Should party's use lame duck sessions for their advantage against will of voters?

independentusa · Dec 2, 2018

In Wisconsin two high positions in the Government changed hands during the 2018 election, that of Governor and the Attorney General. The GOP will continue to control the legislature but knows that it soon will not be able override a veto by the new Dem governor so they are going to try and reduce the power of both. If this is not bad enough they are going to change the election dates so that the presidential and house elections are separated from the election for the state supreme court election. They believe doing this will make it easier for the right wing court member who has been placed on the court by the present GOP governor to be elected. This will cost the state over 7 million dollars. We have seen this happen in other states controlled by the GOP. DO you think that this is ethical? I am not asking if it is legal, as it might be, but does it not reflect a belief by the GOP n some states that they should not listen to the voice of the people?

Amelia · Dec 2, 2018

Of course it's not ethical.

Instead of trying to learn why they lost power, they do this to hang onto power as long as they can against the people's wishes.

Rich2018 · Dec 2, 2018

Amelia said:
Of course it's not ethical.

Instead of trying to learn why they lost power, they do this to hang onto power as long as they can against the people's wishes.

GOP and Ethical in the same sentence ?

Amelia · Dec 2, 2018

It was hard to be a Wisconsin Republican during the Obama/Walker years.

I thought Obama and the Washington Democrats overreached and ignored the public in many ways. But I had to thread a needle because for a few years I was still celebrating Walker's wins even though the way he and Republicans steamrolled them through the legislature strongly paralleled what I didn't about how I felt Democrats were not keeping faith with the public.

I knew I was being hypocritical to praise Walker for what he was doing here while criticizing Obama for what was happening in Washington.

Eventually something had to give, and for me Walker helped give me the boost by digging us back into debt in order to give tax cuts to rich people (this after putting schools and communities on an austerity diet in the name of fiscal responsibility). Whatever illusion I had about Walker operating on pragmatic principles was shattered then, and then he helped further by flip-flopping on his moderate social and scientific positions to make a hard right turn to try to get the GOP presidential nomination.

So what frustrated me about the Wisconsin GOP's shameless power grabs when I was still GOP now makes me quite angry, now that I'm freed from membership in that party and freed from feeling I need to bite my tongue and look the other way and pretend I don't see how badly they behave.

Xelor · Dec 2, 2018

Should party's use lame duck sessions for their advantage against will of voters?

Based on the narrative in the OP, the behaviors the OP-er describe are all "just politics." Sure, it seems and likely is "shady," but then musch about the conduct of politics is.

What can be done and permitted for political purposes can, sooner or later, be undone for political purposes.

Chomsky · Dec 2, 2018

Amelia said:
It was hard to be a Wisconsin Republican during the Obama/Walker years.

I thought Obama and the Washington Democrats overreached and ignored the public in many ways. But I had to thread a needle because for a few years I was still celebrating Walker's wins even though the way he and Republicans steamrolled them through the legislature strongly paralleled what I didn't about how I felt Democrats were not keeping faith with the public.

I knew I was being hypocritical to praise Walker for what he was doing here while criticizing Obama for what was happening in Washington.

Eventually something had to give, and for me Walker helped give me the boost by digging us back into debt in order to give tax cuts to rich people (this after putting schools and communities on an austerity diet in the name of fiscal responsibility). Whatever illusion I had about Walker operating on pragmatic principles was shattered then, and then he helped further by flip-flopping on his moderate social and scientific positions to make a hard right turn to try to get the GOP presidential nomination.

So what frustrated me about the Wisconsin GOP's shameless power grabs when I was still GOP now makes me quite angry, now that I'm freed from membership in that party and freed from feeling I need to bite my tongue and look the other way and pretend I don't see how badly they behave.

Ah. Interesting story, and welcome to the dark side Amelia! :2razz:

I've been an Indie for quite a few years (after having earlier been Dem), but I too have recently (again) joined the Dems. I initially re-joined specifically as a reaction to Trump, but I now find myself getting a bit excited with the grass-roots energy and youthful revitalization I am seeing in the party. I am especially excited to see them opening a big-tent that can fit everyone from Oscaio-Cortez to Conner Lamb. I hope they expand it even further!

Besides my very-early-in-life misplaced errant vote for Reagan, I generally haven't been too crazy about the Republicans. This increased for me during the Gingrich 90's, got worse during the 2K's, and went off the rails under the Tea Party/Boehner, and even somehow worse under Trump.

