Legislative Republicans run a tight ship; That means no talking among the crew

The state budget comes to the floor of the State Assembly today for action.

Excuse me while I yawn.

It will be a long day, and maybe a long night.

But in the end, the existing budget package, put together by the Joint Finance Committee, is the one that will be passed.

There will be no amendments. Republican members won't even offer any. Democrats may offer 100 or more, but the 60-39 GOP majority will reject them all.

[UPDATE: OK, I was wrong. Two amendments passed, one to clean up some drafting errors and another to speed up the cut in taxes on Social Security from five years to three. Story on passage ]

If they stick to their usual game plan, the Republicans won't even debate the Democratic amendments. They'll simply let the Democrats talk, then vote them down. (Dems, however, will get the Repubs recorded on a series of roll calls that could hurt the Rs politically in '06.)

What's most unusual about the process is that the budget that the Assembly will pass has not been changed by the Republican caucus, either. Assembly Republicans got their marching orders that the Finance budget was to be the budget. If you wanted something changed or added and didn't get it done in Finance, where Republicans rule 12-4, you were out of luck.

It is not clear just when that plan was shared with the caucus members. There are reports that some figured it out too late and now are stuck with the Finance version.

In the past, the Finance version of the budget would have been discussed in the GOP caucus, where noses would be counted on amendments, and a substitute version, incorporating all of the caucus-approved changes, would be introduced. Many legislators would have a "bottom line" on some budget provision that had to be included to insure their votes.

But that's no way to run a railroad, the current GOP leadership says. This budget is moving ahead full throttle, and those who are unhappy had best stay off the track.

In part, that's the tyranny of having such a big majority. The GOP leaders don't need every last vote. With 60 members, they have 10 votes to spare. Two Republicans have already announced they will vote no, but it doesn't really matter. This train has left the station.

Shut up and vote

The "shut up and vote" technique was used recently by Assembly Republicans when they passed a bill allowing health care professionals to refuse to perform certain procedures on moral or religious grounds -- even if that might harm or kill the patient.

Stacy Forster of the Journal Sentinel wrote, in the newspaper's Capitol blog:

"The Assembly considered the bill for more than five hours, but Republican sponsors refused to answer Democrats’ questions about the bill and its intent. Democrats repeatedly tried to engage Republicans in the debate, but were consistently rebuffed. Author Rep. Jean Hundertmark (R-Clintonville) responded to questions about an early amendment, then clammed up.

“This has been an interesting discourse today,” Rep. Christine Sinicki (D-Milwaukee) said sarcastically before a vote was taken.

"It was the same strategy Republicans employed during an all-night “debate” last March over a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex and civil unions in Wisconsin. Although Democrats spoke all night, the amendment’s author, Rep. Mark Gundrum (R-New Berlin), spoke only before the final vote, and wasn't even in his seat for much of the night. "

Shut up in caucus, too

Then there is the question of whether the Republican members get to talk even in their own secret caucuses.

State Rep. Jeff Wood is someone who doesn't take up a lot of time on the Assembly floor. In fact, until last week he had been in the Assembly for two and a half years without ever making a speech.

His maiden speech certainly got a lot of attention, though, as an angry Wood complained about being prevented from speaking his piece in the GOP's closed caucus. The issue was yet another in a series of bills in which the sex-obsessed Puritans -- oops, I mean Republicans -- tried to interfere in other people's lives. This time it was to ban the morning-after birth control pill from UW campuses.

This time, the usually silent Wood was the only Republican speaker, and he blistered his own leadership -- for which he was reportedly taken to the woodshed afterward.

Jeff Wood's maiden speech

From Stacy Forster and the JS Capitol blog again:

Here are portions of his remarks (you can also listen to mp3 audio of the speech):

“A lot of our members said, if you don’t support this bill, you’re not really pro-life. I personally find that kind of offensive. I’ve always voted pro-life, I consider myself very pro-life, as much as anyone in this body.

In fact, I was born - despite maybe my youthful appearance – before Roe v. Wade and I was adopted right after birth. I found out about twenty-five years later, that the woman who put me up for adoption had an abortion a few years later. There's no doubt in my mind that if Roe v. Wade had happened a few years earlier, I wouldn’t be here.

“Another thing I heard in caucus is that people wanted to avoid this vote and they didn't want to take it on the floor. I want to make it very clear, I’m not shying way from this vote, I would never ask for a vote not to be taken on the floor. That's one of the things I don't like about this body: Sometimes when we don’t feel like we have the votes, we try to hide from that and don't come to the floor. It’s part of our responsibility to take a public stand on an issue if we believe in it.

“Some might wonder why I’m bringing up these things that were said in (secret) caucus. While these things were being said in caucus, when I put my name on the list to respond to them, I was told, 'We didn’t have enough time, we had to talk about the budget now.' I've been here two and a half years, I’ve never gotten up to speak on a bill…I passed bills and I never felt the need to get up and give rhetoric on other bills knowing full well it wasn’t going to change the vote. But on this one, I feel like I was silenced in caucus.

“And not just me, but this has happened in the past. Last year, now-Sen. (Glenn) Grothman was silenced by our leadership in caucus. I stood up to defend him. This year, another member of (Republican leadership) tried to silence (Republican Rep. Scott Suder of Abbotsford). And I stood up to defend him.

“What happened today, I wasn't just silenced. The 50,000 people that I represent were told we didn't have enough time to hear what I had to say. After all the speeches I’ve listened to on this floor…I’ve spent what seems like half my life listening to (Democratic Rep. Marlin Schneider of Wisconsin Rapids) telling me how evil I am, I just think that was way out of line....

“I want make it clear to the members of this body and (to GOP leaders) especially: You can have your opinions, you can disagree, you can disregard anything we have to say, but don’t you ever try to silence my constituents again.”

Wood left the floor soon after and was reportedly berated in the hallway by a handful of his Republican colleagues. On the final vote, he was recorded as voting against the bill, which passed 49-41.

Ah, the give and take of the democratic process. It's a joy to watch.

A CONTRARY VIEW. Conservative blogger Dennis York offers a different take, in which the Dems are duping the news media. At least he doesn't blame it on the liberal-leaning media.