Most Recent Comments

1) Money to Admin [by Anonymous Citizen on September 24, 2007]
Any money approved by the legislature will sneek its way into higher administrator pay- no benefit to students.
Reply

2) "no vote explanation of" [by Admin003 on September 24, 2007]
Senator Schauer, under his constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill Nos. 511 and 237 and moved that the statement he made during the discussion of the bill be printed as his reasons for voting "no."

The motion prevailed.

Senator Schauer's statement is as follows:

I came to the State Capitol tonight, on a Sunday night, to come together to forge a bipartisan agreement to save our state. With all due respect to the Republican majority caucus, these bills move us no closer to a resolution to our state budget crisis. In fact, they move us backward.

There are one of two possibilities concerning these bills. First, Senate Republicans truly believe that these $900 million in cuts are the way to balance our budget, or second, this is just a game. If the first is true, this approach of mortgaging our future is a nonstarter with Democrats who are committed to protecting our state and gets us no closer to a solution. If this is just a game with just seven days left in our fiscal year, we have wasted another day and have been moved one step closer to a government shutdown.

Let me be clear, colleagues, Democrats here in this chamber are ready to negotiate a solution, but this is not a negotiation. And $900 million in cuts are not a solution. Make no mistake, the cuts supported by Republicans in Senate Bill Nos. 511 and 237 hurt our state, particularly jeopardizing education, health care, and public safety.

Now I found it ironic to this point that no one in support of these bills have risen to speak. I wait with great anticipation to hear a defense of how these bills actually move us forward without hurting our state and jeopardizing our future. Democrats stand ready to work in a bipartisan way to save our state. I urge my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans, to reject these bills and get to the bargaining table. Our future relies upon it.

Reply

3) "no vote explanation of" [by Admin003 on September 24, 2007]
Senator Schauer, under his constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against concurrence in the recommendations of the Committee of the Whole relative to House Bill No.4799 and Senate Bill Nos. 511 and 237.

Senator Schauer's statement is as follows:

I voted "no," as did members of my caucus. That was a party-line vote on approving the report of the Committee of the Whole. The Committee of the Whole just adopted two bills. One bill was 177 pages long that amended the school aid act, full of cuts to a number of school programs that are very critical to the future of our state. Senate Bill No.511 was a 777-page bill. Both of these bills just landed on our desks. That was an omnibus budget bill that, combined with the other bill, provided for $900 million in cuts, colleagues, to our state--cuts which would hurt our future.

I was glad to vote "no" because this is clearly the wrong direction for our state. Unfortunately, this does nothing to move this process forward where we are striving for bipartissan agreement.

Reply

View Full Conversation