Leave it to teabaggers to overstep (what else is new?). The republican governor of Wisconsin picked a fight with public employee unions in a state with a strong tradition of support for organized labor.

From Uppity Wisconsin:

End Game? Walker Doesn’t Have One

Thu, 02/17/2011 – 10:55am |  Jud Lounsbury

Here’s what happened:  Walker looked over to the legislature and noticed that both houses were heavily Republican and then looked at WEAC, AFSCME and the other public sector unions and his dim bulb lit up:  Let’s kill those guys!

The problem, is that its not as easy as voting and signing something into law.  What Walker failed to grasp when he started on this foolish journey is that it would provoke the biggest strike in Wisconsin history and grind the state to a complete halt.

There is no end game where Walker can come out of this as a winner.  Not now.  He had the unions ready to make deep concessions and he would have come out budget contract talks smelling like a rose. Not now.

Now, the state will be shut down for a week or two, a beligerent Walker will finally cave, and the Unions will come out of this stronger than before.

[emphasis added]

From TPM:

Wisconsin Gov. Walker Ginned Up Budget Shortfall To Undercut Worker Rights

Brian Beutler | February 17, 2011, 1:47PM

Wisconsin’s new Republican governor has framed his assault on public worker’s collective bargaining rights as a needed measure of fiscal austerity during tough times.

The reality is radically different. Unlike true austerity measures — service rollbacks, furloughs, and other temporary measures that cause pain but save money — rolling back worker’s bargaining rights by itself saves almost nothing on its own. But Walker’s doing it anyhow, to knock down a barrier and allow him to cut state employee benefits immediately.

Furthermore, this broadside comes less than a month after the state’s fiscal bureau — the Wisconsin equivalent of the Congressional Budget Office — concluded that Wisconsin isn’t even in need of austerity measures, and could conclude the fiscal year with a surplus. In fact, they say that the current budget shortfall is a direct result of tax cut policies Walker enacted in his first days in office….

From the AFL-CIO blog:

Crowd Swells in Madison

by Mike Hall, Feb 17, 2011

Just got off the phone with the Frank Emspak of Workers Independent News (WIN) labor radio and he says it looks like today’s crowd in Madison, Wis., to protest Gov. Scott Walker’s (R) attack on workers’ rights could grow bigger than yesterday’s. About three blocks from the main plaza by the Capitol, the streets are jammed. In fact, there are so many people, cell phone coverage is spotty at best…

Oh, and the coverage from old media? Via Twitter:

awesomefactory David Summers

National vs. local story RT @Slfriend79: The So Called Liberal MSM: TeaParty = Constant Coverage / Union Workers In WI = Crickets #wiunion 1 minute ago

ctaylor64 ctaylor64

@CNN 10s of 1000s of American citizens march on their capitol & Dem senators leave the state to avoid quorum. Where have you been? #wiunion 2 minutes ago

cbl2 clarice andrews

Ich Bin Ein Cheesehead ! #wiunion #solidaritywisconsin 2 minutes ago

According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, State Auditor Tom Schweich has announced that he will go where the action is, no “boring reports” for him:

Schweich said he will designate a “rapid response team” to jump in immediately when credible, serious allegations surface about waste or corruption. As an example, he cited the possibility of a state employee doing political work on state time.

First question:  Does this mean that he’ll be auditing the office of Lt. Governor Peter Kinder? From what I’ve been reading over at FiredUP! there’s serious reason to believe that the underemployed Kinder may have taken advantage of the resources of his office to further his political career. (See also here and here.)

Second question:  Since Schweich doesn’t seem to be able to perform an auditor’s functions when it comes to the unFair Tax proposal pushed by Rex Sinquefield, a big-time purchaser of state political products, will his office even be able to summon sufficient auditing skill do the job when it comes to possible miscreants like Kinder?

Or was Schweich’s hesitation apropos the unFair Tax simply a result of his sense of obligation to follow through on the promise his erstwhile campaign supporter and fellow GOPer, Peter Kinder, made on Schweich’s behalf that, if elected, Schweich would focus his auditing efforts on “the other side”?

