So this business up in the cheese state with the public sector unions maybe losing the right to collectively bargain and the Democrats leaving the state. Really weird! But not weird in the sense that it's unheard of - weird in that this is actually a pretty old form of political protest, dating back to the founding of the country! As my sister can probably tell you more about (happy birthday Emily!), when the Founding Fathers were debating whether to ratify the Constitution back in 1787, the Pennsylvania Antifederalists refused to show up for the vote so that the pro-Constitution folk wouldn't get a quorum. (I think that's right, correct me if I'm wrong, 3 readers). Anyway, it's basically identical to what the Democrats are doing in Wisconsin today, and what they did in Texas in 2002 when they protested Tom Delay's redistricting plan, and what I'm sure Republicans have done in the past too -- denying quorum to slow things down.
More big picture -- is this a good thing for democracy? Sort of. It seems filibustery to me, in the sense that it just slows down the process. That's ok to a degree. The problem in Congress, which I'll probably talk about more later, is that the filibuster is no longer a tool to slow things down and force more negotiation/compromise/consensus - it's a pure tool of obstruction. That is bad and anti-democratic. This stunt is more in line with the traditional filibuster, which blocked the majority from ramming legislation through. I'm more ok with that. Clearly, SOMETHING will happen with the public sector unions - maybe Democrats will get a slightly better deal than they would've before.
Closing thought: What the governor of Wisconsin is trying to do isn't unprecedented. Lots of states have weak collective bargaining rights for their unions.
Chart!
