I’ll have more posts about today’s Rally in Madison later today and tomorrow.
Wanted to give you all a taste of the atmosphere.
Those who want massive tax hikes said this:
Participants create perimeter around the Anti-Reality Rally – keeping a respectful distance while providing a peaceful, quiet, non-verbal welcome to reality.
This is what they did instead:
Yelled obscenities, blew whistles and bullhorns and screamed at the top of their lungs in an attempt to drown out the hundreds of taxpayers who came to petition their government to control taxes and spending.
Typical.
I am sure they’re quite proud of themselves for turning out a bunch of their members in counter protest. Who cares if they lack the ability to engage in civil disourse. I’ve seen better behavior in the stands at Camp Randall Stadium.
Kudos to AFP and those who participated for not returning their profane language and behavior in kind.
All in all, it was an impressive rally.
Come back later for updates.
October 17th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
As usual Union members putting the THUG in Union thugs.
What did you expect from them.
A leopard does not change it’s spots
I hope the GOP does not falter they can keep this up till hell freezes over for all I care nice to see the GOP leadership showing some stones for a change.
October 17th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Does anyone else find it ironic to see Union member holding a sign that reads “Do your job”
I am sorry that is so funny on so many levels lol
October 17th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
I was there today, too, but I watched and photographed the event while mingled in with the counter protesters. I was less than impressed with the vapid and boorish behavior they displayed.
October 17th, 2007 at 4:07 pm
They actually blocked our path as we were leaving and were confronting people.
One stopped me. He was screaming in my face. I was shocked at first, but I fought back. I kept asking him- “Don’t I pay you?” That made him mad.
October 17th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
When you get Grover Norquist involved in our state, it’s not a good idea. Escalation instead of negotiation is what he wants. And that’s not the way that Wisconsin ever has wanted to do politics. This is the result.
October 17th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
Nice circular logic Kay.
Those shouting profanity and acting like thugs are not to blame for the profanity and thuggish behavior. The target of their profanity and thuggish behavior is to blame.
That’s not a “dog ate my homework excuse.” It’s a “I wouldn’t have missed handing in my homework had the teacher not assigned the homework in the first place” excuse.
October 17th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
I agree that it’s never good to be disagreeable. But that is not what will be recalled even a week from now.
It’s always a mistake to bring outsiders and their tactics into this state. As the poster in the photo said, Wisconsinites will remember in November. And they won’t be remembering comments on this blog.
They’ll be remembering — and feeling by then — the cuts in service, cancelled classes, and the like that already are having to be put in place.
The Republicans lost Assembly seats near UW campuses last time, so look at will happen there this time if all those UW students and parents across the state get that extra tuition surcharge. They’ll be reminded that Regents had to do the legislature’s job and set tuition based on the best guess then, without a budget even now.
Again, Grover Norquist’s tactics will boomerang badly by then — election time — when it counts. It’s not about today; it’s about tomorrow. A political consultant ought to be the one to say that!
October 17th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Clearly Kay has lost any sense of sanity.
The $1.2 billion currently in play is expansion.
Nothing has been cut, NOTHING.
The only question here is how much we are going to grow.
We currently have $13,320,000,000 with which to run state government. We are already taxed at a higher rate than all of our neighbors.
It simply should be enough.
October 17th, 2007 at 8:28 pm
Aside from Union members who took a day off from “their job” with the State or its subdivisions yelling “Do Your Job!!”—which is ironic in the extreeeeeeeme…
The other question that crossed my mind is “Would their Moms be proud of them now?” as they grunted, hooted, farted, and drooled their greed into the Square.
October 17th, 2007 at 8:36 pm
Fred, read up on the latest — we will be like our neighbors, raising sales tax instead to Illinois levels. That’s how it looks like taxes are less. There are many different taxes, many others called fees. . . . No thanks; the cost of living in Illinois and state with all those other taxes is way higher than here.