Yesterday at the Missouri Ethics Commission:

A101430 02/16/2011 SAVE KANSAS CITY COMMITTEE John Sherman 5306 Sunset Kansas City MO 64112 Inergy 2/16/2011 $15,000.00

A101430 02/16/2011 SAVE KANSAS CITY COMMITTEE HNTB 715 Kirk Dr Kansas City MO 64105 2/16/2011 $25,000.00

A101430 02/16/2011 SAVE KANSAS CITY COMMITTEE Hallmark Global Services Inc P.O. Box 418307 Kansas City MO 64108 1/28/2011 $75,000.00

[emphasis added]

When they care enough to send Rex Sinquefield the very best.

Previously:

Kansas City’s campaign in support of the earnings tax starts (February 14, 2011)

Kansas City antes up to support the earnings tax vote in 2011, part 7 (January 28, 2011)

Kansas City antes up to support the earnings tax vote in 2011, part 6 (January 24, 2011)

Kansas City antes up to support the earnings tax vote in 2011, part 5 (January 18, 2011)

Kansas City antes up to support the earnings tax vote in 2011, part 4 (January 13, 2011)

Kansas City antes up to support the earnings tax vote in 2011, part 3 (January 9, 2011)

Kansas City antes up to support the earnings tax vote in 2011, part 2 (January 4, 2011)

Kansas City antes up to support the earnings tax vote in 2011 (January 3, 2011)

Finally, part 2 (December 20, 2010)

Finally (December 14, 2010)

HB 26: an attempt to fix some of the mess of Proposition A (December 3, 2010)

Where’s Kansas City on fundraising for the 2011 earnings tax vote? (November 27, 2010)

St. Louis leads the fundraising way on the April 2011 earnings tax vote (November 16, 2010)

Any bets that the Royals follow through for Kansas City? (November 13, 2010)

This morning lots of blogging space is properly being given over to indignant chortling about John Boehner’s declaration that the U.S. has to make dangerous and destructive spending cuts because the country is “broke.” The punchline consists in the fact that he is at the same time insisting on retaining funds for a boondoggle defense project that will benefit his home state. I’m speaking of funding to develop a second engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter – a project that even the Pentagon wants to abandon. A wasteful earmark by any other name … eh?

But Boehner isn’t the only GOPer playing Simple Simon –  you, know – do as I say, not as I do. Among the five significant categories of wasteful spending identified by Think Progress’ Zaid Jilani where big cuts could be made without significant repercussions are agribusiness subsidies:

The federal government “paid out a quarter of a trillion dollars in federal farm subsidies between 1995 and 2009.” “Just ten percent of America’s largest and richest farms collect almost three-fourths” of these subsidies.

Of course these five areas of expenditure, which almost all, like farm subsidies, benefit the wealthy, have been treated as if they are off-limits by the GOP. Which brings us to Vicky Hartzler (R-4), who when she is not trying to impersonate one of the people’s representatives, is a well-to-do Missouri farmer who has benefited handsomely from those very farm subsidies. Her own good fortune in retaining taxpayer support, no doubt, makes it easy for her to cheer the destruction of programs that benefit those poor and middle class deadbeats who not only benefit from, but often survive thanks to the programs she and her House cronies want to stamp out because we are, you know, “broke.”  

The Boehm family

There’s a good reason why Attorney General Koster has not taken any action against serial mortgage abuser Bank of America. He is waiting for a report. One of his lieutenants is in charge of getting interviews from everyone who has listed a complaint on the AG site. Currently that is 152 Missouri homeowners. When I mentioned all this to Mary Boehm more than two weeks ago, she chuckled. “Right. Well, they haven’t gotten to us yet.” But within a couple of days, bingo, she got a call from the AG’s office. The investigator wasn’t calling to set up an interview, but he did offer concrete information. Here’s how Mary described it in an e-mail:

An investigator from the AG’s office called me two weeks ago. He was very nice and said he was calling to let me know that the AG was investigating all the banks and their possible fraudulent behavior, but that it was a very time-consuming process. He said he would be calling us back to get our statement soon. He also said that the AG was investigating this crisis along two lines:

1. The banks telling people to make modified payments while they were “processing” modifications and then suddenly trying to foreclose on them.

2. The banks refusing to give customers their loan documentation proving who holds the note (most likely because no one knows where the notes are).

He told us that we were one of the few complainants who were in both situations. He also said we might be called as witnesses. Lucky us!

When I called and asked Mary if the “lucky us!” was sincere, she laughed and told me it was and it wasn’t. Yes, she and Mike would relish a chance to turn the tables on their tormentors. On the other hand, it’s one more way to assure that the nightmare drags on.