I had respect for the Republicans when the seemed to be a party with quite a few principled conservatives. I can respect principled conservatism. In fact, there's quite a few tenets of conservatism that I practice in my personal life. But the Republican party under Trump, despite the installation of Trump, is no longer the party of principled conservatives. It has become nationalistic, and seemingly against many democratic and constitutional principles. It is for these reasons that I cannot in good conscience associate with them, at least in their current configuration.

poweRob · Dec 2, 2018

independentusa said:
In Wisconsin two high positions in the Government changed hands during the 2018 election, that of Governor and the Attorney General. The GOP will continue to control the legislature but knows that it soon will not be able override a veto by the new Dem governor so they are going to try and reduce the power of both. If this is not bad enough they are going to change the election dates so that the presidential and house elections are separated from the election for the state supreme court election. They believe doing this will make it easier for the right wing court member who has been placed on the court by the present GOP governor to be elected. This will cost the state over 7 million dollars. We have seen this happen in other states controlled by the GOP. DO you think that this is ethical? I am not asking if it is legal, as it might be, but does it not reflect a belief by the GOP n some states that they should not listen to the voice of the people?

Link to what the petty children in the Wisconsin GOP are up to...

GOP seeks to limit Wisconsin early voting, strip powers from Tony Evers and Josh Kaul in lame-duck session

The sweeping plan — to be taken up Tuesday — would remove Gov.-elect Tony Evers' power to approve major actions by Attorney General-elect Josh Kaul and give that authority to Republican lawmakers.

That could mean the campaign promise made by Evers and Kaul to immediately withdraw Wisconsin from a federal lawsuit to overturn the Affordable Care Act would likely be blocked.

Middle_Ground · Dec 2, 2018

Chomsky said:
Ah. Interesting story, and welcome to the dark side Amelia! :2razz:
I had respect for the Republicans when the seemed to be a party with quite a few principled conservatives. I can respect principled conservatism. In fact, there's quite a few tenets of conservatism that I practice in my personal life. But the Republican party under Trump, despite the installation of Trump, is no longer the party of principled conservatives. It has become nationalistic, and seemingly against many democratic and constitutional principles. It is for these reasons that I cannot in good conscience associate with them, at least in their current configuration.

This sums up my take on the situation as it stands....after Gingrich I thought I could vote for some Republicans then the tea party came along and that went out the window.

Middle_Ground · Dec 2, 2018

poweRob said:
Link to what the petty children in the Wisconsin GOP are up to...

GOP seeks to limit Wisconsin early voting, strip powers from Tony Evers and Josh Kaul in lame-duck session

The sweeping plan — to be taken up Tuesday — would remove Gov.-elect Tony Evers' power to approve major actions by Attorney General-elect Josh Kaul and give that authority to Republican lawmakers.

That could mean the campaign promise made by Evers and Kaul to immediately withdraw Wisconsin from a federal lawsuit to overturn the Affordable Care Act would likely be blocked.

Not sure if your in Wisconsin...but I wanted to ask what was the reasoning behind leaving the current legislators in power?

poweRob · Dec 2, 2018

Middle_Ground said:
Not sure if your in Wisconsin...but I wanted to ask what was the reasoning behind leaving the current legislators in power?

Not in Wisconsin. But perhaps Wisconsin's distant cousin... New Mexico.

Chomsky · Dec 2, 2018

Middle_Ground said:
This sums up my take on the situation as it stands....after Gingrich I thought I could vote for some Republicans then the tea party came along and that went out the window.

Yeah, with the Tea Party they (GOP) pretty much threw the baby out with the bath water. And when it seemed it couldn't get any worse, along came Trump.

But remember, all that the GOP did prior is what begat Trump! They - the GOP establishment - conditioned a large segment of their rank & file to believe fantasy and delusion. And long came the ultimate charismatic fantasy delusionalist, in the form of Trump. And he stole the rank & file away from them, because they had been pre-conditioned to accept it!

They (GOP establishment) deserve it!

Nickyjo · Dec 2, 2018

poweRob said:
Link to what the petty children in the Wisconsin GOP are up to...

GOP seeks to limit Wisconsin early voting, strip powers from Tony Evers and Josh Kaul in lame-duck session

The sweeping plan — to be taken up Tuesday — would remove Gov.-elect Tony Evers' power to approve major actions by Attorney General-elect Josh Kaul and give that authority to Republican lawmakers.

That could mean the campaign promise made by Evers and Kaul to immediately withdraw Wisconsin from a federal lawsuit to overturn the Affordable Care Act would likely be blocked.

On eliminating early voting, I realize the underlying intent is to limit voting, presumably to help the GOP, but what is the GOP publicly offering as the reason?

Amelia · Dec 2, 2018

By the way, I don't technically mind a limit to early voting if it is to two weeks in advance of the election. I don't see how that can help Republicans.

They're limiting the people who would go lock in their partisan votes without regard to any breaking news before the actual election day. And I'm happy to have people have lots of time to think about the crap stunts Trump and the GOP are pulling.

