Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) was in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, where he defended his controversial budget reforms at a hearing before the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Before the hearing kicked off, a handful of union activists milled about, distributing anti-Walker flyers and sporting large green buttons reading: “Budget Hoax Brought To You By The Koch Brothers.”

The hearing, titled: “State & Local Government Spending Cuts: Choice or Necessity?” was part of a series of hearings convened by committee chairman Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) to examine the extent of the debt crisis at the state and local levels. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 44 states will face FY 2012 budget shortfalls totaling more than $111 billion. Wisconsin currently faces a two-year deficit of $3.6 billion.

As part of his plan to tackle the budget shortfall, Walker sought provisions that would force state and local workers to pay about 5.8 percent of their income toward their pension plans and about 12.6 percent of their pay toward health benefits, and would also roll back collective bargaining rights for state and local public sector unions.

At the hearing, Walker defended his reforms by comparing his actions in Wisconsin tothose of governors in others states that have been forced to choose between “massive layoffs or massive property tax increases.”

“In Wisconsin we have a different option,” he said, “a progressive option, in the best sense of the word – giving state and local governments tools not just to balance the budget this year or in thenext two years, but for generations to come.”

Also testifying was Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin (D), who was invited by the Democrats on the committee. Shumlin has sought to close his state’s deficit of about $176 million through a series of tax hikes, modest union concessions and spending cuts, and hopes to bring down health care costs by transitioning to a single-payer system. He has pledged no payreductions or layoffs of state employees under his governorship, however, unlike Wisconsin (or any other state in the country), Vermont does not have a balanced budget requirement in its constitution.

Shumlin repeatedly referred to his approach — e.g., bringing unions to the table to negotiate — as solving problems with “maple syrup” rather than “vinegar.”When one Democratic congressman suggested to Walker that he “try using maple syrup,” Walker replied: “It’s not as good as the cranberry juice we make in Wisconsin.”

Republicans on the committee heaped praised on Walker, and repeatedly pointed out that his reforms would grant Wisconsin public employees greater rights than those enjoyed by federal workers, who don’t have collective bargaining rights and contribute about 28 percent to their health care benefits. “Governor Walker’s bold reforms seem reasonable to those of us in Washington who understand that our retirement and health care system at the federal level is not subject to collective bargaining,” Issa said in his opening statement.

Walker joked: “It makes we wonder why the protestors are in Madison and Columbus and not right here in Washington D.C. What we’re offeringis more generous than what you offer federal employees, and yet the outrage is not here, it’s in our state capitol.”

Democrats, on the other hand, peppered Walker with pointed questions about the Koch Brothers and different variations of the question: “Why do you love rich people and hate ‘working’ people?” Rep. Elijah Cummings (D., Md.), ranking Democrat on the committee, asked why, if union leaders were willing to accept increases in their contributions to health care and pension plans, Walker did not simply drop the collective bargaining provision altogether.

Walker replied that while a number of union leaders issued statements saying they would be willing to accept increased contribution, dozens of local and municipal unions rushed to finalize contracts that did not include any health care or pension contributions. “Up until the bill was sign into law, they were not following the statements of their leaders,” he said. “To me, actions spoke louder than words.”

He also recounted his time as a Milwaukee County executive, when had repeatedly asked teacher unions to accept modest changes in order toavoid “massive layoffs,” but had been rejected. “Every time, the response I got from unions was ‘Go ahead, lay 400 to 500 people off, we don’t care,’” he said. “If I have to choose between massive layoffs or making these sorts of reforms, I’d much rather stand on the side of protecting those middle class jobs, and protecting middle class taxpayers.”

A particularly heated exchange took place between Walker and Rep. Bruce Braley (D., Iowa), when the congressman asked Walker to apologize for the “cronyism” of hiring a donor’s son to a government managerial position. An agitated Walker defended himself, saying he was not aware of the hiring at the time it occurred. “If you want to do a political stunt, go ahead,” Walker told Braley. “I though we were here to talk about the debt.”

And while there was a considerable amount of talk about debt and how to address it at the state level, ultimately, and perhaps predictably, the discussion devolved into a philosophical debate about the .. collective bargaining rights. At one point, Gov. Shumlin said he believed collective bargaining was “a fundamental human right.” The Democratic members of the committee heartily concurred, apparently oblivious the irony of acknowledging that members of their own staffs were lacking in this “human right.”

Gov. Walker set them all straight.

“If we really believe collective bargaining is a fundamental right, if it is a fundamental right, why aren’t you all debating it right now?” Walker asked. “Rights come from the Constitution and nowhere in the Constitution does it say that collective bargaining is a right.”