And yet, even on the mortgage modification front, the Boehms are finally getting some traction. Here’s more of her e-mail:

Big news: We paid BOA on 2/11 the amount Stephanie Caruso gave us in writing to come current, which we agreed with (no fees!) and she also put in writing that BOA would fix our credit. (Caruso is in Customer Relations at the Office of the CEO and President.) We will have to wait 90 days for our credit reports to be updated, and by then interest rates will probably be too high for refinancing our loan to be helpful, but we thought this nightmare was finally over!

But then Bad for America reverted to type:

Of course, on Monday, 2/14, I got another collection call from BOA! When I told the woman that we had paid up on Friday, she said that we still owed $830 more and that our Notice of Intent to Accelerate had expired on Dec. 26. (I guess this was a threat to frighten me into paying.) When I told her that we were working with someone from the Office of the CEO and President, she said there were no codes in our file stating that we were working with that department. I said a bad word and hung up on her.

Then Mike left an angry message on Stephanie Caruso’s voicemail complaining. She called back and left a message stating that she was sorry that happened, that it SHOULDN’T have happened, and that we really WERE paid up and current through Feb. 28. To top this off, she said she was putting a “hold” on our phone number which means that we won’t get any more calls from BOA. Unfortunately, she said, that also means that SHE can’t call us anymore either. So if we need to talk to her, we have to reach her in person, because she won’t be able to return any calls. RIGHT! Can you believe that this is real?! This is world-class customer service? It sounds to me like a great excuse for not talking to us anymore. I am beginning to believe that this will NEVER really be over.

Bank of America doesn’t ever believe in doing things the classy way. There will be more teeth grinding glitches for the Boehms. But it looks like they might be among the lucky ones.

Representative Wayne Wallingford (r) introduced a bill that is apparently a companion to Senator Jane Cunningham’s SB 222 celebration of child labor.

… It is the intent of the general assembly that all embryos created in Missouri be birthed….

Obviously this addresses future labor needs (pun intended) in the State of Missouri.

The bill:

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

HOUSE BILL NO. 515

96TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVES WALLINGFORD (Sponsor), LICHTENEGGER, HINSON, FITZWATER, SCHARNHORST, KORMAN, FLANIGAN, JONES (89), McNARY, SMITH (150), CAUTHORN, McCAHERTY, FREDERICK, DIEHL, ROWLAND, FRANZ, COOKSON, CONWAY (14), LASATER, SCHOELLER, CURTMAN, HAMPTON, ENTLICHER, RIDDLE AND WRIGHT (Co-sponsors).

1145L.01I                                                                                                                                                  D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk

AN ACT

To amend chapter 453, RSMo, by adding thereto four new sections relating to embryo transfer.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:

           Section A. Chapter 453, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto four new sections, to be known as sections 453.250, 453.252, 453.254, and 453.256, to read as follows:

           453.250. 1. Sections 453.250 to 453.256 shall be known and may be cited as the “Embryo Transfer Act”.

           2. As used in this section, the following terms shall mean:

           (1) “Agent”, a licensed attorney, fertility clinic, relative within the second degree of consanguinity, or other legal entity that participates in embryo transfer, except entities that participate in stem cell research;

           (2) “Embryo” or “human embryo”, an individual fertilized ovum of the human species from the single-cell stage to day seven;

           (3) “Embryo relinquishment” or “legal transfer of rights to an embryo”, the relinquishment of rights and responsibilities by the person or persons who hold the legal rights and responsibilities for an embryo and the acceptance of such rights and responsibilities by a recipient intended parent;

           (4) “Embryo transfer”, the medical procedure of physically placing an embryo into the uterus of a female;

           (5) “Legal embryo custodian”, the person or persons who hold the legal rights and responsibilities for a human embryo;

           (6) “Recipient intended parent”, a person or persons who receives a relinquished embryo and who accepts full legal rights and responsibilities for such embryo and any child that may be born as a result of embryo transfer.

           453.252. 1. It is the intent of the general assembly that all embryos created in Missouri be birthed.

