Monday, January 23, 2006

More Political Shenanigans Cost YOU Money

As you all know, the State Supreme Court invalidated Wisconsin's "Medical Damages" legislation because the cap on damages did not meet the Court's concept of what's right.

So our Leggies went back to "work," coming up with another law. Doyle vetoed it. Now, of course, the screaming commences: "Doyle's in the Pocket of the Trial Lawyers!!" or in the alternative: "The Republicans' Cap is Too Small!!"

yah, hey.

A friend called and mentioned that the deal could be done. While the PI lawyers want a $1 million cap and the MD's/Hospitals want a $450K cap, it would be no big deal to split the difference and simply call it a day at (say) $750K. Everybody would be happy, including the Supremes.

So why not?

Because certain Republican Leggies will NOT allow this to happen. They want a Gubernatorial campaign issue (can you say Mark Green/John Gard?) and if common sense prevails, there will be no ISSUE!!

Another reminder why Conservatives are often NOT Republicans. Who needs their crap?


Anonymous said...

Yet another reason why professional politicians like John Gard should be thrown out of office. Only now the little dummy is running for Congress...and positioning his primary opponent, Terri McCormick, so that none of her legislation even gets a vote in the Legislature. This guy is simply a jerk. And his supporters either are hoping to gain something from him, or owe him something.

In Wisconsin it's called pay-for-play. Most legal people would simply call it bribary.

Terrence Berres said...

Conservatives have been known to regard as problematic that a "Court invalidated ... legislation because [it] did not meet the Court's concept of what's right."

Anonymous said...

You hit on my main gripe with Republicans. Now that they are in the majority, they seem to be incapable of governing. Instead they let issues simmer unsettled strictly to make a political point in some future election. Nothing gets done because people like John Gard and Scot Jensen have no interest in getting anything done without money on the table or something in it for them. This is why we have no TABOR. This is why we have no compromise that will raise the CAP on school choice. This is why we have no compromise on the liability cap. AND most of all this is why public school funding is such a mess and we have a huge property tax revolt on our hands. I can't think of a problem we have that could not be solved if people like Gard or Jensen had any desire whatsoever to solve the problem.

Dad29 said...

Terry, while I'm no fan of Courts in general, and while the WISC acted like a bunch of 13-year-olds in their decision, that's not the point.

The point is that some damn fools will NOT simply get together and resolve the problem.

You like NO caps? Nope. Neither do I.

Terrence Berres said...

Perhaps one factor in this is to highlight, in next year's election, that the governor has the power to appoint judges when a vacancy occurs between elections.

Dad29 said...

Yeah--but whom will Green/Walker appoint?

Griesbach (Fed Bench, Green Bay) would be great. That's one.

Maybe you know of others?

xoff said...

Even a blind pig finds an acorn once in awhile.

I agree, Daddio. You hit this one right on the head.

Christopher Robin said...

So let me see if I have this correct the Governor vetos the caps proposed by the legislature because he says they would not be approved by the Supreme Court.

So suddenly the governor is psychic and knows how the Supreme court would rule. A skill he didn't posess when he signed the Gaming compacts. How did he gain his psychic abilities. Oh yea, he appointed a new judge. By the way have you guys thanked Bush for appointing Sykes.

After passing numerous bills only to have the governor veto them and missing out on an override by small margins it is the Republican legislature that doesn't want to accomplish anything.

With spin like this you guys must spend most of the day in bed because of the severe dizziness.

Dad29 said...

Christopher, please note in my post I said that I was "reliably informed" or words to that effect.

That means that a compromise IS possible. Your tinfoil hat should be taken off before you read.

As far as I'm concerned, a reasonable compromise is a hell of a lot better than none at all...