But lawsuits will probably block that. And I sure hope they get quick karma if they try to hamstring the attorney general. No idea what form the karma could take, but I hope it is swift and bitter. Maybe it will just take the form of lawsuits blocking their efforts until we can have another chance to vote them out of office.

haymarket · Dec 2, 2018

independentusa said:
In Wisconsin two high positions in the Government changed hands during the 2018 election, that of Governor and the Attorney General. The GOP will continue to control the legislature but knows that it soon will not be able override a veto by the new Dem governor so they are going to try and reduce the power of both. If this is not bad enough they are going to change the election dates so that the presidential and house elections are separated from the election for the state supreme court election. They believe doing this will make it easier for the right wing court member who has been placed on the court by the present GOP governor to be elected. This will cost the state over 7 million dollars. We have seen this happen in other states controlled by the GOP. DO you think that this is ethical? I am not asking if it is legal, as it might be, but does it not reflect a belief by the GOP n some states that they should not listen to the voice of the people?

States should amend their constitutions to abolish lame duck sessions.

Here in Michigan they are talking about passing laws in the lame duck to subvert some initiates passed on November 6th. These Republicans just have no respect for the voters.

Beaudreaux · Dec 2, 2018

independentusa said:
In Wisconsin two high positions in the Government changed hands during the 2018 election, that of Governor and the Attorney General. The GOP will continue to control the legislature but knows that it soon will not be able override a veto by the new Dem governor so they are going to try and reduce the power of both. If this is not bad enough they are going to change the election dates so that the presidential and house elections are separated from the election for the state supreme court election. They believe doing this will make it easier for the right wing court member who has been placed on the court by the present GOP governor to be elected. This will cost the state over 7 million dollars. We have seen this happen in other states controlled by the GOP. DO you think that this is ethical? I am not asking if it is legal, as it might be, but does it not reflect a belief by the GOP n some states that they should not listen to the voice of the people?

They are still in power, so yes.

TobyOne · Dec 2, 2018

I'm guessing you would be silent in the case of liberals doing the same.

independentusa said:
In Wisconsin two high positions in the Government changed hands during the 2018 election, that of Governor and the Attorney General. The GOP will continue to control the legislature but knows that it soon will not be able override a veto by the new Dem governor so they are going to try and reduce the power of both. If this is not bad enough they are going to change the election dates so that the presidential and house elections are separated from the election for the state supreme court election. They believe doing this will make it easier for the right wing court member who has been placed on the court by the present GOP governor to be elected. This will cost the state over 7 million dollars. We have seen this happen in other states controlled by the GOP. DO you think that this is ethical? I am not asking if it is legal, as it might be, but does it not reflect a belief by the GOP n some states that they should not listen to the voice of the people?

Perotista · Dec 2, 2018

independentusa said:
In Wisconsin two high positions in the Government changed hands during the 2018 election, that of Governor and the Attorney General. The GOP will continue to control the legislature but knows that it soon will not be able override a veto by the new Dem governor so they are going to try and reduce the power of both. If this is not bad enough they are going to change the election dates so that the presidential and house elections are separated from the election for the state supreme court election. They believe doing this will make it easier for the right wing court member who has been placed on the court by the present GOP governor to be elected. This will cost the state over 7 million dollars. We have seen this happen in other states controlled by the GOP. DO you think that this is ethical? I am not asking if it is legal, as it might be, but does it not reflect a belief by the GOP n some states that they should not listen to the voice of the people?

Personally, I think there should be no lame duck session, at both the federal and state levels. Georgia doesn't have lame duck sessions. Our legislature begins their session around 10 January and ends it 40 business days later. Unless the governor calls them back in session, its all over.

Our congress should end their session just before election day. Not to resume or begin their new session after the New Year. No lame duck session, period. This gives congress over 300 days to get accomplished every thing they need to in even numbered years and the whole year, 365 days in odd number years.

independentusa · Dec 2, 2018

TobyOne said:
I'm guessing you would be silent in the case of liberals doing the same.

Absolutely not. Any party that does this is anti-democracy in my viewpoint.

independentusa · Dec 2, 2018

Perotista said:
Personally, I think there should be no lame duck session, at both the federal and state levels. Georgia doesn't have lame duck sessions. Our legislature begins their session around 10 January and ends it 40 business days later. Unless the governor calls them back in session, its all over.

Our congress should end their session just before election day. Not to resume or begin their new session after the New Year. No lame duck session, period. This gives congress over 300 days to get accomplished every thing they need to in even numbered years and the whole year, 365 days in odd number years.

I find it interesting that the GOP and all of its followers were with McConnell when he stopped the voting on Obama's pick for the SCOTUS because they wanted the voters to have a choice , but they think it is fine to do this after the voters have spoken.