October 17th, 2007 at 8:42 pm
The tables could be turned. Those that complain that they are overtaxed seemed to have enough money to miss a day of work at their jobs, rent several buses and take out expensive billboards…but couldn’t afford to pay an extra couple of bucks to maintain services. Ironic, indeed.
October 17th, 2007 at 8:50 pm
Capper,
sacrificing a days wages for the better good is one thing.
Attending the rally on the taxpayers dime and continue to be a lemmings to the democratic “leadership” is another.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:04 pm
Union members did one of two things: Union contract allows “union reps” to attend union events with there wages covered by the union. However the tax payers cover the overtime cost related to the union reps being out on “union business”. Or, they just call in sick, and again the tax payers pays the overtime agian to fill the vacant position as well as the employee still in pay status under paid sick leave. I also noticed several Correctional Officers were there in uniform which is a work rule violation.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
Kay -
Students at campuses are already having to pay “surcharges”…. Ask the students in LaCrosse how much they like their $1500 surcharge to improve “diversity”?
I think enough hooey can be found in the UW budgets to prevent cancelled classes. Actually, I would bet my entire tax bill that enough hooey could be found in every state agency budget to prevent cutting any services at all.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
Thanks fo all of the anti-taxers who showed up today at the rally in Madison. You are good Americans!
The left keeps getting more and more irrational by the day.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:56 pm
I love how conservative folks love to rail against state employees and their eeeeevil unions when they disagree on issues like the budget. If you all think state employees are so lazy and useless, I can’t help but wonder if you’re willing to step in and provide security at our prisons, supervise offenders in our communities, work at the DMV, and do all the other jobs that state employees do on a daily basis to keep this state running.
October 17th, 2007 at 10:15 pm
Would I step in Zachary no but I would privatize those jobs so fast your head would spin.
We pay for those services those union thugs work for us but they seem to forget that.
I would love to see the things like the DMV and running prisons turned over to the private sector.
I love your over blown sense of importance I am sure the state of Wisconsin could survive firing 50% of state union members tomorrow.
Show me one area of the private sector where employees could insult the people who pay them like the Union thugs did today and not get fired. But State Union Thugs are a protected class aren’t they Zach.
Also Zach ask yourself why is it only in Government do we see Unions maintaining their choke hold while in most other industries Unions are slowly fading away.
October 17th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
[…] After some refreshments, we hopped the buses to the Capitol. The teat-sucking squealers were already there waiting for us (Messrs. Schneider and Fraley, both of whom I missed, have the details). Whilst waiting for high noon, the very lovely and talented Jenna dropped in, along with Lance Burri, Owen, Leah Vukmir, Rich Zipperer, Bill Kramer and many others I missed. I somehow missed Leslie, the OTB Chris, and Dad29. […]
October 18th, 2007 at 1:52 am
rc, yes, I happen to disagree with that surcharge at UW-LaCrosse. But that’s not what we’re talking about here — an additional $800 for all UW students. Since the law that so many like here says that the state cannot spend more this year than it did last year, and since there are higher costs this year, the students and their parents may have to make up the difference to keep the campuses running in the most basic ways.
Think about all of the costs that have gone up since last year — and certainly since last year’s budget, which the state has to use now, was decided upon before the last biennium, so the projections are from almost three years ago. What has gone up? Heat, fuel, electricity, other utilities, paper, etc.
And heat, for example, isn’t hooey in a Wisconsin classroom in winter.
(Note that what hasn’t gone up is state workers’ pay, since it’s the same this year as last year. Of course, they’re taxpayers, too. So they haven’t been paying more this year into state tax revenues, either — which means even more may have to come from you. And if state workers had gotten last year’s cost of living increases on time, instead of in the last paychecks of the fiscal year, only a few months ago, a lot more would have come back to the state in their taxes in previous months, which might have covered the increased costs of state facilities without more taxes for everyone else . . . and we’d have a budget now.)
