Tuesday, February 22, 2011

A Reminder to the Packer Union-Backers

I think it's fine that Woodson et al. are sympathetic to unions.

There is NO provision in the Wisconsin Constitution or statutes which prevents them from making contributions to State and Local taxing bodies.

None.

Go ahead! Help out!!

15 comments:

Gregory said...

Dad, you are asleep. George Ure is awake, Look at what he has found. Look what is printed today at http://urbansurvival.com/week.htm
======================
WisconnedSINS
Say, I assume you have figured out that republicorp gov. Scott Walker not only created the showdown with the unions in WisconSIN, but now we're learning of a backdoor bill in the legislature which (in its 144 pages, would allow the state - without review - to sell or farm out operations of state utilities to big corporations like the one owned by the Koch brothers.

My friend Howard sent this:
Here's the language from the bill. Note that it exempts the sales or operating contracts from any consideration whether the sales will be in the public interest or even economically justified.

"16.896 Sale or contractual operation of state−owned heating, cooling, and power plants. (1) Notwithstanding ss. 13.48 (14) (am) and 16.705 (1), the department may sell any state−owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state. Notwithstanding ss. 196.49 and 196.80, no approval or certification of the public service commission is necessary for a public utility to purchase, or contract for the operation of, such a plant, and any such purchase is considered to be in the public interest and to comply with the criteria for certification of a project under s. 196.49 (3) (b)."

Sell power plants and such on the cheap? Oh sure! You bet'cha, I'll make enough leveraged investments by ways of...er... campaign contributions, eh? WTF people? Is anyone awake in WisconnedSIN? Where's the recall election to toss out Walker and his double-dealing ilk?

For some real insight into things, might want to read the article titled "Americans for Prosperity Attack Middle Class."

Since everything is a business model, the one in play here is: 1) Pour money into politics, 2) get pliable candidates elected. 3) Have them precipitate a budget crisis, then 4)set up sale of state utility assets at whatever you want to pay.

Sweet.

And the 'Mercun Public is too damn lazy to think this through. But for those folks, I'll say it again: there is no right/left anymore. Just the up and the down and care to guess where we fit?
---
To my way of thinking, if a corporation is "honest" and working in harmony with the public need, interest, and concern, it would not need to buy elections, would it? Wouldn't need to buy Washington, either, would it?

No, businesses would just come and go on their economic merit. But, gee, since we've institutionalized corruption we can rest assured that will never happen.

While the RRRR (rabid right radio ranters) carry on their handlers battle against unions, it's all part of a much larger business model with a few more moving pieces than outright bribery. But then again, isn't corporate money in politics just a bribe?

Blessed by the corporation-favoring Supreme Court which says there's no limit on it....which is why in my next incarnation, I want to be reborn as a corporation, so I can have more rights than these miserable humans which get in the way of great schemes.

Dad29 said...

I think you missed your daily dose of meds, George.

Badger Catholic said...

If they are trying to well up support for the players union(which I do) that support is starting to slip.

Anonymous said...

Dad29--Thanks for playing the "mental illness" card in reference to Gregory cogent post.

Next time respond with a rebuttal rather than the standard "you forgot your medication" line.

Dad29 said...

Gregory's post is NOT 'cogent.'

You, too, can get a scrip on the corner where the Capitol building sits.

One example will suffice:

Note that it exempts the sales or operating contracts from any consideration whether the sales will be in the public interest or even economically justified.

Uh-huh.

The text that HE cites:

...for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state

"The best interests of the State" happen to be congruent with "the public interest."

Reading comprehension matters--which is 99% of why I don't bother to respond to trolls.

Anonymous said...

"The best interests of the State" happen to be congruent with "the public interest."

Since when? Because YOU said so.

Those in power do not necessarily think along those lines. The "best interests of the State" may be geared toward one specific thing that may actually serve against the public interest. All that person has to do is nod "Yep, the prices is in the best interests of the State" without necessarily having to justify that cost to citizens. Shaky ground!

neomom said...

Why does anyone think that the state can run a power plant more cheaply and efficiently than a utility company?

Dad29 said...

Because Gregory's going to lose his State job, State healthcare, and State pension if that old coalburner gets sold.

Another possibility: Walker will just shut it down and buy power from MG&E.

John Foust said...

Neomom, are you familiar with steam plants? That coal-burner is one end of a lot of infrastructure that heats many buildings. That's why the campus is criss-crossed with steam tunnels. Switching to MG&E isn't a matter of flipping a switch. At some point in the past, presumably the UW saw an efficiency in using this method of heating.

neomom said...

Um... John. All major power plants are steam plants. The coal, gas, nuke fuel is just a way to boil water and turn the turbine.

And Dad mentioned shutting them down. I simply questioned why anyone would think the state could run them better than a company that has power gen as their core competency.

Dad29 said...

The "best interests of the State" may be geared toward one specific thing that may actually serve against the public interest

Well, yes...

The shining example: fat contracts for public-employee union members.

Selling assets? Not so much.

Dad29 said...

The State can NOT run them better than a utility. Perhaps not worse...

The objective for Walker is to raise cash. That's the sole objective.

But the deal makes sense in principle, forgetting the cash aspect; the State simply does not NEED a State-operated utility.

John Foust said...

That's my point, Neomom. There are some plants, especially those on the UW Madison campus, that are simply about pushing steam through pipes under the streets and yards. They're not about fuel->steam->turbine->electricity.

neomom said...

Selling the plants to a utility company doesn't mean they will shut them down. The nuke plants were sold to Florida Power & Light and are still operating. The only folks that usually want to shut down power plants are the greenies.

Dad29 said...

In case you don't remember, Mom: that is the plant that Doylet wanted to convert to grass/corn/woodburner b/c the EcoWeenies sued (and won) for pollution problems.