|
tazzygirl -> The tangled web in Wisconsin (4/3/2011 9:58:03 AM)
|
Watching the political wheeling and dealing in Wisconsin has become a fascination for me. A comedy of errors is the most appropriate term I could find.
For example, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, the one who ordered the state police to arrest the Democrats to be lawfully forced to return? Well, seems his father, Stephen Fiztgerald runs the State Patrol. Nice family connection.
The same Majority Leader was warned told he would be oh "shakey grouonds" if he tried to force them to return by attorneys from at three state agencies.
But he acknowledged the efforts to return the senators to Madison came off as "comical" and would have become a public relations "disaster" if any lawmakers had been hauled back to Madison in a squad car.
"The whole thing was a mess," Fitzgerald said. "You just can't compel a senator to come back to the chamber."
He said the reality was brought home when police agencies refused to carry out his March 3 order to forcibly detain the senators. Among them was Rock County Sheriff Robert Spoden, who said his department would not honor any order to bring in Sen. Tim Cullen,
D-Janesville.
Said Fitzgerald: "There was no cop in the state that would enforce it."
Comical... a good word.
"It would appear that Section 15 prevents us from ‘arresting' or ‘physically forcing' a member to attend," Richard wrote in an email to attorneys at the two legislative service agencies and John Hogan, Fitzgerald's chief of staff. "It now seems that monetary penalties and removal of privileges may be our only recourse with this resolution."
Nevertheless, four days later, Fitzgerald once again sent troopers from the State Patrol, which is run by his father, Stephen Fitzgerald, to senators' homes.
On March 3, two weeks after the walkout, Fitzgerald ratcheted up the pressure. He called his 18 Republican colleagues into session, and when the Democrats did not return by 4 p.m., the Republicans found them in "contempt of the Senate." Fitzgerald ordered that the Democrats be "forcibly detained" if they stepped foot in Wisconsin.
That day, Fitzgerald and his private attorney, James Troupis, sounded confident in Fitzgerald's legal authority to bring the errant senators back to Madison. Troupis cited a constitutional provision that allows the Senate to "compel the attendance of absent members."
The Senate resolution authorized Blazel to use force and enlist the help of law enforcement to bring in the missing members. Troupis explained that detention was not an "arrest" because the senators were not suspected of any crimes.
When Fitzgerald tried to have the order to detain put out on the statewide system that officers use to check for arrest warrants it drew the attention of the state Department of Justice, which urged the Senate to back down.
"We would strongly recommend that you attempt to get the Senate's Order to Detain out of the system, i.e. to the extent possible indicate publicly that it has been withdrawn so that law enforcement do not rely upon it and attempt to enforce it, thereby creating unnecessary liability exposure to them and the state," Kevin Potter, an assistant attorney general, said in a March 4 email.
The email response from Troupis, three hours later, was defiant: "We are not withdrawing the Order."
The effort ended March 9 after Fitzgerald removed certain "fiscal" items from the bill that had required a 20-vote majority, and it quickly passed the Senate. Implementation of the law - which strips most collective bargaining rights from most public employees in Wisconsin - is now stalled in a court battle.
Fitzgerald said he doesn't regret trying to force the Democratic senators back but "I certainly understand it was futile."
"Every time we made a move it was always something that you in your wildest dreams never that you'd be involved with," Fitzgerald said. "The discussions we had were incredible, almost surreal.
"They characterize me as some evil overbearing guy who was trying to do all these dirty tricks. We were just trying to do the best we could ... to figure out how to get these things back on track - get the Senate back."
http://lacrossetribune.com/news/local/8ad2476a-5dac-11e0-95fb-001cc4c002e0.html
So while they were talking, through email, about what to do or not to do, what was legal and what the state police would or wouldnt do, while arguing with the state DOJ, they now want us to believe they were working within teh spirit of the law for the best efforts for Wisconsin to get the Senate "back on track".
Damn those pesky emails.
As far as the union law itself... its on hold for two months. I was wondering why these politicians believed they could circumvent a court order, until I read the above. The arrogance of these people knows no bounds.
Wisconsin's polarizing union rights law is on hold for about two months after a judge said Friday that a restraining order blocking it will stay in place she while considers whether Republicans passed it illegally.
Republicans had been pushing the law through despite a boycott by Democratic state senators and weeks of protests that drew as many as 85,000 people to the state Capitol. But they suffered a defeat Thursday when the same judge declared the law was not enacted last week as Republicans had claimed.
Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi on Friday extended indefinitely a temporary restraining order preventing the secretary of state from putting the law in effect. She is considering a lawsuit that says Republican lawmakers didn't provide the proper public notice when they convened a special committee to amend the plan before its passage. The state has appealed the order to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, but the court has not indicated whether it will take the case and has no deadline for making a decision.
Republicans could try to get around the issue by passing the bill again, but party leaders said again Friday they have no plans to do that.
Now they are accusing the Judge of being an "activist".
"We passed the law correctly, legally the first time," Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald said in a statement. "Passing the law correctly and legally a second or third time wouldn't change anything. It certainly wouldn't stop another activist judge and room full of lawyers from trying to start this merry-go-round all over again."
Gov. Scott Walker has said the law is needed to help school and local governments deal with cuts in state funding he expects to make to address the state's budget shortfall. Walker's spokesman referred questions to state Department of Administration officials, who declined comment.
Three lawsuits have been filed so far over the law. Sumi heard testimony Friday on one lawsuit filed by Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne, who argues Republicans provided only two hours' notice of their meeting when the state's open meetings law requires 24 hours. Republican legislative leaders say proper notice was given under Senate rules.
But Ozanne called a number of witnesses who said they heard about the hearing only minutes before it began. They arrived to find long lines at the Capitol's entrances and by the time they reached the room where the meeting was held, police wouldn't allow them in.
Rich Judge, chief of staff for Assembly Democratic Leader Peter Barca, testified that someone dropped off a petition at Barca's office the night of the meeting. He said it was signed by nearly 3,000 people who alleged they were denied access to the meeting and the Senate floor session that immediately followed.
Brian Gleason of Madison testified he reached the Senate parlor, where the committee hearing was being held, about 20 minutes before the meeting was scheduled to begin. He found a crowd of about 150 people and a line of police standing shoulder to shoulder denying access.
"Frankly, I was angry," he said. "At that point, the train going into the Senate parlor was already closed to me."
Sumi asked for additional arguments from attorneys by May 23, delaying a decision for nearly two months. Whatever decision Sumi eventually makes, one side or the other is likely to appeal in an attempt to get the case to the state Supreme Court.
http://www.thenewstribune.com/2011/03/31/1607585/wis-judge-halts-govs-union-law.html?storylink=rss
Seems the spring is heating up.... politically.
|
|
|
|
