I'm sure we've all heard about the WI senators who have literally fled their state in order to prevent a particular piece of legislation from having a vote. I've never heard of this being done before (has it?), and to be honest I'm kind of wondering why... Anyways, I thought I'd get the feel of what other blades thought of the situation, but not just this particular instance. I'm asking, in general, should politicians be held responsible for purposefully staying absent? I think if a politician of ANY office decides to go AWOL, they should be held to the same standards to which any military personnel would be held if they went AWOL - imprisonment at most, but at the VERY least they should be immediately recalled/"fired," no ifs, ands or buts about it (I know the death penalty is the most extreme penalty for the military but I don't think that's called for here - yet ) If any of us lowly people were to just not show up to work because we didn't like what the new boss was doing, we'd be fired, end of story. I'm trying desperately to see a logical reason of why it should be any different for any elected officials, but then again I don't think they're anything remotely special compared to the rest of us to begin with. As for this particular instance, the WI senators (and the unions) are impeding democracy, while bitching about the governor impeding democracy. They call him a dictator, Hitler, Mubarak, and whatever other ad homs they can come up with; they get doctors to lie and give out blatantly fraudulent sick notes; they bitch about having their "right to collective bargaining" being taken away. Meanwhile, 2/3 of WI's students can't read at a proficient level; the WI budget is $137 million in deficit; and, most importantly, the election held merely 3 months ago has replaced the Democrat majority with a Republican one. I consider this most important because the people in power didn't get there by fraud, they didn't anoint themselves leaders, they weren't commanded by god to be in their positions....THE PEOPLE OF WISCONSIN PUT THEM THERE. Scott Walker ran his campaign on fiscal responsibility, and now he's doing things to actually effect CHANGE. Obama could learn from Walker how a politician not only follows-through with his campaign promises, but does not waver from his position just because some people bitch about it. I have yet to read any real justification for having senators just not show up to work in order to prevent their colleagues from doing the work the People sent them there to do. What if Republicans in the US Congress decided to do the same thing? What if, when the Democrats were busy forcing their own legislation through :cough:Obamacare:cough:, Republicans just left the country to prevent the work from being done? We already know what would happen; Democrats and other leftists would be, literally, calling for blood (they're already doing so in WI when it's the Dems who left the state!). There would be an endless flow of outrage, lawsuits, death threats, etc on a scale that pales in comparison to what we are seeing now. Would Obama support the Republicans if they left the party to pout and prevent a quorum to prevent the passage of legislation they didn't like? HELL NO!! Should the Reps have done so? Well shit, if it's OK for Dems why shouldn't they? And therein lies the problem!! When you let the precedent be set that SOME politicians can run away from votes they know they're going to lose, you open the door for ALL of them to do so. Why should ANY of our politicians show up for work when they know they're the minority party and their no votes will be outweighed by the yes votes? At that point, why should any of them show up at all? Why even have a fucking democratic process at all if they won't even participate? Bottom line, any politician who skips out on work to prevent a vote from taking place is akin to a child on a playground who decides to leave a kickball game and pout on the sideline while sitting on the ball so nobody else can play. To me it is straight up fucking horseshit for them to decide to short-circuit the democratic process just because they don't want to be on the losing side of a vote. If the people REALLY hated Walker and the other Reps in power, they could *gasp* VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE. To be clear, I would be just as pissed if any Republicans skipped out...if they did this shit in CA where they're in the minority, I'd be calling for them to be imprisoned and stripped of all of their privileges, too. A politician is a politician to me, I couldn't give any less of a fuck what letter is after their name.
i never did think it was okay for a politician to skip a vote...for anything. representatives get elected by the people to do pretty much one thing...represent, by way of voting on bills before them. it boggles my mind the shear number of skipped votes by representatives. you don't like the bill, great, vote no. but don't take the cowards way out by abstaining from the vote, that is the sum total of your job description. do.your.job.
Luckily that wasn't always the case, Lincoln’s Jump into the National Spotlight . Now, this post is neither in support or condemnation of the AWOL politicians, nor am I comparing them in political prowess to Lincoln. Just adding a bit of history to the situation.
