UW System and the Budget

[nsimps]

This is inaccurate -- Both Bush and Doyle have the ability to pass/not pass things in to law. Both Bush and Doyle can veto any proposed law they find objectionable.

That's not entirely true. Both Bush and Doyle can't introduce bills into the legislature. The main difference is the governor in Wisconsin has the strongest line-item veto in the nation. The problem for Doyle is he can't increase taxes without the legislature, so as long as the legislature doesn't send him a budget, his veto is useless.

 

As far as the legislature, this budget situation has been a total mess with both sides mucking up the process. The 22 republicans in the assembly that signed the no-tax pledge have a vested interest in no new budget as that means that nobody can pass a tax increase. On the other hand, the last minute inclusion of the universal health care provision gave those same Republicans ammo to strengthen thier position. By far the biggest problem is the closed door caucases that both parties have where radical members of each party can strong arm the moderates with a united front.

[patrickgpe]

This is inaccurate -- Both Bush and Doyle have the ability to pass/not pass things in to law. Both Bush and Doyle can veto any proposed law they find objectionable

and other governing bodies have the authority to override Bush's and Doyle's veto.

[olliegjw]

This is inaccurate -- Both Bush and Doyle have the ability to pass/not pass things in to law. Both Bush and Doyle can veto any proposed law they find objectionable

and other governing bodies have the authority to override Bush's and Doyle's veto.

A law can be made without their approval. A law cannot be made without the Legislature's approval. So, I disagree.

[patrickgpe]

all right so i should of read that many others have made my point before me. but still there is no negotiating between parties right now. They might as well be on other hemispeheres and it is obvious that if we want a new budget they are going to have to work together. This budget shows how apart the 2 parties are right now philosophically.

[ryne100]

Just got an email from my on campus boss that there is a hiring freeze for on campus jobs. Someone just quit this week so now everyone is boosting their hours.

[Fatter than Joey]

I would rather we take the time and get it right, than be put in a time crunch and wind up with garbage.

 

I would agree with this -- but they 110 days overdue -- If the delay was due to people crunching numbers I would be patient -- the delay though is due to posturing and political stalemate.

[patrickgpe]

You can squawk about checks and balances all you want, but the reality is that Doyle was elected Decider of Wisconsin, and part of the checks and balances will be Doyle deciding what gets cut if this budget doesn't pass.

unforunately, if he could he would of already. Doyle and the Senate tried to pass a budget and it got voted down in the house. He is going to have to work with the GOP just as bush has to work with the Democrats to get anything done. Is it just me but since the Democrats took over the House nothing has gotten done on a federal level because the 2 parties are so far part. I think we are seeing this on a state level too.

[fondybrewfan]

Did anyone here about that email that floated around the madison campus to students who have financial aid issues for the coming semester? Supposedly the college or an official at the college sent this email urging these students to take part in a press conference urging the increased spending budget be passed.

 

Does anyone find anything seriously wrong with this? People being paid by the state of Wisconsin basically lobbying for a particular party through the educational system? That seems entirely unethical to me.

[Fatter than Joey]

This budget shows how apart the 2 parties are right now philosophically.

 

I think that the extreme factions in each party are having it out. I am certain that most your moderate/centrist GOPS/DEMS are willing to meet in the middle somewhere.

[patrickgpe]

i agree, problem is there are more extremists on both sides. When one party wants to increase taxes substantially and have government run health care and one wants a 0% tax increase and no healthcare, its going to take some work to meet in the middle.

[Fatter than Joey]

if he could he would of already.

 

No -- what I meant is that he will start cutting things (like shutting down the universities) if the new budget doesn't pass. That will be up to him.

 

Is it just me but since the Democrats took over the House nothing has gotten done on a federal level because the 2 parties are so far part

 

The Dems took over the senate as well. Bush lost a lot of support prior to the 2006 elections, even among the GOP -- he wasn't able to get a lot of things passed even when the

House and Senate were held by the GOP -- (before 2006 and moreso in his second term).

 

It's important to understand that Bush has lost a lot of support within his own party -- it is not as simple as a blue v. red thing, a good example would have been that UN guy, Bolton not getting extended. He had a GOP majority on that committee and that failed to come through for him.

[olliegjw]

As far as the legislature, this budget situation has been a total mess with both sides mucking up the process. The 22 republicans in the assembly that signed the no-tax pledge have a vested interest in no new budget as that means that nobody can pass a tax increase. On the other hand, the last minute inclusion of the universal health care provision gave those same Republicans ammo to strengthen thier position. By far the biggest problem is the closed door caucases that both parties have where radical members of each party can strong arm the moderates with a united front.

Didn't Doyle basically do the same when he said, in the State of the State address, "We should not, we can not, we will not raise taxes in Wisconsin", or something very close to that.

[Fatter than Joey]

Didn't Doyle basically do the same when he said, in the State of the State address, "We should not, we can not, we will not raise taxes in Wisconsin", or something very close to that.

