[FrancisZ]

I still take issue with this, personally. I sympathise with the "no one could begrudge you" argument for gaining financially from a poor system. I don't see how whether it's taxpayers money or not changes the principle of what is being done, whichever side of the principle you land on.

Perhaps we have different definitions of a pension. I've always looked at it as: something you received for years of contributing to public service; almost as a thank you for being a good steward of the system. Children take care of their parents when the time comes; and so should society take care of its workers.

But when you retire, you usually only get a small percentage annually anyway, of what you would be making, had you kept your position. My grandfather, for example, was a policeman with the NYPD between 1947-1972; and I think he only got 30% at retirement. If you get hurt, then you might get 3/4.

Normally, this is inadequate to survive however; so then you are confronted with the problem of staying on board and continuing to work, literally until you are too feeble; or try seeking a supplement to maintain your standard of living, in the private sector (or perhaps, in some other field entirely).

Most likely, you would be working part time, if elsewhere. And if you're old and have developed health issues, you may not be able to work in any respect. So that means you would become very poor (living on 30%), unless you struggle at least part time somewhere else.

Quite a "thank you" for years of getting stabbed and shot at for 25 years.

Sometimes they actually force you out too--because it would be more expensive for the state, keeping you on.

From one perspective: you'd be doing a disservice then to the State; and in several respects. Firstly, you would not be vacating the position, so that a younger person my fill it (and usually at lower salary); and secondly, the longer you work (unless there is a ceiling to begin with), the greater the pension owed to you when you finally do retire.

Part of the problem we are experiencing in the United States, is that the Baby Boom generation actually CANNOT retire. Many people--who got talked into 401(k)'s in lieu of an actual pension--have since gotten wiped out by the stock market crash, stemming from the financial sector.

And reasonably: that has only made baby boomers want to CLING to their current employment positions, for dear life--and maybe also THEIR SPOUSE'S PENSIONS!

But that of course only leaves my demographic rather out in the cold, so to speak. Unemployment will continue to grow, so long as the older generations cannot retire.But I digress..If you "retired" from a public position (meaning you reached the eligible age for collecting a pension, and did so), but then continued to work at this same job--taking, in addition, a 2nd check from the same source--well, that's the very definition of double dipping.

But if, however, you "retired" (literally left and did not return) from your public service position, in order to collect your pension; and then worked in the private sector (for whatever reason--whether you can't make ends meet otherwise; or you just like working and earning money); that is NOT double dipping, because you are not receiving it from the same source. One is private, and one is paid for my tax payers.

But YES, even still: if a person has really any work ethic at all, then they most certainly deserve something (namely money) for doing something (at least while they're doing it).

However, if you AGREED under contract, 20 years before: that you would actually leave, when the time came, in order to collect the pension; well then you simply must. Sticking around, in an elaborate scheme to milk the system--by getting paid TWICE by that system--is frankly unethical. I would also expect it to be breech of contract.

IMO, a lot of these problems can be solved by calling a spade a spade. So to my mind, a pension is a fund you contribute to over a lifetime of working, so that you can receive payments when you no longer work. Why does it have to be made so complicated?

It really shouldn't be. No one ever said Americans were smart though. Believe me: I've seen statistics that expound us for being stupid, actually.

I suspect here that you are doing work on "good will", which presumably is unpaid, but has intangible benefits to yourself in your job, your colleagues, your employer, and in the case of teaching, to pupils. I think good will is fine, as long as it works both ways. From my experience, many government functions would not, without the presence of good will. Employers and unions who trample on this cause a lot of damage.

What can I add but more cliches: too often the bottom line rules here. And maybe sometimes not enough. It usually depends on who your friends are.

But as long as we're getting out the chopping block and cleaver: I again suggest that we start from the top down. Why doesn't somebody in Wisconsin pull together a portfolio of their elected official's perks and benefits, and see how much fat they could shave off their asses.

Do it in the name of fiscal conservatism! Tally-ho!

The truth is though: what a politician makes in public service, is a mere bag of shells in comparison to what they could making as a lobbyist. And many lobbyists do become politicians; and many politicians do become lobbyists. In that respect at least, perhaps becoming governor is just a stepping stone toward making more money in the private sector.

 

[nismaratwork]

I believe this has become a clear issue of union-busting, and that makes any other claim that was used to cover that act suspect.

 

[Al68]

Yes I'm possibly missing your point. I would say an individual negotiating with a government employee backed by corporations seems a lot more intimidating than an individual negotiating with a few salesmen to buy a car, hence the need for collective union representation. Personally, I'd find both a terrifying prospect.

I find neither intimidating, myself. If I couldn't negotiate with someone on the terms of a purchase or employment, I might as well be someone's pet instead of a free person.

 

[nismaratwork]

I find neither intimidating, myself. If I couldn't negotiate with someone on the terms of a purchase or employment, I might as well be someone's pet instead of a free person.

You're as free as those things you're willing to give up to be free. Still, I have to question how you find neither intimidating... why don't you? All or nothing isn't a lack of indimidation, it's a thought distortion.

 

[FrancisZ]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/us/22koch.html?_r=1

 

[Norman]

As someone who grew up in Wisconsin and went to school there I have been following the news about the governor and his new budget fairly closely.