Its funny how politicians want us all to vote regularly, but can't find it in themselves to attempt a perfect attendance record. They treat it as if it was high school: skip class when ever possible, and only do your [home]work when you know you'll be held accountable for it. Then again, the vast majority in North America just don't give a shit, until the down hill shit slide affects them personally. There needs to be a change of attitude on both sides.
I definitely think there should be laws that make the vote of a senator that leaves the state no contest, which would eliminate their vote.. This seems like a big ol' loop hole and doesnt seem fair in general. Of course, this would be retroactive from whenever this law is edited. As of now this is just good thinking on behalf of the Democrats to protect the interests of their constituents. Its unfortunate it had to come down to such measures, but what they're doing is legal and really, just smart. Their job is to protect the values of their constituents any way they can, that is legal. This method seems to be pretty effective.. Some may argue they arent doing their job, but if their job is to improve the United States through democratic process, I would argue they are doing their job. Everything they're doing is legal, but i agree it shouldnt be..
the teachers you speak of agreed to all the cuts, pay cuts, having the state cut payments into 401k, making the teachers pay more for healthcare, except the part that cuts them having collective bargaining. this is not a financial issue, this is the WI govenor getting rid of the teachers unions.
The only way I can see it improving anything is making it so there are actual laws against the behavior in the future. I think they should be representing their constituents, but they should not be disenfranchising the rest of the populace in doing so. Just because some people didn't vote for the politicians doesn't mean they don't represent those people. A senator represents ALL of the people of their district, not just those who voted for them. Also, having a representative does not guarantee you get what you want; it only guarantees you have a voice in the argument. If the constituents of WI didn't want this, they wouldn't have voted for Republicans in Nov 2010. If they REALLY don't want it, they'll vote for Democrats in 2012.
So in other words, the ends justify the means, whatever the means may be? Regardless of what the Governor is doing, the Senators shouldn't be pouting over it. They should cast their vote, then have ammunition for the next campaign. Like I said, if the People of WI really don't like what Walker and other Reps are doing, they'll vote them right back out of office ASAP. And it goes both ways...like I said, if the Republicans walked out on their jobs over the Obamacare vote, would that be acceptable since it "wasn't a healthcare issue?" The issue in WI is indeed a financial issue, because the people who are collectively bargaining their wages twice as much as those of the private sector people who are paying for the public employees. As a result (they haven't solely caused the financial issues), WI doesn't have money to pay for anything. How is that not a financial issue?
i said it's not a financial issue because the teachers agreed to all the financial cuts that the govenor proposed.
And collective bargaining has no adverse economic impacts? He's only getting rid of their right to force higher pay. Now they have to get public approval for a raise above the rate of CPI.
Abe Lincoln once jumped out of a window in an attempt to do the same thing that the WI Democrats are doing. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Early_life_and_career_of_Abraham_Lincoln#Illinois_State_Bank
If I'm voting someone into that position, AND my tax dollars are paying their (obscene) salary and retirement fund (one of the only jobs in the world where you can work five whopping years and get a pension for life), I expect them to at least do the fucking job they're paid to do, which is VOTE.
I'm sure everyone would have been fine with it if Republicans skipped out of town during the Obamacare vote.
That's the depressing part, anyone who was known to be skipping at an important time would be fired at a normal job. They should be terminated from their jobs if they can't handle the heat.
Dude have you read any of the bill, and what Walker is proposing? Or do you just repeat what you hear from your media outlet? I bet I can guess. Collective Bargaining is a HUGE financial issue, how the hell do you think these public employees got all these great deals and benefits in the first place? COLLECTIVE BARGAINING! Unions are so fucking corrupts its ridiculous, there worse than the big bad corporations.. There would be outrage from the left if the Republicans would of did this...
I don't know the laws in your state, but in TX roll is taken each meeting and is made public information. Furthermore, legislators are required to be at a certain percentage of all legislative meetings. You need to be realistic and take into account that legislators have lives, as well as business to take care of. It's not realistic for legislators to attend 100% of all meetings upon threat of termination. Committee meetings sometimes overlap as well, so being present at all meetings isn't physically possible. Also, there are video archives available to the legislators as well as the public.