Perotista · Dec 2, 2018

independentusa said:
I find it interesting that the GOP and all of its followers were with McConnell when he stopped the voting on Obama's pick for the SCOTUS because they wanted the voters to have a choice , but they think it is fine to do this after the voters have spoken.

There's a lot that has gone on in the senate over the last few years I absolutely abhor. First and foremost was Reid's use of the nuclear option to strip the minority party in senate what few rights they had. Second is not giving Garland a vote. It was asinine not too. McConnell had 54 senators at the time, three more than needed to vote Garland down if that is what the Republicans wanted to do. That in my opinion was a total abuse of power.

Today, the senate is full of hypocrites. It's full of folks who put their party first above all things and everything. Schumer is no better, he said during the last years of Bush the then democratic controlled senate wouldn't take up any SCOTUS nominee from Bush.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/schumer-in-2007-dont-confirm-any-bush-supreme-court-nominee

Idiots one and all. From under who's rug do we dig these idiots from. I long for the days of Daschle and Lott, Mitchell and Dole, even Baker and Byrd back to the days of Mansfield and Dirksen. Just when I think the senate can't fall any lower, it sinks even farther.

Mr Person · Dec 2, 2018

Perotista said:
Personally, I think there should be no lame duck session, at both the federal and state levels. Georgia doesn't have lame duck sessions. Our legislature begins their session around 10 January and ends it 40 business days later. Unless the governor calls them back in session, its all over.

Our congress should end their session just before election day. Not to resume or begin their new session after the New Year. No lame duck session, period. This gives congress over 300 days to get accomplished every thing they need to in even numbered years and the whole year, 365 days in odd number years.

There's a hole in that proposal: some hypothetical thing happens and it is in the president's interest not to have congress act but very much in the American peoples' interests that congress act. (I'm aiming at the recall-by-governor analogy)

Maybe that has nothing to do with the present situation, but it is relevant to a proposal to do away with 'lame duck' sessions entirely.

independentusa · Dec 2, 2018

TobyOne said:
I'm guessing you would be silent in the case of liberals doing the same.

I find it interesting that cons are always telling us that elections have consequences, apparently except when the Dems win.

Checkerboard Strangler · Dec 3, 2018

TobyOne said:
I'm guessing you would be silent in the case of liberals doing the same.

Not surprising that you would guess that, but you'd be guessing wrong, and more to the point, seeing as how you're proposing that state Democrats do it too, please provide us with examples of state Democratic revanchism.
I'll wait, and make popcorn.

Perotista · Dec 3, 2018

Mr Person said:
There's a hole in that proposal: some hypothetical thing happens and it is in the president's interest not to have congress act but very much in the American peoples' interests that congress act. (I'm aiming at the recall-by-governor analogy)

Maybe that has nothing to do with the present situation, but it is relevant to a proposal to do away with 'lame duck' sessions entirely.

There something wrong in my mind about congress critters still doing things after they been defeated in a lame duck session. You have 40 new Democrats elected to the house, but it is the 40 old defeated Republicans that have all the say. That is until the new House meets and begins its new session in January of 2019.

The people threw out those GOP'ers, but they still run things and are totally in charge during the lame duck sessions. Party doesn't matter, the same thing happened in 2010, only then it was 63 defeated Democrats in charge, having total say even though they were defeated.

Grokmaster · Dec 3, 2018

independentusa said:
In Wisconsin two high positions in the Government changed hands during the 2018 election, that of Governor and the Attorney General. The GOP will continue to control the legislature but knows that it soon will not be able override a veto by the new Dem governor so they are going to try and reduce the power of both. If this is not bad enough they are going to change the election dates so that the presidential and house elections are separated from the election for the state supreme court election. They believe doing this will make it easier for the right wing court member who has been placed on the court by the present GOP governor to be elected. This will cost the state over 7 million dollars. We have seen this happen in other states controlled by the GOP. DO you think that this is ethical? I am not asking if it is legal, as it might be, but does it not reflect a belief by the GOP n some states that they should not listen to the voice of the people?

The voters elected them, did they not?

SENATE = GOP

POTUS =GOP

2>1.

Should party's use lame duck sessions for their advantage against will of voters?

independentusa

Amelia

Rich2018

Amelia

Xelor

Chomsky

Social Democrat

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996

Middle_Ground

Middle_Ground

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996

Chomsky

Social Democrat

Nickyjo

Amelia

haymarket

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend

TobyOne

I am the pretty one.

Perotista

independentusa

independentusa

Perotista

Mr Person

A Little Bitter

independentusa

Checkerboard Strangler

deepfreezefilms.bsky.social

Perotista

Grokmaster

Should party's use lame duck sessions for their advantage against will of voters?

Social Democrat

USMC 1988-1996

USMC 1988-1996

Social Democrat

Preserve Protect Defend

I am the pretty one.

A Little Bitter

deepfreezefilms.bsky.social

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency