Protests In Wisconsin

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

I don't get what the big deal is Dee, the state has always had the ability to take over city management during a fiscal or other crisis. During the whole Kwame mess the governor had the option to impeach Kwame and take over the city of Detroit. If that HAD happened it would've been a budget manager out of Lansing who would have been the "mayor" of Detroit. People have been calling for a state takeover of DPS for years as well, it's just that Granholm, while mentioning the option was available, didn't want to get into that hot mess and I don't blame her.

So how is this any different?

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

There is a difference from impeaching somebody and just sacking somebody.

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

True but AFAIK if the state ever did take over the city due to a crisis people elected and appointed would be replaced left and right.

There is a huge difference between impeaching a mayor and eliminating the entire city council and disincorporating a city. Additionally, for the governor to impeach that mayor, there are steps required, including a hearing. It doesn't eliminate the whole city as an entity! It would also allow for a new election because there is a secession plan built into a city charter. And an ELECTED city council member would become mayor, not whoever the governor decides to put in charge. Tell me how the following can even happen in a democracy?


Gov. Snyder is seeking emergency powers that would enable him to 1) unilaterally declare a "financial emergency", 2) disincorporate entire municipal governments, 3) dismiss elected officials with no replacement election to follow, 4) seize control of local civil services, 5) hand taxpayer money, services and POWERS to private, for-profit firms.

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by AGDee

Gov. Snyder is seeking emergency powers that would enable him to 1) unilaterally declare a "financial emergency", 2) disincorporate entire municipal governments, 3) dismiss elected officials with no replacement election to follow, 4) seize control of local civil services, 5) hand taxpayer money, services and POWERS to private, for-profit firms.

I'm curious to see if any other state governors have the ability to do the above or if what Snyder wants is just totally out there. Another thing to note, just because he would have the means, it doesn't mean he has the intent. I doubt Snyder will disincorporate city after city. It would just lead to more shit on his plate. I know that since you're a democrat, Snyder is probably public enemy #1 to you right now but I still think it's a little early to be foaming at the mouth over this.

[Psi U MC Vito]

The fact that he is even pushing this suggests that he would use the power if granted. Which is way too much power for one man to have. Unfortunately it would be legal if he gets the bill passed.

[AGDee]

It is simply too much power for one man. To give one person the ability to take over an entire state really is just crazy. If the President was trying to push such a thing for states, the whole country would be outraged. Many Republicans here are freaking out about this too. When you add on that he's raising taxes by insane amounts only on people making less than $80K a year, he's losing popularity fast up here.

[PiKA2001]

I haven't looked at the bill since I've been on the road for the past month but if it's as extreme as you make it sound I doubt the bill will pass. Even if does pass the courts could strike it down. BTW, how much did the tax rate go up by?

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

I haven't looked at the bill since I've been on the road for the past month but if it's as extreme as you make it sound I doubt the bill will pass. Even if does pass the courts could strike it down. BTW, how much did the tax rate go up by?

There is one bill in the House and a different one in the Senate. The one in the house says that an independent firm can declare a city or school district in financial crisis.. the Senate bill says it has to be a person to do it. However, both the House and Senate have a Republican majority so I won't be surprised if it passes. Whether it will stand up in court is the big question.

It's difficult to measure exactly how much the tax rate went up. He wants to eliminate the child exemption ($600 per child). The income tax rate had gone up to 4.25% temporarily and he wants to keep that in place so it won't go down to 3.9% again like it was supposed to. Pensions will be taxable income under his plan. It eliminates the Earned Income Tax Credit (only available for those at poverty level). It eliminates the Homestead Property Tax credit for those making more than $61K (previously set at $80K). The Homestead Property Tax Credit basically allowed you to deduct your property taxes from your income tax. It was already on a sliding scale some. Overall, 1.8 million increase in income taxes. 1.7 billion decrease in eliminating the business tax.

An analysis from an mlive.com article, which doesn't address the $600 child credit: For a senior couple with $77,500 in retirement income the plan, which also adjusts income tax credits for property tax liability, the proposal would result in a tax increase of nearly $2,600. For a couple with $42,000 in income, the tax bite would be nearly $900.

http://www.mlive.com/politics/index....plan_intr.html

The 1.4 billion dollar budget deficit would be addressed through cuts to education, local municipalities and concessions from state workers.

[AGDee]

It is official. He signed the bill today. http://www.clickondetroit.com/politi...43/detail.html

[sanjiyan69]

Originally Posted by AGDee

It is official. He signed the bill today. http://www.clickondetroit.com/politi...43/detail.html

we are fucked.

[Drolefille]

I don't have anything left to say, so here's a gif of sharktopus. Seriously just done.

[LaneSig]

FYI - Layoffs were announced last week in my school district. 335 teachers were told they would not have jobs next year.

Fortunately, I was not one of the ones laid off. Unfortunately, I was told that I would have a job for '11-'12 school year, but probably not for year '12-'13.

We were also told that an additional $30-35 million would have to be trimmed out of the '12-'13 school year budget. That is on top of the $25 million that was taken out of next year's budget.

Rick Perry campaigned for governor with the slogan that "Texas is open for business." We're wanting to make bumper stickers that say "Rick Perry's Texas: Open for business, closed for schools".

[knight_shadow]

That's SOME good news, I suppose.

I still can't believe that, especially in Texas, ESL teachers are in danger. It kind of makes sense for a new History teacher (for example), but with the make-up of the schools, I can't believe they're talking about getting rid of ESL teachers.

[KSUViolet06]

^^^I know, right?

California is in the same position and I can't believe that some districts are cutting ESL teachers (esp. in districts where a large portion of the kids have English as a 2nd lang.)

Same with SPED. That's typically not an area where you see large numbers of layoffs.