A lesson for Repubs on democracy and the three branches of government

It would be helpful if state Repubs would remember that courts exist for a reason - not to please them, but often as a crucial last resort when either the executive or legislative branches of government overstep constitutional boundaries, threatening our rights.

The judiciary is a third and co-equal branch of government. It does not exist to serve the interests of the other branches but to protect and defend the Constitution and to correct proposed laws and the process itself as needed when they are not consistent with democratic rights and responsibilities.

Dane County Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi's ruling striking down the Walker/Fitzgerald union busting bill is not a partisan decision on policy, on the content of the law; it is a legal ruling that what the Repubs did in order to pass that bill was a violation of our state Constitution. It violated the open meetings law by not giving proper public notice of the meeting in which the vote so hastily took place.

Judge Sumi, appointed by Republican Gov Tommy Thompson, is now being called an 'activist' judge and friend of the unions by our much-farther-to-the-right current Repubs.  Amazing how they demonize a Repub-appointee as soon as she dares to use constitutional law to put roadblocks in front of their steamroller.

Okay, Repubs, and especially you, Scott Fitzgerald, a lesson in democracy and the role of the three branches of government. In response to the ruling, Fitzgerald said this: "There's still a much larger separation-of-powers issue: whether one Madison judge can stand in the way of the other two democratically elected branches of government."

Um, Mr. Fitzgerald, yes she can. That is one of the crucial roles of the circuit court, to stand in the way when the legislature does something unconstitutional. That is precisely why we have 3 branches, a blessing from those founding 'fathers' at the federal level taken up by the states so long ago. This is what prevents that threat to democracy called 'tyranny of the majority,' because democracy is not represented by winners of elections doing whatever they want, but by how well the democratic rights of all citizens are protected and defended by whomever is elected.

Courts exist to ensure those rights. The most terrible thing would be having courts at the service of a political party and their agenda - a growing threat from the right in this country. As more and more judges get elected, more and more judges are being bought the same way politicians are bought by corporate campaign money.

Now, in contrast to Mr. Fitzgerald's erroneous understanding of democratic government, here's what Judge Sumi said in her ruling:

"The court must consider the potential damage to public trust and confidence in government if the Legislature is not held to the same rules of transparency that it has created for other governmental bodies. Our form of government depends on citizens' trust and confidence in the process by which our elected officials make laws, at all levels of government."

Now I ask you which statement better reflects the principles and values of a democracy? Which of the two, Fitzgerald or Sumi, can best be trusted to uphold the Constitution? Which one reveals the most basic understanding of the workings of our democratic system of government?

Friends, as we move into this Memorial Day weekend, one of those patriotic moments when we acknowledge those who fought in our wars, most with the motivation of defending our freedom, maybe we could pause a moment to reflect on the privilege of living in a democracy. Maybe we could give pause a moment to think about how under threat it is right now.  And maybe you could pass on this lesson to those legislators and governors who seem in urgent need of it.

The budget as a moral issue

The Wisconsin Council of Churches has reminded us one more time that the state budget is not just a political issue. Indeed, it is essentially a moral issue since it impacts virtually everyone. For churches, the priority among that 'everyone' are the most vulnerable and marginalized among us. Budgets cut ought to impact first and foremost those who are doing just fine. It ought to impact the least those who have greatest need of various programs and services.

God’s call to us as citizens of a democracy is to tell our elected officials where Wisconsin’s heart is – and where its treasure should be.

For people of faith, this is a good reminder - and an essential one.

On Sunday, the front page of the Journal Sentinel had this screaming headline (well, at least it screamed at me, really made my head hurt): Average Wisconsin CEO pay rises 27%.  Read it yourself. I don't care what those corporate-sponsored Repubs say, this wealth should be taxed and then taxed some more. What this kind of concentration of wealth represents in this society right now is a profound moral and ethical failure.

We're supposed to be relieved this morning because Scott Fitzgerald and some other Repub legislators are saying they want to preserve SeniorCare. This is fine, though we don't know if it will hold in the end, but it hardly begins to address the harshness and questionable ethics of Walker's biennium budget proposal - and now the way in which some of those same vulnerable populations are in danger of being disenfranchised by the Voter I.D. bill.

So, whether or not you are a person of faith, I think this document very useful in laying down the moral argument for a more just, equitable, and compassionate approach to the great budget debate, in large part because it doesn't allow us to escape these moral issues with bogus slogans about fiscal responsibility or the state being broke. Make the state less broke by restoring some measure of justice and equity to the tax code. Raise some revenue from wealth to make sure kids get a good education and our precious natural resources are preserved and Koch Industries is actually NOT allowed to add more pollution to our state's waterways, and mining companies and developers are NOT allowed easier access to the good of the commons for their own profit-making interests.

So, click here for the WI Council of Churches brochure, Faith and Facts. No matter how bad the final version of this budget, the ground needs to be laid now for the recovering of justice and compassion to the political culture of this state- not to mention to the electoral debates that will quickly follow.

Closed government

Perhaps the most popular chant during recent protests was an old tried and true one: "This is what democracy looks like!"

Here is what democracy does not look like:

Building commission meeting closed to public

At this closed meeting, the Building Commission made decisions regarding $1.1 billion worth of bonds for the next 2 years. This bonding could include a controversial proposal for no-bid sales of power plants in the state.

