‘Justices vote the party line’ - Beloit Daily News: Opinion

608-365-8811
default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

‘Justices vote the party line’

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Monday, September 24, 2012 4:00 pm

No surprise, Mr. Barth wrote an editorial criticizing the recent decision by a Dane County judge to declare Act 10 null and void. As soon as I heard about the ruling I knew people would say it was just another activist judge exceeding his authority. Why is it okay for right-leaning judges to strike down liberal legislation but it is not okay for liberal judges to strike down conservative legislation?

Mr. Barth usually champions the First Amendment but in this editorial mocks the argument that it has been infringed upon. He said the judge ruled the law violates employees’ rights of free speech and association and violates the equal protection clause by creating separate classes of employees. Love or hate the law, it did do those things. Mr. Barth justifies that by saying the law was passed by duly elected representatives of the people and the recall election showed it had public support. That does not make it constitutional. How many times have the courts overturned legislation passed by elected legislatures and supported by the people in this nation’s history?

Mr. Barth wrote that for years the liberal strategy has been to go shopping for a judge when they can’t win a political victory. I think both sides are guilty of that.

Mr. Barth would like opponents of Act 10 to just give up. Would the other side just give up if the situation were reversed?

Mr. Barth is right that the state Supreme Court, the same court he himself has criticized many times, will no doubt overturn this decision because they have proven incapable of judging cases on their merits and instead vote the party line. Maybe somehow a federal issue will allow the U.S. Supreme Court to have a shot at Act 10. I trust them more than our court. 

Mike Hoey

Delavan

  • Discuss

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
  • 2 Don't Threaten or Abuse. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. AND PLEASE TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
  • 3 Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
  • 4 Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 5 Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 6 Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Welcome to the discussion.

17 comments:

  • luckydog posted at 5:50 pm on Wed, Oct 3, 2012.

    luckydog Posts: 3587

    It's really hard to give MrData much respect as he constantly belittles other posters while claiming that he is being disrespected. Fortunately courts all over the country are rejecting the Republican voter suppression laws.

     
  • Delavan Mike posted at 3:23 pm on Wed, Oct 3, 2012.

    Delavan Mike Posts: 1295

    Exactly where did I overreact? I simply responded to your comment.

    Thanks for again showing that your previous apology for poor online behavior and pledge to do better was insincere. In that post you blamed luckydog for your poor behavior. He disrespected you, so you returned fire. What is your excuse this time? If you felt the need to return fire over my recent posts than I believe you are the one overreacting.[beam]

     
  • Mr Data posted at 9:51 am on Wed, Oct 3, 2012.

    Mr Data Posts: 3824

    Hi there Mike:

    See ..... it didn't take much at all to trip your trigger, did it ................ Mikey?

    And that's how you'll once again over-react when the Act 10 is ruled to be ... legal.

     
  • Delavan Mike posted at 9:39 am on Tue, Oct 2, 2012.

    Delavan Mike Posts: 1295

    Apparently Mr Data did not read my letter very carefully. It won't "trip my trigger" at all if the state Supreme Court overturns the ruling of the Dane County judge. As I clearly said in my letter, I fully expect that court to overturn it because they have clearly shown they are a partisan group that will tow the party line. My hope is that eventually the U.S. Supreme Court will get a crack at Act 10. I trust them much more.

    Not sure why the state Supreme Court needs to delay to hear the case now. Clearing their docket seems like a flimsy excuse.

    Nice to see Mr Data is following through on his promise to write more respectfully in his posts. The name is Mike, not Mikey.[beam]

     
  • Mr Data posted at 8:17 am on Tue, Oct 2, 2012.

    Mr Data Posts: 3824

    Or, lucky, perhaps the Supreme Courters want to keep their docket clear to be ready to reverse that ridiculous ACT 10 ruling by that politcally liberal activist judge up in Madison that is heading their way.

    That will really trip Mikeys trigger!!

     
  • luckydog posted at 3:21 pm on Sat, Sep 29, 2012.

    luckydog Posts: 3587

    Nah, they just wanted to duck this judicial hot potato until after the election.

     
  • Delavan Mike posted at 2:01 pm on Sat, Sep 29, 2012.

    Delavan Mike Posts: 1295

    That surprised me. I'd take that as a sign they can be non-partisan but I think I'd be deluding myself.

