The “run to avoid a quorum” trick works if you can leave one person behind to force a roll call to check if a quorum is there. But what happens if the Republicans just don’t call a roll and assume that there are 20 Senators there and start voting on those things requiring a 3/5 quorum? Can they just deem there to be a quorum unless someone demands an actual roll call... but if there were a Dem there to do it they would have the 20 they need? What legal options do the Dems have if the Republicans just start voting things in 19-0 and “assume” that the Dem (there had to have been one somewhere) just abstained?
“The “run to avoid a quorum” trick works if you can leave one person behind to force a roll call to check if a quorum is there. But what happens if the Republicans just don’t call a roll and assume that there are 20 Senators there...”
I LOVE IT. I can see it happening (in a loud, deep voice): “...and not hearing any objection, I DECLARE a quorum to be present.”
LOL
I wondered the same thing. When my State Senator (Texas) legged it to New Mexico a few years ago, they left one Dem behind to raise a point of order that there was not a quorum. In Texas, the Dems could leave one behind, and still deny a quorum. The Wisconsin Dems cannot. I suspect that they (1) hope the Republicans, in what used to be a "good government" State, are too fastidious to ram it through, (2) hope that the Wisconsin Courts will ignore the "enrolled bill rule" (which says a Court cannot judicially review whether a bill certified as passed by the Legislature, really was lawfully passed), and (3) hope that the Unions will appreciate the fact they stayed bought.
Follow the Pelosi plan and just “deem” there to be a quorum.
This is what I've been saying all along -- intentionally "miscount" the attendance and officially record it if there are no objections, then proceed with the established quorum.
The reason this wouldn't work in Indiana is that they have enough of a margin to leave a couple of folks behind to raise such objections.