Yesterday the Dane County district attorney filed suit in state court claiming that Senate Republicans violated the state's open meetings law in the manner in which it passed the portions of the budget repair bill pertaining to collective bargaining rights for public sector workers.  You know the moment only too well, but if you need a reminder and some background, go here.

Meanwhile, we have an election coming up on April 5 for a seat on the State Supreme Court. Given the legal challenges mounting over the way in which the new governor and Republican majority are trying to ram through their agenda, this latter election has taken on new significance.  In case you wonder about that, Republicans are making it perfectly clear.

This from the Wauwatosa Republicans:

"David Prosser is the only Conservative running in the State Supreme Court race. If he doesn’t win, the court will have a 4-3 liberal majority, and all of the reforms that Governor Walker is accomplishing, will be challenged and judged by liberal legal activists who believe that their opinions are more powerful than the Constitution."

Opinions more powerful than the Constitution... Does this mean that Joanne Kloppenburg, should she win, would not respect the Constitution? That's the accusation implied here.  I worry a lot when one group like this claims a special hold on the meaning and interpretation of the Constitution.

In any case, it's a pretty stunning development when a race for judge takes on this kind of significance.  Says a lot about where our democracy is right now. Are Republicans aware that many of the things they want to do might be challenged in court? Is this revealing of their intentions that they are feeling anxious about this?

It has occurred to me often in recent years that the new rightist Republican party tries to claim the mantle of patriotism and American correctness, as if more than 200 years of a 2-party system and a vibrant, often cantankerous, political culture, is not itself the heart of the democracy.

Closed government, closed meetings, hastily put together votes, not allowing the opposition time to debate, to even arrive in time to be able to vote, not being completely transparent about policies buried in line items in the budget proposals, and on and on - this, my friends, IS NOT WHAT DEMOCRACY LOOKS LIKE.

So why all this secretiveness and subterfuge? Well, it's in this press release from State Sen. Fred Risser and  State Assemblyman Mark Pocan. Scott Walker did not run on a platform that stated he wanted to crush public sector unions, and then he did just that. With the budget repair bill, he brought it to the state house then Republicans tried to ram it through with their majorities in a matter of days, before Democrats, or you and me, could find out what was in it. The Wisconsin 14 saved the day, if not legislatively at least in terms of giving us time to find out what was really going on, and the result is that Walker has found his poll numbers plummeting while the 14 were welcomed back as conquering heroes by the masses!

So, let's retreat back behind closed doors, shall we? Let's let the people find out what we're doing after we've already done it.  Democracy can make things pretty messy.

Why all this secretiveness and subterfuge? 

"Why is Walker so afraid of the public?" ask Risser and Pocan. In asking the question, they also answer it.

Republican assault on democracy - and workers

I understand about having a 2-party system, with fairly big tents joining together folks around a certain orientation across widely divergent viewpoints. I understand the need for respect for the opponent, for decorum, for rules that allow for open debate on legislation, even when we get frustrated with the process. I appreciate that when you reduce democracy to a 2-party system, those large tents are bound to fail some of their constituents most of the time.

But when one party, frankly, begins to undermine democracy itself, this becomes extremely worrisome. When one party dispenses with laws, rules, and procedures to rule by ambush and subterfuge, seeking to brush the competing party aside as so much detritus, things have gone seriously wrong. Then we are not talking about democracy, we are talking about power grab.

This is happening in Wisconsin right now - as has been happening with the power of big money nationally, the Supreme Court vote on Citizens United, the unseemly money plays of Karl Rove, the influence of Goldman Sachs contributions on Barack Obama, or the decisive influence of Koch Industries money on Wisconsin governor Scott Walker.

But what happened tonight in the Wisconsin legislature is without precedent - a blatantly illegal move on the part of Republican leaders that busts the unions of public sector workers.

What happened a few hours ago is this: violating the Open Meetings law of the state, Republican Senate Majority leader Scott Fitzgerald pulls a power play to take a vote on a bill unseen by Democrats, not clearly understood, and for which notice was not properly given. All it does is destroy 50 years of collective bargaining rights for public sector workers under Wisconsin law. What they did was take out the controversial union-busting language from the budget repair bill and pass it as a separate piece of legislation. Having argued previously that eliminating collective bargaining rights for public sector workers was definitely a fiscal issue, therefore requiring a quorum of 20 senators, suddenly Republicans said it was not a fiscal issue at all and a simple majority will do.

You 14 Democrats who left the state to prevent the quorum they once said was necessary to pass fiscal-related bills? Stay in Illinois as long as you like; we just busted the unions.  And guess what? that's what we wanted to do all along - just like you said.

If this stands, if the state attorney general and the state's courts do not block this vote from taking force, democracy in my state is in big, big trouble.

Check out the video of this hostile anti-procedure:

http://wiseye.org/Programming/VideoArchive/EventDetail.aspx?evhdid=3885

Are all legislators subject to the laws, or just not Fitzgerald, Scott Walker, and the others who work for corporate interests? Have we really arrived at a point where one party in the majority can violate rules and laws and then prevail?

Protesters began pouring in to the Capitol as this atrocity took place. If you are anywhere near Madison this weekend, especially Saturday, join the masses in the streets.