Tampa-fication Thru Tea Party Temperance Not Spend-thriftiness

Democrats claiming credit for Tampa's triumphs 

In anticipation of the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Salon Magazine (no conservative rag) published a piece entitled: “Tampa: America’s Hot Mess”, which details how a city which the 1988 bestseller “Megatrends” has degenerated into what is derisively called a “Hot Urban Mess”.

Columnist Will Doig uses the empty 40 acres in Tampa which were slated for the aborted $2.4 Billion Sun Rail project in July 2011 as an example of what he considers the short-sighted parsimonious civic spending in Tampa as a foretaste of what is in store for America if Presumptive Republican Presidential nominee Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) is elected as President.

The article seems to presume that Hillsborough County’s rejection of the ½ cent sales tax increase scotched the light-rail deal and unwisely condemned them to congestion.  Actually, the transit tax was a 1 cent sales tax increase which failed to get 60% of votes in 2010.

The presumption that light rail would be a transportation panacea is questionable on a cost-benefit analysis.  Mass transit works well in several cities with established urban cores, such as New York City, Philadelphia, Boston, Washington D.C. and Chicago.  But then there is the infamous example of the $200 million Detroit monorail.  Baltimore’s light rail is not touted as a solution to urban congestion.  Presumably, progressives love choo-choo trains because of centralized planning, emulating European examples and employing municipal union employees. Light rail costs lots of money to establish the infrastructure and maintain it.  Perhaps express busses (which could be designed to look like street cars) running in HOV lanes could more efficiently comnbat congestion. But that derails the dream of urban railroads so beloved by progressive politicos.

Doig recounts that when Tampa went on a building spree spurred by real estate and the financial and insurance markets, there were tall glass buildings that were detached from the city itself and did not offer incentives for parks, transit or walkable space.

Perhaps the author is unfamiliar with Joel Garreau’s theory  why businesses were inclined to relocate to an Edge City  in the 1980s instead of urban centers.  The lower cost of office-space, cleaner campuses (without Superfund cleanups) which the companies control, modern infrastructure and municipalities which offered tax incentives for relocating rather than soaking supposed deep pocket companies to “pay their fair share” of taxes and graft.

It is unsurprising that the Salon columnist blames the Tea Party for not submitting to smart growth policies contained in the non-binding United Nations Agenda 21 document (not a treaty).  But without worrying about conspiracies over international Sustainable Development initiatives, the consternation can more easily be explained by the urban, suburban divide.  Democrats love centrality and dense populations, as this requires active government, lots of municipal employees and empowered politicians who bring home the bacon for their constituents.  Suburban sprawl denudes the density which requires the infrastructure and activist progressive politicians.  Of course the urban core of Tampa are Democrats and suburban Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties (St. Petersburg) are conservative strongholds.

Hurricane Isaac may make shuttling the 400 buses slated to transport RNC delegates to the Tampa Bay Times Arena more complicated, but it will be embracing the consequences of Tea Party Temperance on Taxation.  It is the height of hypocrisy for the Democrat Mayor and City Council to claim credit for the Tampa triumph and then backbite the conservative Tea Party types and conservatives

Considering the empty coiffers of many state and local governments due to boondoggles, overstaffing municipal union employees and ridiculously generous pension packages, there may be much more Tampa-fication in America rather than spend thrift states like California and Illinois.

Mickey Mouse Creeping Sharia Lawsuit

Two years ago, Imane Boudlal was fired as a hostess at Disneyland’s Grand Californian hotel Storyteller’s  restaurant.  The now 28 year old  Ms. Boudlal, a Moroccan born Muslim who is an American citizen had worked at Disneyland for two years when she began wearing her hijab (head scarf) to work.  If you totally believed the fact pattern as told by the ACLU and the Hadsell Stormer Richardson & Renick lawyers, Ms. Boudlal was fired by Disney due to anti-Arab and anti-Muslim bias which religiously discriminated against her.




What the jury and the court of public opinion should take into consideration before rushing to judgment are the accommodations which where purposed and rejected by Boudlal.  All workers at Disney resorts wear uniforms or “costumes”, particularly front-line employees at thematic attractions and restaurants.  Boudlal asked that her costume at the fin de siècle themed restaurant could be modified.  Disney offered a compromise attire which should have satisfied the modesty rationale for observant Muslim women wearing a hijab.

Ms. Boudlal, however, rejected this employer accommodation by asserting “The hat makes a joke of my religion and draws even more attention to me” and "They don't want me to look Muslim. They just don't want the head covering to look like a hijab."  Disney notes that Boudlal was offered four different roles out of the public view, which she rejected. In lieu of the rejected accommodation attire, Boudlal was given a choice to take off the hijab, work in the back or go home.  Boudlal went home and tried reporting to work for several other days wearing her head scarf before being terminated.

Some may wonder why it took two years for Ms. Boudlal to file her discrimination lawsuit. The Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Los Angeles tried to use Boudlal as a cause célèbre  two years ago but attorney Ameena Qazi could not successfully try the case in public.

 

Even observant Muslims like Qudosi Chronicles editor Shireen Qudosi questioned Boudlal’s stated rationale for wanting to wear the hijab in “observance” of  Ramadan is ridiculous and a false act of faith.  Moreover, an observant Muslim woman who believing in it would not considered a head covering optional for over two years as did Boudlal.

It is also important to note that when Boudlal was terminated, she was represented by UNITE Local 11, which did not have a labor contract with Disney hotel employees for over two and a half years.  Hence, mocking the proposed costume accommodations made for Boudlal was good agi-prop for the Union’s perception among the public.  Well, UNITE Local 11 signed a five year agreement with the Mickey Mouse Company, and the higher wages and better health care seemed to supercede standing up for their “discriminated” Muslim union sister Boudlal.   So it was wise for Boudlal’s new legal representation before her right to sue expired.

Boudlal’s statements and actions are confusing.  Boudlal did not claim to have a spiritual conversion but was motivated to assert her religious rights as she became an American citizen.  Boudlal then complained that the sartorial accommodation drew even more attention to her and being out of uniform did not do the same.  Boudlal as an employee seems to think that she can dictate how an entertainment company that is theatric and thematic can present its employees to the public.  It does not seem that CAIR saw any accommodation for Boudlal’s modesty other than allowing her to shatter the carefully cultivated public images which Disney presents to the public and Boudlal agreed to as part of her employment.

Perhaps this is a case of creeping Sharia, where an active minority uses lawfare to dictate terms to the public.  If this case ever goes to trial, may the jury weigh all of the facts of the matter as they deliberate on this Mickey Mouse alleged discrimination case.

Politics and Super Bowl Commercials

Since its inception in 1967, the Super Bowl has become a key cultural event in America’s civic religion.  But it is not just football fans who gather to watch “The Big Game”.  This year 111 million viewers tuned into the championship game but 114 million people watched  the Half Time spectacular starring Madonna and her cohort M.I.A., who literally gave the finger to the audience. In a similar vein, there are some people who look forward to Super Bowl Sunday for the commercials.

The Super Bowl attracts the largest television audience in the year, so the broadcasting network  command top dollar for commercials run during the game.  This year, a thirty second spot could cost $3.5 million.  So advertisers will use their moment in the spotlight to put their best foot forward with catchy new material.  In fact CBS (not this year’s Super Bowl broadcaster) ran a prime time show celebrating the best and worst of Super Bowl ads as well as hyping the spots that would premiere during the same.  This year, some advertisers leaked their ads online beforehand to spread the excitement.  USA Today convened  panels  in suburban Washington and Phoenix Arizona to measure how much viewers liked the commercials.  Most of the winners featured dogs.

Aside from a super smart canine who used Doritos to facilitate getting rid of felines or the ilk, there were some spots that were overtly political. The Center for Union Facts plunked down good money to show their “Repair Shop” ad. This ad should have been partcularly poignant in host city Indianapolis as Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN) signed legislation that made Indiana the 34th right to work state in the nation, much to the consternation of union activists.

Another unusual Super Bowl spot featured New York City Mayor  Michael Bloomberg (I-NYC) and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino (D-Boston) sitting together on a couch to urge “keeping guns out of criminals hands”.  Basically, it was two of the biggest proponents of the nanny state advocating more restrictions on the Second Amendment.  Some progressives are concerned that the “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” might push President Obama’s re-election campaign to focus on gun control.  In the face of the “Fast and Furious” DOJ gunrunning scandal and Democrats past history about pushing federal gun control, Daily Beast writer Adam Winkler worries that advocating this issue might cost the Obama campaign votes.

A regionally run Super Bowl ad that has generated a storm of controversy is an ad by former nine term Congressman  Peter Hoekstra (R-MI 2nd) in his opening salvo to unseat Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI).  Hoekstra sought to sell the story  that China is a continuing threat to American job creation.  But most of the buzz from the ad involves mouthpiece for the anti-incumbent message.  The negative ad against “ Michigan Sen. Debbie ‘Spend-it-now” is a young Asian women riding a bicycle across fields of rice paddies.

Voices in the media, as well as some dissenters from the Republican party, have criticized the alleged racist depictions in the ad.  Hoekstra is not chagrined by criticism about the commercial.  Hoekstra invested $150,000 in the ad and his fund-raising has exponentially increased while gaining national attention.  The backbiting from Republicans may represent jealousy and intra-party squabbles.  Moreover, FNN commentator Lou Dobbs thought that “People that are concerned about a racial implication of some sort are missing the point entirely... This is about the results and consequences of public policy choices [and] “I think that Hoekstra is doing a terrific job at defining that.”   But the supercharged cries of racism seems to track the tact which the Democrat establishment is taking to its opponents, as epitomized by the recent kerfluffle with Governor Jan Brewer (R-AZ).

Voices in the media, as well as some dissenters from the Republican party, have criticized the alleged racist depictions in the ad.  Hoekstra is not chagrined by criticism about the commercial.  Hoekstra invested $150,000 in the ad and his fund-raising has exponentially increased while gaining national attention.  The backbiting from Republicans may represent jealousy and intra-party squabbles.  Moreover, FNN commentator Lou Dobbs thought that “People that are concerned about a racial implication of some sort are missing the point entirely... This is about the results and consequences of public policy choices [and] “I think that Hoekstra is doing a terrific job at defining that.”   But the supercharged cries of racism seems to track the tact which the Democrat establishment is taking to its opponents, as epitomized by the recent kerfluffle with Governor Jan Brewer (R-AZ).

Not all political ads during the Super Bowl were overtly partisan.  Chrysler sponsored a two minute advertisement narrated by  conservative icon Clint Eastwood suggesting that “It’s Half Time in America”.  The spot seemed more like a Public Service Announcement than a car commercial since only five seconds of the 120 second ad featured auto-making, and no branding was present until the end credits.

In case one argues that Chrysler was applying a high concept ad that soft sells its brand, consider the application of copyrights.  This ad disappeared for several hours from the internet on Monday by a copyright claim from NFL Properties.  It is strange that the NFL was claiming copyright on an advertiser's product.  It is only hypothesis, but since all but the final credits mentioned Chrysler that the end could be chopped off and played as a PSA during NFL games during the fall, which both offers an uplifting public spirited message as well as pleasing the powers that be.

Fiat Chrysler has extra incentive to ingratiate itself to the Obama Administration.  The bridge loan to Chrysler of $4 billion made in late 2008 was written off by the Obama Administration.  Fiat was given the option to make an “Incremental Call Option” to buy 16% more of Chrysler at a reduced price by paying back the US Treasury $3.5 billion. But Chrysler had difficulty obtaining such private loans.  So Obama Energy Secretary indicated that he would grant a $3.5 billion fuel efficiency loan to Chrysler which was actuated by the Fully Integrated Robotic Engine that is a key component in the 2011 Fiat 500.  No wonder why Fiat was trying to make the modern rendition of the topolino sexy, as it facilitated a $3.5 billion loan for a company that only had a $5 billion market share, and now the Italian automaker owns 51% of Chrysler.  In this light, it is understandable why Chrysler produced this “Half Time in America Spot” to celebrate how Obama crony capitalism saved the “American” auto industry and to be a centerpiece President Obama’s  re-election campaign.

Even though American consumers seemingly have a sophistication towards Super Bowl commercials that celebrates innovation and entertainment, the political soft sell Chrysler used in “Half Time in America” calls to mind celebrity huckster P.T. Barnum’s maxim “There’s a sucker born every minute.”

Getting Schooled on Municipal Cost Cutting

The Garfield Heights, Ohio schools made news by making austere reductions in educational programs as well as shortening the academic day due to another failed levy in November.  School Superintendent Linda Reid noted that Garfield Heights schools had not received any additional property tax money since 1992 and five school levies have failed. But in actuality, voters have been more parsimonious than recalcitrant, as voters renewed a school tax to support the six schools and 3,700 students in May 2011 but handily defeated a new tax by 300 votes. So its liberal logic that maintaining a budget is treated as a draconian cut.


