Matching Grant Challenge
BruceMatch
We’re slowly making headway in our annual fund drive, but not nearly fast enough to meet our make-or-break goal.  On the bright side, a generous CounterPuncher has stepped forward with a pledge to match every donation of $100 or more. Any of you out there thinking of donating $50 should know that if you donate a further $50, CounterPunch will receive an additional $100. And if you plan to send us $200 or $500 or more, he will give CounterPunch a matching $200 or $500 or more. Don’t miss the chance. Double your clout right now. Please donate.
 unnamed

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)

pp1

or
cp-store

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Violating Rule 76

Why Wisconsin’s Assembly Vote Was Illegal

by ERIC JOHNSON-DeBAUFRE

Early Friday morning, the Republican leadership of Wisconsin’s state assembly rushed through Governor Walker’s bill that would strip most unionized state employees of their ability to engage in collective bargaining. As is by now familiar, the vote opened and closed in a matter of seconds, leaving 28 members of the assembly uncounted in the vote, which passed by a 51 to 17 margin (all 51 in favor, it should be noted, were Republicans).

Progressive media outlets—who, to their credit, have expressed outrage at the underhanded tactics employed by the Republican majority—are already touting this as a victory for Walker. But this concession seems premature as a close inspection of the Wisconsin assembly rules suggests that the vote was illegal.

According to Assembly Rule 76 (6), “During a roll call vote, any member may raise the point of order that a member appears to be absent from the chamber but is shown as voting according to the roll call display boards. If the presiding officer rules the point of order ‘well taken’, the vote of the absent member may not be recorded.”1

The clear intent of the rule is to prevent error or fraud from occurring in votes taken in the state assembly. But exercise and enforcement of the rule also clearly requires that there be sufficient time during a vote for assembly members to register whether or not there is a discrepancy between votes recorded and the members physically present on the floor.

Opening and closing a vote within seconds clearly violates the intent for which Rule 76 (6) was designed and adopted. Wisconsin Democrats thus have good ground for throwing out last night’s vote.

ERIC JOHNSON-DeBAUFRE is a visiting lecturer at Boston University and an occasional contributor to CounterPunch.

Assembly Rule 76. Voting. http://nxt.legis.state.wi.us/nxt/gateway.dll/?f=templates$fn=default.htm