 

In 2007? -- I don't think so. I am not aware of it at least. I certainly would love to find out for certain.

[olliegjw]

Didn't Doyle basically do the same when he said, in the State of the State address, "We should not, we can not, we will not raise taxes in Wisconsin", or something very close to that.

 

In 2007? -- I don't think so. I am not aware of it at least. I certainly would love to find out for certain.

 

I believe it was 2006, but the same principle applies. I'll take a look for it.

[fondybrewfan]

Didn't Doyle basically do the same when he said, in the State of the State address, "We should not, we can not, we will not raise taxes in Wisconsin", or something very close to that.

 

In 2007? -- I don't think so. I am not aware of it at least. I certainly would love to find out for certain.

He said that at his 2003 State of The State Address, the first one after he was elected. I leave it to you to decide if he fulfilled this promise.

 

The 2nd half of his phrase? "Wisconsin's problem is not that we tax too little. It is that we spend too much."

 

[patrickgpe]

The Dems took over the senate as well. Bush lost a lot of support prior to the 2006 elections, even among the GOP -- he wasn't able to get a lot of things passed even when the

well still the dems haven't put anything on bush's desk to sign in 10 months.

 

also on the doyle tax promise thing, i think he has in the past promised to not increase the tax rate, but has never mentioned anything on the levy. Not sure if he did it in 2007, but he has made this promise in the past

[iluvlamp]

This is the opening of Charlies Sykes show. I couldn't really find the sound except on TMJ. Just listen to the first 20 seconds or so. It's Link #19 down the page.

 

http://www.620wtmj.com/results?keywords=jim+doyle+sound+bites&searchType=gen&submit.x=0&submit.y=0&submit=Search

[adamb100]

Wonder how this will affect me(Currently attending UWM).

[patrickgpe]

i very well could but i doubt its going to come to that, if a budget is not passed cuts need to be made to be able to fund other program increases. IMO though, if Doyle thinks he is going to run again in '10, I don't think he can pass huge tuition increases or shut down the Wisconsin University system.

[olliegjw]

http://www.wisgov.state.wi.us/journal_media_detail.asp?locid=19&prid=1648

 

As someone mentioned earlier, it was his 2003 speech I was thinking of. Here is a link to his 2006 State of the State, where he basically says the same thing:

 

"Three years ago, I stood here and promised the people of Wisconsin I wouldn't raise their taxes - and I kept my word.

I said no to higher sales taxes…

No to higher income taxes…

No to higher excise taxes…"

[fondybrewfan]

This thread is teetering http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

This isnt in reference to Doyle or anything but it is foolish to call any tax anything besides a tax on income. Either directly or indirectly any tax will by and large decrease a person's income. It doesnt have to be a payroll deduction to have a negative impact on income. That is just a stupid way politicians can say that they didnt do something when in reality they did

[sbrylski]

Maybe focusing on the effects on the University System and its students rather than the political policy problems will keep this thread alive and beneficial...

[Chio151]

http://clerkkids.house.gov/images/bill_law/index.gif

Presented by Brewerfan.net

[paul253]

This is inaccurate -- Both Bush and Doyle have the ability to pass/not pass things in to law. Both Bush and Doyle can veto any proposed law they find objectionable. Ultimately the president/governor signs things into law, not the Legislative branch. Obviously the Legislative branch can override a veto (assuming they win a physical challenge), -- but in this case the GOP doesn't have the votes to pass their own budget let alone override the state senate and governor.

 

Obviously Bush and Doyle can "make law" by signing it into effect, but it has to get to them first, meaning it has to pass through the Senate and the House. I think what the other person was saying is that they can;t simply come up with an idea and make into a law without going through the proper channels, i.e. checks and balances.

 

However, you keep saying the GOP doesn't have enough votes to pass their version of the budget, and to me it almost sounds like you're saying "well since they can't pass theirs, they should pass the other one". That is absurd. First of all, the GOP doesn't have enough votes to pass their budget, but obviously the Democrats don't have enough to pass theirs either (if they did, we wouldn't be having this debate). You mentioned cigarette taxes and the hospital tax, but also a lot of fees would be jacked up to (I'm not sure, but I think, for example, car registration fees would be going up). The whole budget debate is based on this. The new budget calls on spending over $1,000,000,000 more (yes, that's one billion) next year, and to do that, we'd need to come up with new taxes, higher fees, and jack up current taxes. The Democrats are willing to do that, and the GOP is not, it's that simple. I don't smoke and could care less about the cigarette tax, but seriously, enough is enough. If you have money, you'll spend it, thats what we do. Instead of constantly raising fees and taxes, why can't we just please, stop spending money we don't have? As far as the whole shutting down the UW system, that is nothing more than a pathetic attempt at a scare tactic. Jim Doyle wants more money, but he also wants to send illegal immigrants to school for free....makes sense to me

[PeaveyFury]

As a reminder, political talk is not allowed here. You're free to discuss the ramifications of the budget for now, but refrain from slinging blame on either side.