In response to the budgetary shortfalls, all special subjects have been cut, such as art, music, physical education, and the library.  Moreover the school day has been shortened by 30 minutes.  Furthermore, hot lunches have been cancelled. In fact, students who qualify for school lunches were given brown bag meals of baloney sandwiches, an apple and a pickle.  Levy supporters speculated  that up to 40 staff members may be laid off.




Whenever big government bureaucrats are stymied at growing their budgets through the ballot box, the vulnerable are used as public pawns to rally the public to get their way. Administrators will tug at citizens heart strings, threatening women and children and push the most dramatic cuts instead of administrative or procedural reforms. The only thing that Garfield Heights School Administrators missed from the liberal kabuki show playbook is hurting police and firemen.  Wait--Garfield Heights Police will have to bring in extra traffic patrols and crossing guards might have their schedules changed. One of the reasons that Governor Kasich (R-OH) failed in his attempt to pass reforms in Collective Bargaining by governmental workers was unions successfully swaying voters that Policemen and Firemen would be hurt.

With this in mind, it is not surprising that  the Garfield Heights Schools kicked off a Levy meeting on January 12th in preparation for a March election.   The “brown bag” reforms are the hardball to obtain earned media and sway an apathetic public. The last levy vote only involved 5,700 voters out of a total population of 27,000 residents.

Garfield Heights is a working class inner ring suburb on Cleveland’s East side with an aging demographic. While they historically vote Democrat, this is a demographic which unconsciously embodies the Tea Party’s manta of being Taxed Enough Already.  As voters assess an additional assessment to bankroll Garfield Heights City Schools, it would be prudent to discern if school administration is top heavy or overcompensated.  Those who are skeptical about the meat clever cuts should challenge School Administrators if their reforms were the only way or just the most dramatic.  Supposedly, the schools have cut $4 million in costs prior to their education  coup de coup de grâce, but those savings may have been ethereal.

As Americans take an agonizing reappraisal of governmental functions when it can effectively grow no more, difficult decisions will have to be made.  Schools should be all about educating not about protecting union member benefits at the cost of fleecing taxpayers or shortchanging students.

DC Metro: More Fare Thee Well?

P.J. O’Rourke once observed “Giving money and power to the government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teen-aged boys”.  This demonstrated with the  latest proposal of fare increases for the Washington Area Transportation Authority.  The DC Metro Board has proposed another 5% fare increase to help alleviate budget shortfalls for the system.  This comes on top of the $109 million fare increases from July 2010 that included the dreaded 20 cent surcharge for peak-of-the-peak.

The Metro overloads believe that they will curry favor by lifting the peak of the peak fares, which they deemed a failure.  Instead, the gimmick would be to charge flat rates for Farecards--$6 for rush hour and $4 for other usage.  Alas, the changes would only bring in $66 million in new revenue so local governments would also need to increase their contributions by $53 million.  Hence the taxpayers get stuck once.

But the dirty secret which the Metro Board does not highlight in their proposal is Farecards tend to be a perk of working for the Federal government. So jacking up the rush hour Farecard toll to $6 throws the excess costs on Federal Agencies, which will inevitably be passed along to the nation's taxpayers.  Thanks Uncle Sugar, that means that taxpayers get stung a second time.

These fare increases frankly seem pretty steep, but they might not stink as much if the service was not so sketchy.  In June 2009, there was a fatal Fort Totten rear end train crash which killed eight passengers and one transit worker which was due to 'anemic safety culture'.   The blog "UnsuckDCMetro" chronicles the safety deficiencies in hardware as well as manpower.  Elevators are prone to be out of service.  Trains can be stuck for prolonged periods, occasionally requiring evacuations.

Despite the service shortcomings, the DC Metro has embarked on an $11 billion 23 mile expansion to Dulles International Airport.  Costs to local taxpayers were slated to escalating because the Washington Metro Airport Authority unilaterally decided that the metro station at Dulles should be buried so as not to interfere with the aesthetic of the Eero-Saarinen, which only adds another $330 million and an extra year to the expansion project. Fortunately, the WMAA flip flopped eschewing the burden on local taxpayers.  But this shows the dangers of bureaucrats behaving badly and  unaccountable public entities making uneconomic decisions with the burdens falling on taxpayers.

Raising fares without offering perceived benefits is financially dangerous.  The new Fyra High Speed Rail Service in the Netherlands between Amsterdam-Rotterdam and Breta cost Dutch taxpayers nearly $11 billion.  The Fyra does not offer marketedly better service and costs 20% more so consequentially those trains run 85% empty and run at about a half million dollar a day loss.

Urban planners and green enthusiasts have long touted the virtues of having railroads and subways to ease congestion and lessen the "environmental footprint".  Few of these modes of transport are profitable.  The reality is that most rail systems will be publically operated boondoggles which enrich municipal union workers at the expense and convenience of the public.

H/T Nate Beeler, Washington Examiner

Occupy Movement-Can You Hear Me Now?

Projection on Verizon Building, NYC  Photo: Amy McLinn

Last night as the Occupy Wall Street Movement marked its two months of street theater in lower Manhattan (and other locales). Along with the  provocative unpermitted marches on the New York Stock Exchange, there was also an outdoor movie on the Verizon Building.

Showing the triumphant Occupy agitprop on the Verizon Building was no random act.  The 45,000  Communication Workers of America workers walked off their jobs at Verizon for 18 days in August but settled for essentially the same terms as before the strike.  So the CWA could show their solidarity with the Occupy Movement by projecting their support on their employer “oppressor”’s building.



Aside from the irrational exuberant exclamations of “We Are Winning”, the point of this propaganda is that it is a widespread “movement”.  While it is tempting to treat the Occupy Wall Street Movement as being a political parallel of Charlie Sheen’s moonstruck megalomania, the coordination seems more sinister.

While the useful idiots can not articulate coherent messages, it seems organized in accords to Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals.  Incorporating the muscle of radicalized unions along with the funky street theater of the i-Pad carrying hippie wanna-bes could indicate agents of change that circumvent the rule of law and our constitutional Republic government.