           2. A legal embryo custodian may relinquish all rights and responsibilities for an embryo to a recipient intended parent prior to embryo transfer. A written contract shall be entered into between each legal embryo custodian and each recipient intended parent prior to embryo transfer for the legal transfer of rights to an embryo and to any child that may result from the embryo transfer. The contract may cover more than one embryo collection from the donor. The contract shall include the designation by the recipient intended parent or parents or an agent of such parent or parents who is authorized to act on behalf of such parent or parents. The contract shall be signed by each legal embryo custodian for such embryo and by each recipient intended parent in the presence of a notary public and a witness. Initials or other designations may be used if the parties desire anonymity. The contract shall nullify any prior written agreement governing disposition of the embryo. Any subsequent embryo relinquishment or legal transfer of rights to an embryo shall be subject to the same agent restrictions set forth in subdivision (1) of subsection 2 of section 453.250.

           3. If the embryo was created using donor gametes, the sperm or oocyte donors irrevocably relinquish their rights to the embryo to an agent of an in vitro fertilization clinic.

           4. Upon becoming a legal embryo custodian, the legal embryo custodian shall designate a successor legal embryo custodian for the embryo who is authorized to act in the event of the death or incapacitation of the legal embryo custodian. Upon the death or incapacitation of the legal embryo custodian, the designated successor legal embryo custodian shall become the legal embryo custodian.

           5. Prior to the creation of an embryo:

           (1) The legal embryo custodian shall establish that the embryo donor has been screened and tested negative for all infectious agents on the United States Food and Drug Administration’s Complete List of Donor Screening Assays for Infectious Agents and HIV Diagnostic Assays. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to an embryo in existence prior to the effective date of this section; and

           (2) The person or persons creating the legal embryo shall designate a legal embryo custodian for the embryo who is authorized to act in the event of the death or incapacitation of the person or persons creating the embryo. Upon the death or incapacitation of the person or persons creating the embryo, the designated legal embryo custodian shall become the legal embryo custodian.

           6. Upon embryo relinquishment by each legal embryo custodian under subsection 2 of this section, the legal transfer of rights to an embryo shall be considered complete, and the embryo transfer shall be authorized.

           7. A child born to a recipient intended parent as the result of embryo relinquishment under subsection 2 of this section shall be presumed to be the legal child of the recipient intended parent; provided that each legal embryo custodian and each recipient intended parent has entered into a written contract.

           453.254. 1. The court shall give effect to any written waiver of notice and service in the legal proceeding for embryo transfer.

           2. In the interest of justice, to promote the stability of embryo transfers, and to promote the interests of children who may be born following such embryo transfers, the court in its discretion may waive such technical requirements as the court deems just and proper.

           453.256. A completed embryo transfer contract shall terminate any future parental rights and responsibilities of any past or present legal embryo custodian or gamete donor in a child which results from the embryo transfer and shall vest such rights and responsibilities in the recipient intended parent.

“…except entities that participate in stem cell research…”

Interesting.

And we all thought the right wingnut republicans in the General Assembly di
dn’t have a plan.

Rep. Billy Long (R-7) seems bemused about how physically large the U.S. budget document is:

FY2012 hit my desk, 4 Volumes – Budget – Historical Tables – Analytical Perspectives – Appendix & it weighs more than any Bass I ever caught

If you go to his Web page, however, you will better understand his apparent surprise that a sophisticated, powerful country with a population north of 300 million people might need more than a three page budget. That good ol’ Billy, who’s been on a budget cutting spree with his GOP homeboys, is a man of few words is readily apparent in the section devoted to his views on spending cuts and debt which reads in its entirety:

Spending Cuts and Debt affect us all and dealing with these issues are important to my work in Congress.

Is this what people mean by “laconic”? In case you think he dealt with the issue elsewhere, here’s Billy on the related topic of the economy and jobs – and, I assure you, there’s no more than this:

The issues of Economy and Jobs are important to our district and to my work in Congress.

Billy may not know all the facts – or any of the facts – but he does seem to want to keep quiet about it. Not so Vicky Hartzler (R-4) who had this to say about President Obama’s 2012 budget:

Citizens of the 4th District want their government to cut spending and help create jobs, … This budget proposal fails these tests in every respect. We’ve got to do better for our children and grandchildren.

Somebody ought to tell her what John Boehner acknowledged today – the budget cuts that the House – including little Vicky – wants to enact  will cost mucho jobs*. And what’s worse, Boehner admitted that he and, presumably, his rank-and-file GOP House members, don’t really care. Vicky ought to check in with her leadership now and then. At the very least, she needs to know what it is she owes to the children and grandchildren, doesn’t she?  

And while Vicky’s working on her attitude, she ought to have a word with Rep. Akin (R-2) who seems to be reading from the same script. I suspect if I were to visit the pages of the rest of our House GOP members, I would find statements that indicate that these folks are all equally careless about the nature of the real world and the role of finance.