October 18th, 2007 at 2:38 am
Kay - get your talking points straight. Grover Norquist has little to no involvement with AFP outside of his pre-existing relationship with Tim Phillips from two decades ago.
Regardless of Norquist of AFP, do the taxpayers not have the right to petition the government for redress?
This rally (and counter-rally) - however big or small each side was - the public will see it for what it is: that they are paying for these guys to harass taxpayers and dig deeper into their pockes.
Unions already suffer declining memberhsip and the public doens’t identify with them.
You do realize that everytime you mention Norquist’s name on a blog or anywhere else for that matter, he has staff collecting that up and feeding his ego. Basically, you talking about it only makes him stronger…
And are you really suggesting that people at the rally aren’t paying enough in taxes or that they are mistaken in feeling that they pay too much?
Or are you suggesting that they just stop complaining?
Really?
BUT the best has to be this nugget of yours, “Of course, they’re taxpayers, too.”
Unionized workers represent only about 7 percent of the workforce in this country, maybe a bit more in Wisconsin because of the shear size and scope of state government.
The vast majority of workers is, indeed, subsidizing their jobs. There are more taxpayers than tax consumers. But the unions usually don’t let intellectual debate stop them…
And do they realize that they are advocating a $1.5 billion budget just so they can get a few extra shekels? Whatever raise they get will be consumed by the increased taxes. I didn’t exactly see a smoke free crowd…
And the silliness of suggesting people try their job for a day - what a dumb argument. Arguments that dumb should be fined - or shall I say taxed (of course, to discourage it’s use)?
I don’t think for one minute I could do what they do - but that has no bearing when the legislature is prioritizing and determining appropriate levels of funding for state employees.
Do they think they could do what a small business owner or a CEO of a Fortune 500 company does? Doubtful. therefore the argument doesn’t hold and is only useful as a rhetorical tool…
October 18th, 2007 at 11:56 am
I’m always amazed with the “we need a budget now” crowd. Do we stop paying taxes until one is passed? The state’s prior budget stays in place and continues at the eye-popping rate of $26 BILLION a year. The comments made by the unions and supporters of passing a pork filled budget are either intellectually dishonest, or they just don’t have a clue how the government spend machine operates.
October 18th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
Greg, here’s a couple of clues: By law, in the current stalemate, the state can spend only according to line items in last year’s budget. Last year’s budget is not based on this year’s revenues. Since budgeting is done for a biennium, and last year was the second year of the last biennium, last year’s budget that now is also this year’s budget is based on revenue projections as much as three years ago.
And budget line items are dollar amounts — not percentages of revenues, past or since. Dollar amounts in last year’s line items were set before more utility and fuel increases since, for example; you must feel those increases, as they happened to all of us. So if you decide to spend on heating only at a previous year’s rate, and heat bills go up, you can only turn the thermostat down so far before you just have to pay more, if only to keep your pipes from bursting, right?
The state is having to pay more for many such costs this year, but it can only spend up to last year’s amounts. So it is going to run out in some of those line-item areas, to which it must hold by law without a current budget. If you want to change that, to allow the state to increase spending this year based on current revenue, fine — just tell your legislator to change the law. State agencies can’t do so, by law.
Then we won’t need a “budget now.” Then we could use a 1950 budget and just bring it up to date based on revenues — with across-the-board increases, which also would prevent new pork projects.
It’s up to the legislators on how to keep state government running, to keep turning our taxes back to us with state services, even on last year’s budget. They decided on a law that would not shut down state government but would only fund it at last year’s levels — not at adjusted levels based on revenues since.
