Here’s a report from Rick Ungar’s blog “The Policy Page” over at, of all places, the conservative outlet forbes.com that, if true, paints a disturbing picture of a legislative branch that is abdicating its responsibilities while both muzzling dissent and empowering an increasingly dictatorial governor-

What’s a governor to do when he has a big agenda but little tolerance for the nagging voice of the people?

He either loads up on the anti-acids and the aspirins, or he finds the peace and quiet he requires to bring his society-changing schemes to life by simply legislating away the annoyance of having to listen to the voice of the voters.

Apparently, Gov. Scott Walker has decided to skip the Maalox and go for the muzzle.

Last week, the Wisconsin legislature passed a new state budget granting Gov. Walker the power to slash the state’s Medicaid program by some $500 million. To ensure that the Governor and his subordinates could do their cutting without unwanted interference from Wisconsin voters and the pesky media, the legislature simply removed the obligation of the executive branch to hold hearings on any such cuts- leaving Walker free to do as he will without the requirement of public input.

Previously, as a result of the now infamous budget-repair bill passed earlier this year in the Badger State, the legislature had taken themselves out of the Medicaid cutting business by turning full responsibility for the same over to the Department of Health Services. By so doing, the legislature not only avoided the requirement of holding public hearings, but handed Walker total and complete control over how the state’s poor were to be treated.

However, even that over-the-top legislation held onto the requirement that Health Services hold their own public hearings on proposed alterations to Medicaid programs so that interested parties could make their feelings and voices heard.

Apparently, the whole democracy thing turned out to be more trouble than it was worth in Wisconsin.

In the new budget, the legislature not only continues their own dismissal from the process – thereby continuing to abdicate the responsibility entrusted to them by their constituents – but have now opted to drop the requirement that public hearings be held by the Department of Health Services.

To further make clear just who is in complete control of Wisconsin’s government, the legislature added that the exemption from having to allow the public into the discussion is to be kept in place for the remainder of the Governor Walker’s term.

I really do hate to say ‘I told you so’, because the fact that I was right in my previous post about Wisconsin’s Open Meetings law means thats my take-home pay is about to be cut 8-10%, thanks to Scott Walker’s union-busting “Budget Repair” bill, which balances the budget on the backs of public employees (regardless of whether they have been members of unions with bargaining rights or, like me and other UW professors, not so). While I was on vacation, I read that Dane County Judge Maryann Sumi had struck down the bill on the grounds that in passing it, the Republicans violated at least the spirit of the Open Meetings law, and perhaps even its letter (having given less than two hours notice, and having granted only limited access to the meeting after that). Although I agreed with her that the Republicans had violated at least the spirit of the law, it seemed to me that the law itself contained a loophole regarding legislative rules that allowed them to do so legally. Hoping that Judge Sumi might explain some aspect of the law or of the Senate’s legislative rules that I had missed, I read her decision with interest, but I had the distinct impression that she had downplayed the power of the loophole. Unfortunately, the Wisconsin Supreme Court today agreed 4-3 with my interpretation. As the New York Times reports-

The decision ended, at least for now, lingering questions about when and whether the cuts would take effect, but it also underscored the state’s partisan divide, which seems to grow wider by the day. The ruling was 4 to 3, split along what many viewed as the court’s predictable conservative-liberal line.

The majority of the justices concluded that a lower court was wrong when it found that the Legislature had forced through the cuts in collective bargaining without giving sufficient notice — 24 hours — under the state’s open-meetings requirements.

In its written decision, the court cited the importance of the separation of powers, and said the Legislature had not violated the state’s Constitution when it relied on its “interpretation of its own rules of proceeding” and gave slightly less than two hours’ notice before meeting and voting. In the end, the provision passed without the attendance of any of the Senate’s 14 Democrats.

The Isthmus adds to its story on the issue the following remark from Democratic Senator Barca-

“The Supreme Court is saying the legislature is above the law,” he said.

Barca suggested the best recourse would be passing a constitutional amendment ensuring openness in the legislature.

The collective bargaining law will officially take effect once published by Secretary of State Doug LaFollette, after which time the legislation is likely to see legal challenges, this time on its merits, rather than procedure.

The point that I made in my previous post is that not only does the Supreme Court say that the legislature is above the Open Meetings law, the legislature wrote the law so as to insure that it is above the law. No doubt there will be a challenge to the law’s legal merits from an injured party, but I doubt that any such challenge will be successful. As I stated in my previous post, this is a political issue to be decided at the polls, not a legal one.

Bring on the recall elections.

Well, I was gone only two and a half weeks, but during that time a number of developments occurred regarding the upcoming Wisconsin state senate recall elections. By now you’ve probably heard that, as the Associated Press reports, Republicans plan to field fake democratic candidates to force time-conuming and money-wasting primary elections. So far, the reaction to such shenanigans - including editorials in such centrist media as The Oshkosh Northwestern – has been loud and negative. It will be interesting to see if the Republican party backs down on this.

In the meantime, it has been fascinating to see the number of “King State Senate” signs that have sprouted like so many mushrooms on the lawns of my usually politically quiet – indeed, even Republican – Oshkosh neighborhood. Before I left, there was hardly a one. Now they outnumber the Hooper signs by at least 5-to-1.

I wonder: will the fake primaries give Hooper time to get his up?