Ironically, government officials in liberal localities have aided and abetted both the expansion of the Occupy Movement as well as coordinated with other mayors in cracking down on the protestors. Oakland, California  Mayor Jean Quan (D-Oakland) had voiced support for her city’s Occupy protestors and countenanced a blue flu by teachers to show solidarity by striking for the Occupiers.  Yet as Oakland was forced to crack down after a rape in the Occupy Oakland encampment,  Quan noted that she consulted with 18 mayors who were simultaneously dealing with Occupy protests.  Strangely, the cities all began to clean up the Occupy Movement at the same time.  Perhaps polling numbers looked bad and Second City campaign winds of change began to blow.  Or maybe sparking conflict in multiple places at once was part of a larger overall plan.

Suddenly the Tin Foil hats of Glenn Beck seem more appealing and practical than a fashionably controversial Benetton sweater.

h/t AmyMcLinn

Obama Does a Job in Joint Session Speech

President Obama before Joint Session of Congress giving Jobs speech/  source: AP

President Barack Obama deigned to demand a Joint Session of Congress to kick off his between the beltway re-election campaign and announce an American Jobs Act. There were a couple of problems with that plan.  Firstly, the President did not have the power to convene Congress, which is a separate co-equal branch of government in our democratic Republic. Secondly, the date Mr. Obama proposed was curiously the same time which Republican challengers for his job would be gathering at the Reagan Library for a long planned debate.

It is worth noting that during the eight years that both President Bill Clinton and President George W. Bush were in office, they only made two extraordinary speeches (aside from States of the Union) before Joint Sessions of Congress.  One of Bush 43's speeches was in response to the terrorist attack on America on 9/11/01.  In less than three years, President Obama has given two Joint Session speeches and both of them seemed to be partisan packages.  But it is remarkable that President the Obama was forced to switch his rhetorical road show to a non-prime time speech to Congress timed so as not to overlap the NFL opener between the Green Bay Packers and the New Orleans Saints. So much for burnishing the aura of the occupier of the Oval Office.

By insisting on giving his job speech before Congress, President Obama raised expectations for his American Jobs speech.  Surely, the Obama Administration wanted to project an image of leadership and perhaps confront his political enemies in a forum where they could not really respond , as  Obama did to House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA 7th) during a George Washington University Deficit Speech in April.   But perhaps President Obama laid off his clutch speechwriters as Mr. Obama’s rhetoric did not soar.  In fact, it seemed reminiscent of a used car salesman.  And Mr. Obama fell into his contrived campaign cadence of dropping the last syllables on words.

During President Obama’s 32 minute speech touting the new American Jobs Act, he managed to say a variation of “Pass this bill now!”  19 times.  Of course, President Obama managed to work in class warfare (tax the rich and corporations to pay their fair share), vilify bad businesses like oil companies, give pecuniary shouts out to his comrades in teachers and construction unions and hype the already hyperactive spending on dubious high speed rail projects.  Seemingly, the only things missing were actually having a bill, designating exactly how everything will be paid and calling Mr. Obama’s $450 million in spending as another stimulus package.

Even though President Obama introduced the American Jobs Act with great pomp, it is still vaporware. President Obama insisted that everything will be paid for, which is amazing as no legislative language exists.  President Obama wanted to pawn off cost cutting to the Gang of 12 Congressional Super-Committee.  And even though President Obama implored legislators to “Pass this Jobs bill now!” to alleviate this jobs crisis, he only promised to release more details which finances his stimulus jobs bill and stabilizing the debt. So, as former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 6th) would say “We have to pass the bill to know what’s in it.”

If history is any guide, President Obama will propose sweeping cuts which will be scheduled to take effect in the off-years of a ten year plan., which means that they are ethereal as future Congresses and Presidents will not be bound to the plan.  Moreover, it will likely have more budget gimmicks, such as counting trillions of dollars of budget savings for not having troops in Afghanistan, which will have already been withdrawn by 2014.

It is curious how legislative language is inconsequential to the Obama Administration.  In July, Congress agreed to a hard fought compromise that raised the debt ceiling by $1 trillion in return for a Congressional Super-Committee finding $1.5 trillion in budgetary savings or else impose draconian cuts on the military and social programs. Now President Obama wants to impose another $450 billion of stimulus Jobs spending to that effort.

No wonder Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) chose to sort his sock drawer rather than hear this claptrap. Senator David Vitter (R-LA) had a better plan to watch the Saints-Packers game.  When the camera panned the chamber, it was obvious that two rows in the middle section were vacant. Only 26 of the 80 seats in the Congressional Media section were filled.  Perhaps that is why disgraced former Representative David Wu (D-OR 1st) was let in for the speech.  House Minority Leader Pelosi was said to be peeved that there was no official televised Republican response to compete with the NFL opener, but really what new to which to respond?

There may be some ideas to Obama’s ethereal American Jobs Act which will not be dead on arrival. Job creators need long term financial incentives and breaking down barriers.  So one off incentives to hire workers will probably only result in temp hiring or short term governmental jobs (like the Census). Pumping government money to favored companies has proven to be a waste, such as the Solyndra green jobs which wasted $600 million before going belly up when Uncle Sugar’s cash stopped.  If Mr. Obama’s rhetoric would match reality, reducing the regulatory burden would help. If President Obama really wanted to help small businesses, he would lower the tax rate on sole proprietors rather than rail for tax increases on Millionaires (which seems to include thousandaires who managed to make more than $200,000 per annum).

 But President Obama’s “Pass this bill” mantra gives an all or nothing vibe, so the talk about working with Congress is just a mighty wind. May the 112th Congress not be cowed by the bully pulpit and the “Do Something” disease to pass this mighty wind and do a better job than President Obama did with his Joint Session shuck and jive.

McCotter Jams Into Presidential Primary Race

Five term Congressman Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI 11th) will immanently announce his candidacy for the Republican nomination for President in 2012.  McCotter is known in Republican circles for being a conservative who is culturally attuned and new media savvy.  While serving on the Hill McCotter formed a rock and country band “The Second Amendments” which played for the troops and at a White House picnic. To that end, President George W. Bush called McCotter “that rock and roll dude”.

McCotter has a way of mixing wonkiness with rocking.  His Rock Solid interviews show McCotter answering policy questions while riffing on his Star Spangled Telecaster guitar.  When making House floor speeches, McCotter has been known to quote Led Zepplin.  To protest the Democrat drive to reimpose the Fairness Doctrine on talk radio, McCotter produced an innovative youtube video that was an homage to Bob Dylan’s Subterranean Homesick Blues.



McCotter is the third sitting Congressman to run for President this cycle. McCotter is jamming into an already crowded race.  The Republican field may further further expand soon if the persistent rumors about a forthcoming campaign from Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) prove true and the strong signals from former Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK).

Even though McCotter has a lifetime ACU rating of 86%, he does cause some rankles in the conservative base.  McCotter’s district is filled with autoworkers, hence he has a union friendly voting record for things like the automotive bailout of G.M. and Chrysler.   Granted, that it is a inside the beltway baseball thing, but when McCotter was the head of the conservative leaning Republican Policy Committee, McCotter sought to abolish it to save money and was replaced by Rep. Tom Price (R-GA 6th). While McCotter is mostly a well spoken conservative, his tough talk on trade puts him at odds with most free market conservatives.  Moreover, McCotter will have to explain his HAPPY proposal (H.R. 5310 Humanity And Pets Partnered through the Years legislation to give a $3,500 tax credit for pet care).

So why is McCotter jamming into the Presidential fray?  His people can say that he is in it to win it, but surely they know that it’s a long shot at best. The virtual Gingrich campaign implosion offered an opportunity to pick up some movers and shakers in Iowa.  The Ames Straw poll is in August and McCotter’s agents spent $18,000 to get the position where former Gov. Huckabee (R-AR) was located. Still McCotter polls 2% in Iowa, despite jamming with Huckabee on FNC.  But as the Paulistians (sic) often prove, straw polls can be won by dumping cash and mobilizing partisans to something that garners publicity but no delegates.

Now that Michigan Congressional redistricting has been finalized, McCotter’s district will be more secure and less union oriented.  While it is nowhere near national levels, in the last election, McCotter raised five times what his opponent did.   Even though political junkies and viewers of FNC’s Red Eye know the quirky but endearing Rep. McCotter, he might not have the statewide exposure. McCotter, like most other top tier GOP candidates,  passed on running against two term Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) this cycle.  Perhaps McCotter is looking to the future and sees that six term Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) will be 80 in 2014 and may not like being a back bencher again.

But as Rep. Michele Bachmann’s (R-MN 6th) meteoric rise in the Presidential polls has shown, a candidate who is intelligent, engaging and appealing can catch lighting in a bottle during the New Hampshire Debate and can reach for the top.  To somewhat of a lesser extent, the same was true for Herman Cain after the first debate in South Carolina. Perhaps McCotter is counting on scoring big points during a debate along with his pop persona to make him a political rock star.  And if McCotter does not become American Political Idol, then he is well positioned for House re-election, GOP cabinet consideration and possibly a Senate run in the near future.

McCotter may be a huge Beatle fan, but he would be advised to bone up on Bon Jovi’s “Living on a Prayer”.

Badger State High Court Grudge Match

David Prosser 2nd from L, Ann Marie Walsh Bradley 3rd from L , Shirley Abrahamson C

Union politics in the Badger State have been quiet contentious as of late.   In February, mobs of union sponsored protesters had a prolonged standoff in the state capitol in Madison that caused $7.5 million in damages. In a feeble attempt to circumvent the proper political process, 14 liberal state Senators became fleebaggers to deny quorum to vote on Gov. Scott Walker’s (R-WI) budget that reformed Wisconsin state union’s collective bargaining abilities about pension issues.  National activists dumped $3.5 million to contest the re-election of Wisconsin Supreme Court Judge David Prosser.  When the vote did not defeat Prosser, who could have been the deciding vote on legislation to nullify the state budget on procedural grounds, the left sought to do a costly state recount to win the contest for JoAnne Kloppenburg  in “overtime”.  Since the election was not close enough to for Democrats to steal, Prosser continued in his post and the Walker budget was passed.

Apparently, the situation has not cooled and politicos remain pugnacious.  Prior to ruling on the judicial roadblock to passage of the Walker Budget, there was a black robed melee. The initial reports from Wisconsin Public Radio and the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism were that  Supreme Court Associate Justice David Prosser held fellow Justice Ann Marie Walsh Bradley in an angry chokehold.  The brute!

In a written statement, Prosser did not categorically deny this violent incident against women in the workplace:

Once there's a proper review of the matter and the facts surrounding it are made clear, the anonymous claim made to the media will be proven false. Until then I will refrain from further public comment.

But as Oscar Wilde pithily put it “The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple.”  The lamestream media reports left out a salient detail–Prosser was defending himself from Walsh Bradley charging him with fists a flying.

It seems that six justices met in Walsh Bradley’s office to discuss when to release ruling on the budget impasse.  The Wisconsin Supreme Court was tasked with an appellate decision on District Court Judge Sumi’s objection to the Walker Budget on the grounds of the open meeting requirement.  Wisconsin legislative leaders wanted an expedited ruling to complete their work on the state budget.  When Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson was non-committal about releasing the decision in June, Prosser vocalized that he had lost all confidence in Abrahamson’s leadership.

Justice Walsh Bradley reportedly did not take kindly to any attacks on Abrahamson’s leadership so Walsh Bradley went to throw Prosser out with her fists up.  It seems that Prosser went to defend himself by putting his hands up and was said to have brushed against Walsh Bradley.  Walsh Bradley alleged that she had been choked.  Another unnamed justice immediately disputed Walsh Bradley’s accusation. Still the matter was reported to the Wisconsin Capitol Police Chief and seemingly referred to Wisconsin Judicial Commission, which can neither confirm nor deny that the incident was brought to their attention. Despite filing the report and offering damning press availabilities over the alleged incident, it is unclear if Justice Bradley is seeking justice and pressing charges over this supposed battery in the workplace.

The Prosser hit piece seems strikingly like agitprop to achieve where the electoral, legislative and judicial processes failed, to force a majority liberal Wisconsin State Supreme Court, which acts as a roadblock to changes that adversely impact their union comrades. When all else fails, fall back on the politics of personal destruction.

Right now, the only beautiful thing associated with the Wisconsin Supreme Court is the artwork in the Supreme Court Chambers by Albert Herter (1871-1950). Herter's paintings, including the Signing of the American Constitution, is supposed to represent great moments in history which influenced the law in Wisconsin.  It seems unlikely this will be depicted on canvass even though the alleged incident might still be framed.

H/T:  Verum Serum

H/T:  Red State

Rethink Telephony Oligopoly

On Sunday, news broke that Southwestern Bell Corporation SBC Communications Cingular  AT&T has launched a $39 Billion bid to buy T-Mobile USA from Deutsche Telekom. If the deal goes through, it will consolidate America's 4^th largest cellular carrier with nation's 2^nd largest wireless provider thereby creating the largest cellular carrier in America. The company originally was a Baby Bell which thrived through acquisitions. SBC bought sibling Baby Bell Ameritech in 1999, then it gobbled up the shell of  AT&T in 2005 and rechristening itself with MaBell's formal name. In 2007, AT&T bought Baby Bell Bell South for $86 Billion in 2006.


In the abstract, this deal makes sense as both AT&T and T-Mobile USA use GSM providers, which makes network consolidation easier, but T-Mobile subscribers with 3G handsets eventually would have to get new phones.  AT&T significantly benefited from a 3 ½ year exclusive relationship with Apple on selling I-Phones, which gave AT&T at least additional 2.5 Million smartphone subscribers . But now that Verizon can sell I-phones for their network, it is estimated that 25% of AT&T I-Phone users will switch to the perceived better networks of Verizon Wireless. While AT&T is still flush with I-Phone profit cash, it can buy T-Mobile, giving it more subscribers and opportunities to sell the much desired I-phones. Strategically, AT&T pre-emptive strike for T-Mobile makes it difficult for Verizon to grow through acquisition of Sprint. And AT&T's juicy offer puts Sprint's nascent bid for AT&T on the bottom of the decision pile.



Even though Deutsche Telekom stockholders may be happy with retaining T-Mobile International, getting $25 Billion in cash, about $13 Billion in stock (an 8% controlling interest in AT&T) and a seat on the AT&T Board of Directors, the battle is to sell this M&A to Federal regulators. Robert Liton, a Clinton Administration anti-trust attorney, observed that it will be an uphill battle to convince regulators that the merger will not reduce competition. This will be a big battle as there is industry opposition, public interest opposition and concerns from regulators and legislators about the anti-trust issues.



Lately, the Obama Administration has been making overtures that it is business friendly as the clock ticks towards 2012. The Obama Administration has not opposed any major mergers, but aside from the crony capitalism with Chrysler-Fiat and the Comcast-Universal merger, the economy has not been ripe for large private sector acquisitions.



The two talking points that AT&T is initially pushing in favor of the merger are that it will allow for increased access to wireless internet connectivity and wrapping the deal in the Stars and Stripes. By merging with T-Mobile, AT&T will be able to provide high speed wireless to 95% of America, furthering an Obama Administration objective to improve connectivity to rural America. Perhaps AT&T is more interested in T-Mobile's cell towers than its customers. The other tact is to highlight the fact that T-Mobile would be rescued from foreign ownership by AT&T.



Economic nationalism arguments might not carry the cache that it used to in the Age of Obama. After all, the Obama Administration facilitated a sweetheart deal with Italian Fiat Auto to carve up Chrysler's bones with the UAW and the largess of the American taxpayers. Then there is the recent news of President Obama blessing Petrobras doing deep-sea drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.



If anti-trust issues actually matter, the FCC's rationales for rejecting the Echostar (Dish Network)-Direct TV merger in 2002. While the FCC's commissioners may have changed, the soundness of their arguments remains. Commissioner Powell fretted about replacing a vibrant competitive market with a regulated monopoly that could be as best a duopoly in some areas. Other commissioners worried that decreased competition would harm consumers by raising prices and decreasing innovation and quality of service.

The oligarchy issue is problematic. While the big four wireless carriers dominate 80% of the US market, this proposed merger would consolidate 70% of the market in the big two (merged AT&T and Verizon). To smooth over consumers' ruffled feathers, expect the FCC to require open access on the expanded wireless network and that AT&T sacrifice some bandwidth in certain markets for increased competition. Can you hear me now?



There are a few political aspects that could both sway and complicate the proposed AT&T merger. Last year, AT&T spent over $15 Million in Between-The-Beltway lobbying expenses which is the 8^th highest corporate total. William Daley, now President Obama's Chief of Staff, was SBC's former president. And according to the Center for Responsive Politics, AT&T's PACs have contributed over $46 Million during the past two decades, which is more than any other company. So there is some compelling corporate pressure on politicians to "bless" this merger. It may be significant that AT&T workers are members of the Communication Workers of America while T-Mobile's employees are non-unionized so there may be a background impetus for labor to expand its membership. But the FCC is an independent agency of the Federal Government and is not subject to political pressures and forays, right?



Congress has an oversight role for mergers. Both House Judiciary Chairman Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX 21^st) and House Energy and Commerce Chairman Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI 6^th) have indicated that Congress will scrutinize this proposed merger. However, Upton's initial statement of the AT&T deal linked it with examining the FCC review. The FCC caused considerable controversy when it proffered net neutrality regulations on the internet despite Federal Court rulings which denied that power grab. Moreover, a seat on the FCC will need to be filled by the Obama Administration before any AT&T merger is finalized so political wonks will be engaged about this proposed merger and it will have some political consequences.



Consumers tend to have a love/hate relationship with their cellphones. They seem to love the advantages of ubiquitous instantaneous communications and the strong suit of their carrier, such as coverage (Verizon) technology (previously AT&T for the I-Phone) or deals (T-Mobile and Sprint). But consumers also hate the indifferent customer service, the dropped calls, the expensive lock in contracts, limitations in usage (bandwidth governing, capped "unlimited data plans") and the increasingly expensive monthly bills. It is prudent to let more details emerge when deciding proper telephony public policy, but this proposed AT&T/T-Mobile merger may have consumers rethinking oligopolies.



Via: Knoxvillebiz     Via: Betanews

By Hook Or By Court

The passage of changes in Wisconsin Public Union's abilities to use Collective Bargaining on non-salary issues remains controversial. Fourteen Democrat State Senators fled Wisconsin for several weeks to thwart the legislative process of the Republican majority in passing the budgetary changes. To show their syndical solidarity, thousands of Union led protestors rallied outside of the Capitol while the Democrat fleebaggers were FIBbers. Hundreds of enthusiastic, anarchistic opposition forces occupied the Capitol Rotunda causing $7.5 Million in damage. Yet Union sympathizers proudly proclaim about these actions "This is what democracy looks like" in our Federalist REPUBLIC.


After Wisconsin Republicans decided to separate fiscal components from the Collective Bargaining changes, the legislation was passed on an 18-1 vote. The absentee Democrat legislators wailed the talking point that passage was "an affront to democracy" Kind of ironic, isn't it? Union supporters have vowed to use the courts and the recall process to remedy their legislative loss. Big blowhard socialist cineaste Michael Moore declared "This is war". Unfortunately, some liberal partisans seem to have taken cartoonish call to arms war admonition literally



Ann Althouse, a Madison law professor who revels in proper federalism, received a special note on her blog:

WE WILL FUCK YOU UP. We will throw our baseballs in your lawn, you cranky old pieces of shit, and then we will come get them back. What are you gonna do? Shootus? Get Wausau Tea Patriots to form an ad hoc militia on your front lawn? That would be fucking HILAROUS to us. You could get to know the assholes on your side in realfucking life instead of sponging off the civil society we provide for you every single day you draw breath.

Should we resort to the saw "sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me"? Well, State Senator Dan Kapanke (R-WI 32 La Crosse) has suffered threats, broken windshield along with a persistent thug who twice spread nails on Kapanke's driveway. It's not just legislators who are targeted by these loser thugs. A bank was targeted for supporting Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI). The tagger was bold enough to declare that "Unions are forever" so it should not be blamed on rowdy youths.




A more civilized way to redress Public Sector Union grievances is to mount recall efforts. But union thugs do not fight fair and have been caught tearing up Republican recall petitions. Much to the chagrin of union loyalists, Gov. Walker can not be recalled until he has served a year in office. Wisconsin State Senate Majority Leader Fitzgerald intimated coordination between the White House and Wisconsin Labor activists to assist in recall efforts. While that seems legally questionable, it seems slightly more businesslike than being Tourist in Chief in Rio de Janeiro while "leading" the United States into war in the Maghreb. 

Gov. Walker had to sign the Collective Bargaining bill in a private ceremony before the public signing as localities were rushing to ink deals that favored the Public Sector employees before the law took effect. But why rush when WI Secretary of State Doug La Follette (D-WI) decided to drag his feet and not publish the bill for two weeks, which was his right.



The final component of this by hook or by crook strategy is to use the court system. The thin reed which Union sympathizers are holding their hopes is on the notice for the vote. Wisconsin state Open Meeting Laws generally require 24 hours notice, but in special circumstances allow. the legislators to give as little as two hours notice. The non-partisan legislative parliamentarian approved the notice so the State Senate voted, the Assembly followed suit and the Governor signed the legislation.



Yet a Dane Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi deigned that the Governor's signing may be invalid because of the lack of proper notice. Of course, the law has not even take effect, but Sumi ruled against it. Sumi also recently refused to order Madison teachers back to work as they "suffered from" blue flu while protesting at the Capitol for their generous benefits package courtesy of the Wisconsin taxpayers. Unfortunately, according to State Bar, Wisconsin's Judicial Recusal rules are amongst the worst in the country, since judges do not need to excuse themselves "soley" because of political contributions or parties independent expenditures. So the fact that Sumi's son is a political operative who is an AFL-CIO field operative and also working for SEIU may not be sufficient to cause recusal. Perhaps the fact that Sumi made a preliminary injunction on important public policy and then went on vacation for a few weeks might merit her removal. Maybe Sumi went to Rio.



Despite my preliminary impression is that this political hack opinion is dodgy but it may follow the anything goes judicial standards of the day. Issuing preliminary injunctions against laws that have not been implemented seems incredulous, but the same phenomenon occurred when a Federal Circuit Court judge prevented Oklahoma's constitutional referendum against Sharia law from being implemented. Then there was the California Federal Circuit Court judge who decided that the 18 year old Congressional Law for the Military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy was unconstitutional and the Obama Administration immediately acquiesced. As the Obama Administration has shown with DOMA and federal border enforcement, laws do not matter if the Administrative and Judicial Branches have actors who are not keen on applying them.



Although the case materials are not readily available, there are several strong challenges to Judge Sumi's kangaroo court preliminary injunction against the Collective Bargaining changes. Firstly, it is fascinating that a Circuit Court judge can overrule the implementation of the will of the Legislative and Executive branches of a state government. After implementation of the legislation, real harm is suffered, a court could rule on a legal matter and its constitutionality, but not before. Secondly, there is the fact that the non-partisan Legislative Parliamentarian approved the two hour window. Thirdly, there is the question of whether the Wisconsin Open Meeting laws strictly applied to legislative proceedings and if the exigency provisions are applicable. Lastly, there is the niggling notion that the separation of powers question. Namely, can Circuit Court Judge Sumi tell the Legislative Branch how they must proceed, or does a legislative branch set their own internal rules?



Via: HotAir  Via: SouthCapitolStreet   Via: Breitbart.tv  Via: Red State


UPDATE 3/22--  I found this detailed priliminary legal analysis on Judge Sumi's ruling from Prof. Rick Esenberg of Marquette University Law.  This piece confirmed a few of my suspicions with attaching the relevant Wisconsin laws to them. Eseberg must be commended this for composing this excellent analysis while Marquette was playing in the 2nd Round of March Madness

Be-Laboring the Point

During the Democrat National Committee winter meeting, Obama Labor Secretary Hilda Solis gave an impassioned partisan presentation of the public sector labor disputes in Wisconsin and Indiana.  Solis accused Republicans of trying to turn back the clock on worker’s rights.

Solis segue to started to address union issues by stating: "People now have to be reminded, the American public needs to know, and we need to be out there reminding them, elections do matter.  They really do." Either Solis' speechwriter is fluent in Orwellian Newspeak or lives in Wonderland, as her premises seem counterintuitive to the election results in November 2010.   Solis insists that public employees “want to be at the table but that is not what the other party [Republicans] want.”  Solis mouthed the lines of shared sacrifice, but implied that it had to be negotiating with unions and not within the ordinary governing process.

As Solis was voicing solidarity with unions in Wisconsin, she was supporting labors cronies in the state house lose power and the state is needs to balance the budget by $3.4 Billion through reductions in the platinum pension deals which Democrats had given away with taxpayer money.  So Wisconsin teachers honor their positions by having an illegal sick out strike, occupying the State Capitol and getting bogus doctor’s notes.  And they laud the cowardly lawmakers who fled the state to impede the legislative process on the matter because they don’t have the votes.  Honestly, that does not sound like Solis accepts the will of the people at the ballot box.

Of course a Democrat Labor Secretary will have a more progressive perspective towards organized labor than the prior Administration.  Both of her parents were industrial union members. And prior to serving in the Obama Administration, Solis was Congresswoman in California’s 31st and 32nd districts, which represented East Los Angeles.