So just be glad state revenues are up. Imagine if they were down, when the law tells state agencies to keep spending at last year’s levels. If revenues were down, I would bet that legislative leaders who are fine with living on last year’s budget would be for a new budget, but fast.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Freefall - You’re missing the point. The budget will never be high enough for your side. The State is living outside its means. The definition of compromise only seems to be an increase in taxes, fees, and spending. “The state is having to pay more for many such costs this year, but it can only spend up to last year’s amounts.” So are all of us that have to keep paying the obnoxious amount of taxes in this state.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
How funny is it that Kay is whining about a possible $800 tuition surcharge and then goes out of her way to say she supports the ridiculous $1,500 surcharge at UW - La Crosse for “diversity”? I nearly spit soda all over my keyboard when I read that.
It’s taking all of my willpower to refrain from calling here a ditz. But hopefully my willpower will win out. … D … i … t … No, I won’t. (Willpower wins out!) …
October 18th, 2007 at 1:46 pm
Whoops, my bad. Kay DISagrees with the UWL surcharge. But the people she supports are the ones who put it in. Sorry.
But then we all know the people she supports are the ones who put that surcharge in.
October 18th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
Oops again, foolish one. Nowhere did I say I support any “people” — if you mean pols. They’re all acting foolish, too. The people I support are the people of this state who needs its services.
And Greg, I’m not for a skyhigh budget; you have no evidence of me saying that, either. I’m for a budget that is negotiated by those whose job it is to do so, and I expect that true bipartisanship and leadership would bring it down to a reasonable level to handle rising costs without raising my costs too much.
Both of you reeeeeally need to work on your reading skills. Or maybe your argumentation skills. Or maybe you just need to take a deep breath — and not alienate those who might agree with you more than you know, if you weren’t so determined to be disagreeable.
October 18th, 2007 at 8:44 pm
“capper Says:
October 17th, 2007 at 8:42 pm
The tables could be turned. Those that complain that they are overtaxed seemed to have enough money to miss a day of work at their jobs, rent several buses and take out expensive billboards…but couldn’t afford to pay an extra couple of bucks to maintain services. Ironic, indeed.”
It is ironic, Capper. Were you the one that came up to me and yelled in my face, “Go home and count your stocks and bonds…all you rich people come here and” (and before you could finish I was out of hearing distance from you). What about your day off work from your job, and your rented buses, and the expenses you had to appear at our (AFP) rally!!!!! I just happen to be retired and won’t have any raises to offset extra taxes.
October 19th, 2007 at 9:00 am
Great, Kay. Let me simplify this, since your arguments seem to just run in circles. You are “for a budget that is negotiated by those whose job it is to do so” and “expect that true bipartisanship and leadership would bring it down to a reasonable level to handle rising costs without raising my costs too much.”
I’m taking a deep breath trying to figure out what the heck that even means. Anyway, I’m glad that the Republicans are doing their job and not agreeing to unreasonable levels of increases, because it just is not needed. There are already cost of living increases incorporated into the budget.
October 19th, 2007 at 11:42 am
No, Greg. My arguments have been consistent; you just can’t or don’t want to see them for some reason, when you actually have just agreed with them.
I said I was willing, unlike many here, to see some level of increases in the budget, because costs have gone up. You are saying the same thing — that you’re glad that some Republicans are not agreeing to unreasonable increases. That means that you and those Republicans are willing to accept reasonable ones.
It is the others saying “no increase” that are not being reasonable.
However, two points: No, cost of living increases for this biennium, the one that began four months ago, are not in the budget being used now, because it is last biennium’s budget. That budget could not include what was to begin in this biennium. And those line items are stated in dollar amounts, not adjustable percentages based on increased tax revenue since.
And cost of living increases do not include increased costs that have gone up for other budget items, anyway, such as utility costs, building costs, etc. And they certainly don’t include new items proposed for inclusion that were not in the last budget, such as GPS monitoring for sexual predators.
So at some point (and it is upon us), continuing to work at last year’s budget level, with only last year’s budget items, doesn’t work. And that’s when it is time for a new budget that reflects costs and proposals for now, not for the past. And that’s when it is time for both sides to be reasonable, as we agree.
October 19th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
does it bother anybody that our leader is a liar? I hope he never gets re-elected to anything again.