A couple of things that have not (I don't think) been brought up in this thread are the following:

The bill also has a provision for the governor to forgo the usual legislative process (remember a governor is not a legislator, but an executive) and revamp public health care system for poor children (called BadgerCare). See this link for reference: http://host.madison.com/ct/news/loc...cle_979fd798-385c-11e0-b233-001cc4c03286.html

In addition, the bill also has a provision to "sell any state-owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without the solicitation of bids."
source: http://www.todaystmj4.com/features/iteam/116633848.html

--Note this source makes some extreme logic jumps - namely that Koch industries would directly profit from this clause. I don't know about that, but, no bid contracts have traditionally been one way politicians reward campaign contributors. I don't think it matters whether you are right wing, left wing, or no wing on the political spectrum. If the state is going to sell off infrastructure it should do so at the greatest economic reward to the state. It is in a budget bill...

 

[WhoWee]

As someone who grew up in Wisconsin and went to school there I have been following the news about the governor and his new budget fairly closely.

A couple of things that have not (I don't think) been brought up in this thread are the following:

The bill also has a provision for the governor to forgo the usual legislative process (remember a governor is not a legislator, but an executive) and revamp public health care system for poor children (called BadgerCare). See this link for reference: http://host.madison.com/ct/news/loc...cle_979fd798-385c-11e0-b233-001cc4c03286.html

In addition, the bill also has a provision to "sell any state-owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without the solicitation of bids."
source: http://www.todaystmj4.com/features/iteam/116633848.html

--Note this source makes some extreme logic jumps - namely that Koch industries would directly profit from this clause. I don't know about that, but, no bid contracts have traditionally been one way politicians reward campaign contributors. I don't think it matters whether you are right wing, left wing, or no wing on the political spectrum. If the state is going to sell off infrastructure it should do so at the greatest economic reward to the state. It is in a budget bill...

Is there a specific proposal on the table? Your link credited the Tea Party with raising concerns of a political supporter - then spoke in terms of "could" and "if" - not clear?

 

[Norman]

Is there a specific proposal on the table?

Are you talking about the actual budget bill? I am unsure what you are talking about. Could you be more specific please?

Your link credited the Tea Party with raising concerns of a political supporter - then spoke in terms of "could" and "if" - not clear?

I assume you are referring to the 2nd link about the sale of the state-owned power plants. Yes, as I stated in the last part of my post, the article makes a lot of logical leaps. Namely that some campaign contributors to Walker's campaign would benefit. The point is not that these people will definitely profit here. My point was simply that no-bid sales of public infrastructure are a losing situation for taxpayers. All of this put into a budget bill that is meant to address some (imagined - in my opinion) budget issues. How can the Governor pretend to care so much about the state budget, but be willing to let a no-bid sale of state infrastructure happen?


Mainly, I am trying to add the following to the discussion: The Governor, with this budget bill, seems to be trying to drastically change the power balance in Wisconsin. He seems to be consolidating power to the executive branch (away from the legislative branch) while simultaneously taking power away from state employees.

I feel this should be very unsettling to all Wisconsinites (and Americans), regardless of your political leanings. But that is just my opinion.

 

[WhoWee]

Are you talking about the actual budget bill? I am unsure what you are talking about. Could you be more specific please?


I assume you are referring to the 2nd link about the sale of the state-owned power plants. Yes, as I stated in the last part of my post, the article makes a lot of logical leaps. Namely that some campaign contributors to Walker's campaign would benefit. The point is not that these people will definitely profit here. My point was simply that no-bid sales of public infrastructure are a losing situation for taxpayers. All of this put into a budget bill that is meant to address some (imagined - in my opinion) budget issues. How can the Governor pretend to care so much about the state budget, but be willing to let a no-bid sale of state infrastructure happen?


Mainly, I am trying to add the following to the discussion: The Governor, with this budget bill, seems to be trying to drastically change the power balance in Wisconsin. He seems to be consolidating power to the executive branch (away from the legislative branch) while simultaneously taking power away from state employees.

I feel this should be very unsettling to all Wisconsinites (and Americans), regardless of your political leanings. But that is just my opinion.

If he's trying to consolidate power - how does 14 legislators - members of the opposing party - hiding in another state to avoid debate and votes help their cause?

 

[Norman]

If he's trying to consolidate power - how does 14 legislators - members of the opposing party - hiding in another state to avoid debate and votes help their cause?

I don't know, you would probably have to ask them...

Also, I don't think hiding in another state has held up debate on the subject. It has definitely held up a vote. I believe those senators have been quoted as saying they left to slow down the vote and allow more discussion.

Are you interested in clarifying your previous questions and having a discussion? What do you think about the consolidation of power? Or do you just want to randomly jump from point to point?

 

[nismaratwork]

"Oh myyyyyyyy"

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/02/22/wisconsin.budget/index.html?hpt=T1

STORY HIGHLIGHTS
NEW: Governor's spokesman calls the accusation "a lie"
NEW: Spokesman calls blockage temporary, routine for new sites
Democrats blame Republicans for blocking pro-union website in the state Capitol
Defendwisconsin.org could not be accessed in the Capitol on Monday, early Tuesday

 

[vici10]

It seems that Wisconsin protests are spreading. The protests in Indionapolis - http://peoplesworld.org/right-now-1000-workers-sit-in-and-block-indiana-state-senate/"

 

[nismaratwork]

It seems that Wisconsin protests are spreading. The protests in Indionapolis - http://peoplesworld.org/right-now-1000-workers-sit-in-and-block-indiana-state-senate/"

And republicans are joining. Can you recall a governer in WI?

 

[Norman]

And republicans are joining. Can you recall a governer in WI?

Not until they have been in office for a year. So the governor is safe until 2012. Bit there are 8 senators (if memory serves) who could be on the block.