Does halting all-night debate make sense?
Even this didn’t come easily. After hours of debate last Tuesday, state Assembly leaders on Thursday signed a “memorandum of understanding” designed to eliminate all-night debates. It’s meant to set a new bipartisan tone for the 2013-14 session that began last week.
The memorandum includes several changes. The Rules Committee will set expected debate schedules and times for each measure. Leaders of both parties will limit the number of controversial bills up for discussion on any day. Time limits on speeches will be strictly enforced—two minutes about tabling a bill and 10 minutes total. A clock installed on the Assembly floor will track speaking times.
Other states, including Pennsylvania and Oklahoma, have enacted curfews to avoid debate raging past midnight. Wisconsin’s Legislature, however, might have set a state record in 2011 with a 61-hour nonstop scrum before passing Gov. Scott Walker’s controversial plan to end most collective bargaining for most public workers.
Is this memorandum a good step in the right direction? Are you confident our Assembly representatives can and will abide by these new rules? Some observers might argue that it’s good to let debate continue rather than cut it off at some arbitrary time before everyone has a chance to speak as long as they’d like.
We’ll share our perspective in our editorial Tuesday.
Greg Peck can be reached at (608) 755-8278 or gpeck@gazettextra.com. Or follow him on Twitter or Facebook
Jan 16, 2013 at 10:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Late night cramming sessions are not what I expect from our elected officals!
ALL elected officals promised us they would make a difference yet few prove it.
Jan 15, 2013 at 10:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
You continue with the silly name calling, but want to be taken seriously. It only makes you look like a bully.
Jan 15, 2013 at 9:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
blisslady - I did see it
Jan 15, 2013 at 8:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
ford
I will ignore your rambling response, as you probably did not see the statement I was commenting on (before Peck edited).
Jan 15, 2013 at 3:17 p.m.
Jan 15, 2013 at 3:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
"Another note...Walker did not END collective bargain, he did curtail some of it." A corrected another note...Walker effectively ended collective bargaining by stripping public unions of nearly ALL of their rights. "...he did curtail some of it" is a factual statement but totally misleading (as is expected from today's low integrity conservative).
Jan 15, 2013 at 2:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
wislady - can't have readers editing their comments. Just imagine if one of the liberals grew a conscience. They'd tie up all the Internet bandwidth writing corrections. ☺
garyprimer - your question leads to interesting possibilities. Should the bloggers also be locked out of editing comments? Will the coming web changes include software that allows for and tracks post editing? Are you aiming be responsible for the first "This blog was removed by the site staff." message on gazetteextra.com? ☺
Jan 15, 2013 at 12:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
gpeck
Thank you.
(Perhaps we should be able to EDIT our own comments also).
Jan 15, 2013 at 9:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
Greg, did you add the first "most" or the second "most" or both?
And why did you not use "curtail"?
Jan 15, 2013 at 6:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Readers, I added the word "most" to my initial statement in reference to collective bargaining after wislady posted her comment.
Greg Peck
Jan 15, 2013 at 2:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
It will be interesting to see if everyone will be polite enough to stick to the “memorandum of understanding” when mining legislation is introduced or if someone introduces a "Right to Work" bill during this legislative session.
Jan 15, 2013 at 12:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
wislady wrote "Another note...Walker did not END collective bargain, he did curtail some of it."
Read it again wis...the article did not say he ended collective bargaining. It said "end MOST collective bargaining".
Your words "he did curtail some of it" is laughable.
If he only "curtailed some of it." please tell us what small part he curtailed.
He gutted all but bargaining for wages and that is a joke.
Keep your spinning and lies coming...it's still good for a laugh, albeit a small one.
Jan 14, 2013 at 4:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
The parties came to a "consensus", that is a good start. There is a certain decorum that one expects in the Assembly proceedings.
Another note...Walker did not END collective bargain, he did curtail some of it.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.