Imperial Walker Voids Local Control

Unbelievable… Small government conservative my ass.

Gov. Scott Walker signed into law Thursday a measure that voids Milwaukee’s paid sick leave ordinance that was passed by voters in a referendum and upheld recently by the state Court of Appeals.

Walker, in Milwaukee on Thursday for the annual Governor’s Prayer Breakfast at the Italian Community Center, went to offices of the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce offices to sign Senate Bill 23. The bill will pre-empt local ordinances from requiring businesses to provide paid sick leave to employees for family, medical or health issues.

Apparently, if you stand with Walker you stand with Big Government Intrusion into Local Issues.


Related Articles

16 thoughts on “Imperial Walker Voids Local Control

  1. Ending the intrusion of centralized big governement into our lives has always been just a Republican slogan. This is unsurprising in the extreme.

  2. He should be at a prayer breakfast. Surprised he didn’t get struck down by a bolt of lightning in the parking lot. What a piece of shit he is.

    1. You hit the nail on the head, Lisa. I am in total astonishment that this guy even pretends to believe that there is a Power greater than himself.

  3. Act 10 is also a major intrusion on local sovereignty, as it tells local governments what they can and cannot negotiate, and how much they can pay their employees under what circumstances, while tying the hands of local government by cutting shared revenues. Between that and the administrative rules move, it is clear that this guy has no respect for others who may want a say or do things differently.

    Which is a big reason why “others” like us are going to blow him straight back to Tosa on June 5.

  4. You are remiss in mentioning that the paid sick leave law in Milwaukee, which spawned this bill, was initiated by the people and organized by the woman’s group 9 to 5.

    You also miss the fact that Tom Barrett, along with MMAC, actively fought the law. It is no wonder that he had not spoken out against this move from Walker.

    1. A couple of things. First, the piece I wrote was only peripherally about the law itself. Yes, I agree it’s an important law on its own, but what I was more concerned about was Walker’s hypocrisy in circumventing the democratic will of the people of Milwaukee. But thank you for sharing the name of the group who developed the law.

      Now, with regard to the second point, Barrett’s objection to the law was not to the substance of the law but rather to the fact that it put Milwaukee at a competitive disadvantage to other cities in Wisconsin where employers did not have to pay for sick leave. He voiced his objection thusly:

      “I continue to be opposed to the paid sick leave law. My concerns that it only affects the city of Milwaukee remain,” he said.

      In order to mitigate the unevenness of implementing these kinds of laws at the community level (as was done with smoking bans), we need a state law that provides these benefits to all workers. That’s the point Barrett was making.

      I think answering the why is more important than just pointing out the what.

      But I find absolutely no indication that Barrett would have done as Walker did and veto the bill from Madison. If that’s the case you’re making, you’ve got a long, uphill climb to prove that.

  5. I did not intend to say anything about your action other than to comment how hypocritical it was for a man whose political persuasions were so invested in Randist philosophy to attend a “prayer” breakfast, since his closest political/philosophical ideology conforms most closely with someone who continually identified herself as an atheist. I can’t vote in Milwaukee, or anywhere else in WI. So I am puzzled by your almost hostile email. I had and have no knowledge or opinions about this person “Barrett”, and never intended to comment about that person’s acts or ideology. I am only of the opinion – which I try to keep informed about – that your State governor is a wicked and unworthy man to hold public office. I thought I was agreeing with the contents of the article. If I wrote something to undermined that belief, it was not intentional. On the other hand, I do not discard that out=of-state. casually stated opinion.

  6. I stand with the people of the State of Wisconsin. I oppose Gov. Walker and will continue to do so. I don’t think I was “remiss” in anything I said about Barrett, since I didn’t say anything at all about Barrett. Please read my comments mores carefully before sending me irresponsible emails.

  7. Why are you continuing to send me hostile and sarcastic emails? I’m on your side. You may be thinking you’re responding to someone else’s comments.

  8. Stephen, I have a sneaking suspicion the emails you’re receiving are actually being sent to you because you subscribed to receive followup comments to this entry via email.

    1. I’m just interested in what’s going on in Wisconsin because I believe that the Governor of that State is a wicked and untrustworthy man. I was not aware that I subscribed to anything.

      1. Stephen, there’s a little checkbox just below the box for leaving a comment. According to my records, you’re receiving emails any time someone replies to this thread, and you subscribed to the thread at 5:11 p.m. on May 3.

Comments are closed.