After all, the incessant GOP babble about “fiscal reality” is coming from people who went after the 2011 budget like a troop of blind-folded axe murderers. If enacted, their proposed cuts would destroy hundreds of thousands of jobs and put vastly more vulnerable people at risk.

In fact, the Center for American Progress (CAP) tells us that the House Appropriations Committee shoe-horned a hack-job on the budgets of 12 of the 15 federal agencies into a two week period. This time frame means that:

… not only will those voting on the proposal have little opportunity to understand it but the authors themselves will not have fully vetted or completely understood what they are proposing. There have been no hearings, no requests for testimony, and no opportunity even for staff charged with proposing the cuts to do agency-by-agency analysis of the possible negative consequences. Members will vote next week on the package without fundamental knowledge of how major budget changes in literally thousands of federal programs will impact the country in general or their own constituents in particular.

Then, of course, there is the fact that the cuts, although plenty destructive, don’t really amount to a hill of beans when it comes to deficit cutting:

The $44 billion that Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) is insisting we take out of the domestic spending is “peanuts.” With a $1.5 trillion deficit it could be lost as a rounding error. But applied to only a selected sliver of the entire budget it could do immense damage to critically needed government infrastructure and services.

There is also the fact that in many of the agencies these cuts will mostly result in  personnel cuts – CAP gives the example of the FBI –  where termination costs will wipe out most of the savings, not to mention the expense that will be incurred when displaced stafff move onto the unemployment rolls. But, oh frabjous day, the hatchet job will have the effect of rendering agencies like the FBI nearly toothless.

I’ve read that ol’ Billy Long is sitting back and savoring the pleasures of a job completed in regard to the 2011 budget the House has produced: “we got her done” he is quoted as saying. I wonder if he and the rest of the gang has any idea what it is they’ve actually done? Are our elected GOP officials even capable of a process that, as CAP puts it, “insures we all understand what we are cutting and what benefits and costs of those cuts will be”? Yet indications are that these same thickwits are aching to shut the government down in the name of budget cuts the impact or effectiveness of which they don’t begin to fully fathom – all so some Tea Partiers can make a “dramatic statement.”

* Link added to TPM article describing the scope of job loss.

In Kansas City on February 6, 2011.

Previously at Show Me Progress: Jane Cunningham hearts child labor (February 14, 2011)

At Think Progress:

Missouri Lawmaker Pushes Bill Rolling Back Child Labor Laws

Missouri State Sen. Jane Cunningham (R) is pushing a bill which would dramatically claw back state child labor protections….

In the comments at Think Progress:

Total repeal of the 20th century is going on. What are we to do?

Walk like an Egyptian.

It’s bad enough that mainstream media repeat answers from the right and the left in he said/she said fashion as if all responses were equally credible. But when the Post-Dispatch publishes a front page McClatchy article that repeats a Republican lie as if it were incontrovertible fact, I grind my teeth. So I wrote them:

I don’t know which is more culpable: a newspaper founded by Joseph Pulitzer for printing an article which falsely claims that Social Security is “driving the national debt skyward” or McClatchy newspapers, which circulates throughout the entire nation, for saying so. That claim, made in “Blueprint targets deficit, spending” (Feb. 14) is ridiculous on its face. First, Social Security takes no government funds. None. So how could it drive the debt up? It’s totally funded by its participants, which makes it an insurance program. How dare McClatchy and the Post  besmirch the reputation of the most beloved and important social program this nation has ever seen! Republicans have been spreading this calumny, and the Post should be ashamed for printing it.

Furthermore, Social Security is so fundamentally strong that it is fully funded at least through 2039, and any problems that might arise at that point could be easily fixed simply by raising the cap on Social Security taxes. Meantime, it is so healthy that its extra funds must be invested; therefore, Social Security has been buying T-Bonds. The truth, then, is that our government has been relying on Social Security to buys its bonds. It has not been propping up a program that contributes to the deficit. So Social Security has been supporting the government, all the while maintaining its own fiscal integrity.

If you got yourself into hock and borrowed a thousand bucks from a friend, would you blame your friend for your debt?

The editorial staff at the P-D is sharp. I get valuable information and well substantiated opinion from them regularly. But you know what I want to see the op-ed staff do? Write an editorial taking the paper’s own front page coverage to task when it offers lies to the reading public.