     
  • luckydog posted at 6:34 pm on Fri, Sep 28, 2012.

    luckydog Posts: 3587

    On a bright note the right wing leaning Wisconsin Supreme Court today decided not to take up the judges rulings that shot down the Republican voter suppression law. in Wisconsin. That virtually assures that the odious Republican voter ID law will not be in effect for this election.

     
  • Delavan Mike posted at 9:12 pm on Thu, Sep 27, 2012.

    Delavan Mike Posts: 1295

    Okay, maybe we should go back to the argument over if I should be forced to pay toward my retirement then. Poor performance explanation or not, I would not be paying this increase if not for Act 10. I know you and many others fail to have any sympathy for me on this issue and that is your right. I still respectfully disagree I have a much better deal than the rest of you when I look at the entire picture and not just benefits. I know there are a lot private sector workers who have it worse than me but I see quite a few who have it much better than me as well. I see myself as being right in the middle and sinking because of Act 10. We are so far apart on this issue that there really is not point arguing it further. Let's agree to disagree and move on with our lives.

     
  • RJ83 posted at 4:07 pm on Thu, Sep 27, 2012.

    RJ83 Posts: 58

    Mike,
    The amount increased due to poor performance of the plan's investments. It is similar to having a 401K that does not perform as well as expected. It is necessary to put in additional money in order to get the same benefits in the end. If you did not demand a defined payout at retirement, it would not be necessary to increase the payments now. If the investments outperform expectations, your contribution amount will be reduced. That is the reason companies have gone away from defined benefit plans.

    If you would like to pay less it is pretty simple to achieve, you have to eliminate the demand for a defined pension amount. Economics dictate how this plays out.

     
  • billtinder posted at 8:38 pm on Wed, Sep 26, 2012.

    billtinder Posts: 4677

    Always a pleasure to be of assistance lucky. Perhaps your boy Mike can talk one of the English teachers at work into tutoring you on your lack of reading comprehension.

    Then you won't feel like you've been pithed on.[smile]

     
  • Delavan Mike posted at 7:45 pm on Wed, Sep 26, 2012.

    Delavan Mike Posts: 1295

    Obviously I disagree. I also point out that the point of my post was not to lament the fact I must now pay toward my retirement when I didn't before. It was to lament the fact I have to pay more toward it than I was already being forced to leading me to question what other increases are coming my way. Many Walker supporters argued the concessions public employees were forced to make last year were reasonable (again, I obviously disagree, but I won't waste my time arguing the point with someone whose opinion I have no hope of changing). My point was that they needed to be opposed because they were most likely the first of many more to come. If you are going to sarcastically criticize my post at least criticize the correct argument.

     
  • RJ83 posted at 9:09 am on Wed, Sep 26, 2012.

    RJ83 Posts: 58

    OH THE HORROR!!! Mike has to contribute to his retirement. The world is coming to an end!!!

    Get over it Mike, everyone else in this world has to pay towards their retirement and you are still getting a much better deal than the rest of us.

     
  • Delavan Mike posted at 10:52 am on Tue, Sep 25, 2012.

    Delavan Mike Posts: 1295

    Just got word today that the 5.9% of my salary that I must contribute toward the Wisconsin Retirement system as a result of Act 10 will increase to 6.65% in 2013. Even more money out of my pocket that I cannot spend in my local economy. This was exactly why I argued so vehemently against Act 10 in the past. Not only did it negatively impact public workers when it was passed, there is nothing to keep it from negatively impacting us even more in the future. 6.65% in 2013. What's it going to be in 2014? How long will it be before Walker decides to take more money from me to cover health benefits?

     
  • luckydog posted at 9:01 pm on Mon, Sep 24, 2012.

    luckydog Posts: 3587

    Congratulations Mike I knew that Bill would soon be along with one of his typical pithy yet incomprehensible posts. Thanks for not dissappointing there Bill.

     
  • billtinder posted at 6:14 pm on Mon, Sep 24, 2012.

    billtinder Posts: 4677

    let's see, the definition of insanity:

    Doing the same thing over and over again, yet expecting a different result.

    Somehow I'm not suprised, by this crew.[beam]

     
  • luckydog posted at 4:26 pm on Mon, Sep 24, 2012.

    luckydog Posts: 3587

    Exactly Mike. Same thing when the judges halted the voter ID law. Same old hypocritical screams of outrage from the right.

     

Print ads