"Strip policy and pork projects from the state budget. The budget process should be about funding essential government services based on the taxpayers’ ability to pay. It should not be about horse trading for special interest groups or establishing talking points for the next campaign." (emphasis added).Who doesn't think that Walker's imperious push to eliminate collective bargaining for public employees, a) won't be the central talking point in his continuing campaign for re-election, b) won't be a top talking point in GOP legislators' 2012 politicking, and c) isn't a reward to big business as it ripples through private-sector payrolls and lays the groundwork for union-busting 'right-to-work' laws?
Interesting, also, that reporter Scott Bauer at postcrescent.com two weeks ago highlighted the relationship between talking points, Scott Walker and union-bashing:
"MADISON — Forcing concessions from state employees is a popular talking point for Gov. Scott Walker and one that likely will find a central place Tuesday in his first State of the State speech."
Some will assert that when Walker said "horse trading" he was talking about legislators exchanging (wink-wink) a vote for some future consideration somewhere down the line.
To them, I say - - split hairs and parse your way to a rationalization - - maybe this Jeff Plale situation by Walker the Governor is closer to what Walker the Candidate said he won't tolerate?
And how about Walker's proposed bill exempting cops and firefighters from those bargaining restrictions.
Any special interest collusion there? Anything of value for Walker when the next round of campaign talking points get spun?