Solis ratcheted up the rhetoric by declaring "The fight is on... We help the embattled states right now where public employees are under assault. And we work together and get going."  Out on the campaign trail, candidate Obama insisted that he would put on a comfortable pair of shoes to walk with protestors who were being denied their “rights” to collective bargaining.  Maybe just Solis’ words are change that union activists can believe in.

An article chronicling the costs associated with the Detroit People Mover shows why the Obama Administration is emphasizing trains and supporting union labor. The Mackinaw Center shows that the DPM employees receive double the pension contributions than their private counterparts. The monorail that makes a 2.9 mile loop around the Detroit’s downtown core.  To attract it’s 2 million riders, the DPM only charges $0.50 a ride but it costs $4.31 a mile to move a passenger, which requires a $6.2 Million operation subsidy from a destitute Detroit and another $4.3 Million from the State of Michigan.

It is another example of how organized labor has helped kill a once Great Lake State and the unions continue their death grip on the corpse to suck all the marrow from the bones.

Syndical Incivility

During the Health Care fight last year, then Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 6th) compared the peaceful grassroots protests by Tea Party activists with the violence in San Francisco during the mid 1970s.  The Lamestream Media persistently propagated the unfounded attribution that Rep. Gabrielle Gifford’s intended assassin was a right leaning wingnut. So much so that the University of Arizona established a National Institute of Civil Discourse.

The Civility Center comes at a propitious time considering the union antics against right-to-work and benefits contribution legislation in Wisconsin to help balance the state budget.  On Saturday there was a counter-protest in Mad-town by Tea Party activists and supporters of Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) reacting to the teacher occupation of the State Capitol.  The Daily Caller documents how union activists tried to sabotage the counter protest by vandalizing the dais’ sound system.  I’m sure that he was only trying to help as he shouted anti-Tea Party invectives.

 During a union rally in Boston to show solidarity with their Badger brethren, Rep. Mike Capuano (D-MA 8th) proclaimed:

I’m proud to be here with people who understand that it’s more than just sending an email to get you going. Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary...

Perhaps that was rhetorical overstatement or just an evocative metaphor.  But union activists have been interpreting that exultation a little too literally of late.

Consider the case of the ASCME “soladarity” rally on the Rhode Island State Capitol steps in Providence. A cameraman for “We the People of Rhode Island” Public Access television was assaulted by an ASCME activists.  In order to convey the contentious altercation for broadcast, Glenn Beck used codewords for the FCC-finable words.  The edited exchange was “He will Fruit Smoothie him in the cookie you Happy Man”. So much for civility.  The Rhode Island State Troopers did haul the assailant way as the assembled crowd chanted “Hey, hey, ho-ho, union busting’s got to go.”

In our nation’s Capital, the Communication Workers of America solidarity assembly took place at the Hall of States near Capitol Hill, which happens to house the DC bureau of Fox News Channel and Freedom Works.  Tabitha Hale, a diminutive 5'1" young female was filming a heated tete-a-tete with a CWA activist.  When the exchange was not going his way, the union thug assaults her twice, including one swipe with his placard. I guess that union signs are more than just trash after a union demonstration.

Apologists will explain away these embarrassing assaults by the left as isolated incidents of a few unstable individuals.  But as Pelosi implored words have consequence and political actors need to assume responsibility.  As for the limited extent of these incidents, it is curious that MoveOn.org is rallying union sympathizers to conduct protests in all 50 states this weekend. This will show if progressives can protest peacefully or if it is syndical incivility.

H/T: Michelle Malkin
H/T: The Daily Caller
H/T: FreedomWorks

Profiles in Cowardice

A Wall Street Journal article by Douglas Belkin and Kris Maher gives a concise narrative of how the fourteen fleeing Wisconsin State Senators decided to fight Governor Scott Walker’s (R-WI) legislation over the budget bill through flight from the state capital in Madison.  These elected officials decided to abandon their offices just three hours before a roll call on the legislation.

During a coffee klatch by the Capitol, Democrat Minority Leader State Sen. Mark Miller (D-Monona) recommended regrouping in Rockford Illinois at the Best Western Bell Clock Tower Resort which could be easily spotted from the Interstate. This spot was an hour and a half drive from Madison was just over the Wisconsin state line, which was out of reach of Badger state troopers to recall the legislators on the lam.

Twelve of the fourteen self-exiled Democrat State Senators managed to make it to the Bell Tower Resort, but two missed the mark due to a wrong turn on the highway. The Democrats flight did not remain secret for long when Miller was spotted by reporters in the hotel parking lot trying to elude a cellular dead zone. Citizen activists figured out where these cowardly State Senators were held up and two Tea Party types confronted State Sen. Jim Holperin (D-WI 12th Eagle River) and State Sen.  Bob Jauch (D-WI 25th Poplar) as to why they were not doing their jobs in Madison.

It was interesting to learn some of the hardships that these absent Democrats have endured in their exile, like paying $28 for a room service hamburger or a spouse needed to drive 350 miles roundtrip to deliver clean laundry and $300 cash.  Wonks have wondered if these diasporic Democrats were expensing their exile on Wisconsin state credit cards.   In 2002, 50 Democrat Texas State lawmakers tried to flee Texas to protest the redistricting plan.  The Democrats were enticed back to Austin when Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) cut off the state credit cards.  One lesson learned from the Lone Star expatriation  comes from Texas State Sen. Leticia Van de Putte (D-TX 26th San Antonio) who recommended, “If you are going to be out more than two weeks call your spouse for conjugal visits.”

Now Hoosier lawmakers are following their Badger counterparts and Indiana Democrats have fled the State Capitol in Indianapolis to avoid legislating limited governmental union coercion. This is a pitiful abdication of their oaths of office.  Being an elected official means making hard choices and going on the record with their representation.  Taking your ball and going home when you know that you are going to lose risks making our democratic republic look like a banana republic, more like an unstable Mesoamerican regime than a hip retailer.  Some slick politicians who aspired to run for higher office were chary about taking difficult votes, but at least he voted “present”.

Perhaps these abdications of office are political theatre, coordinated anarchistic strategy or just a desperate short term answer for losing legislators.  But this fight by flight strategy may be too clever by half.  In Wisconsin, there needs to be a 60% quorum when voting on budgetary matters, but only a simple majority for other legislation.  These cowardly Cheesehead State Senators might find lots of antithetical acts have been passed in their absence.

H/T: Wall Street Journal
H/T: Garyvarvel.com