Progressive Thinking

As the Republican leadership in Madison rush to move complex and controversial bills through the legislative process, legislators and the public don’t have access to changes in proposals offered until just before committee hearings. Thoughtful and meaning dialog on the impact of complex legislation is compromised when speedy passage becomes more important than open debate.

MADISON - “How can we digest all your work in this short amount of time?” Senator Bewley asked the Chair of the housing committee and author of the bill before her. An amendment replacing the bill was released just before the hearing on that bill.

“How can we have a thoughtful and intelligent discussion...we just got this stinking thing a few hours ago.”

The bill, SB 464 (which has an Assembly companion - AB 582) was complex. The bill’s author said he wanted to avoid “moving the goal post” on a development project. Among other things, the bill froze in place laws on an industrial development once a minor approval (like a driveway permit) was granted even if the project would not be completed for years.

The Towns Association called the legislation, “One of the most damaging bills to local control in recent memory.”

The committee Chair said he negotiated with local groups to remove the most egregious parts of the bill. It was impossible for anyone at the hearing, including the Senators on the committee, to say what was actually in or out of the twenty-page bill they just received.

After 5:00pm, the committee finally took up SB 464. It was the last on the agenda and many people had waited since 11:00am to testify.

Citizen after citizen who testified shared their concerns about the bill and offered some version of “I don’t know what’s in the bill and I don’t know if you’ve fixed the problem.”

People who waited all day in the Capitol hearing room to speak said they had no way of knowing a new version had been posted on a website. They gave up a day of work, used a vacation day and left home early to travel to the Capitol. No one told them about the revised bill or offered to give them copy.

During that day, in another hearing room, people testified against removing the effective ban on nuclear power plants. In a third hearing room, people waited to testify against a bill that would make extensive changes to protections for lakes and rivers.

All were controversial making big changes to public policy. There were six hearings happening at the same time. Twenty-two bills were voted out of committee. Many were introduced over the Holidays and rushed to public hearing right after the New Year.

That day the Senate Sporting Heritage, Mining and Forestry Committee, of which I am a member, heard a bill on fish farming. I asked the Chair why the bill was not assigned to the Ag Committee and he said, “It deals with water.” You’d think it would sent it to the Natural Resources Committee.

Knowing what was in the bill and how it interacted with existing laws related to water and agriculture was important for understanding the consequences of the bill.

Again, I received the bill just before the committee hearing. Supposedly, the bill was introduced the day before the hearing. Details of its exact impact were scarce.

Again, the bill was complex. It changed protections of streams and springs, altered water flow over dams (which affects streams) and interwove state and federal rules.

Again, the Chair was also the author of the bill. He and I were the only legislators at the hearing. All other Senators had two or more hearings at the same time.

I like fish. I keep two large aquariums and fiddle with water chemistry for fun. In full disclosure, the fish farmers named me their Legislator of the Year several years prior. I want fish farmers to succeed, but not at the expense of our Wisconsin waterways.

The homework needed on the bill was not possible with members pulled to other committees and the bill rushed so fast no one had a chance to read it. I sat in the public hearing, I was pretty opponents did not even know the bill existed.

Speed and secrecy have become all too common in the Capitol. Democracy suffers. Public interest suffers.

The process works best when – to use a fish analogy – we treat legislation like fish – open it up, set it on the table, let the sunshine in and see if the fish smells.

When does your neighbor’s property right limit your own rights? What if your neighbor built a fireworks factory next door? Or a large hog operation? Or an industrial sand mine?

A new bill introduced in Madison just before Christmas could take away local control over land use ordinances and zoning rules that protect our communities and the individual rights of neighbors to protect themselves.

ALMA, WI - “My neighbor likes to expand his lot,” Kelly told me. “First he put up a stone fence on our property and then he built a jungle gym for his kids on his other neighbor’s property.” The fence stayed but the jungle gym came down.

Laws and fences help make good neighbors.

Often these “laws” are ordinances passed by local communities. We decide collectively what works for our neighborhood, and what works in some areas will not work in other areas. You can’t have roosters in most cities. But in some cities, you can keep a few hens.

Moving at warp speed in the Capitol is legislation that would change what your neighbor could do on his/her property and would limit your local community from taking a position to protect you and your other neighbors.

When does your neighbor’s property right limit your own rights? What if your neighbor built a fireworks factory next door? How about a large hog operation? Or an industrial sand mine?

In a bill, introduced just before Christmas and due to have a public hearing before you read this, the simple action of applying for a driveway permit or a state culvert permit could “freeze in place” any local ordinance or state law.

For example, on the date a person applies for a driveway permit and discloses a proposed project, the ordinances and rules of all levels of local and state government could be frozen in place on that date provided the driveway is constructed within a stated deadline – even though some aspects of the project may not be completed for many years.

Expanding a little known part of the law related to housing developments, the bill (Senate Bill 464 and its companion Assembly Bill 582) creates a loophole so big that the approval of a culvert permit in Kenosha could affect a development in Eau Claire.

In addition, if the developer first sought permission from the state for a minor permit, locals might not even know the granting of that state permit would mean the entire project had become a “vested right” of the developer.

“Vested Rights” is a common law idea that means some version of – because I have the property, I have an absolute, unconditional complete right to do what I want on the property. Obviously, I can’t build on your property, as in my first example. But what if what I do affects you? What if I create an industrial site that pollutes your water and air? What if I create a new activity (like sand mining six years ago) that effects your enjoyment of your land?

The bill is written so broadly that an action in one part of the state could affect land owned by the same company in another part of the state. The bill also gives “vesting rights” retroactively. Meaning, if the bill is passed into law, the new law would apply to any project that has not yet been finally approved by the time the bill passes. The bill could also affect any pending court cases.

The provisions related to projects not yet approved and pending court cases make me think there are many unknown implications.

One consequence of the bill is to create a race between a developer, builder or contractor against a local community. If the developer can get the project started before the local community takes final action, an inappropriate “non-conforming” use is created and may be continued indefinitely.

Other parts of the bill stop a county from taking a “breather” (development moratorium) while a comprehensive zoning amendment is considered. In addition, non-conforming structures on a lake or river could be torn down and a new (probably much larger) non-conforming structure built in its place.

Land use ordinances, zoning, subdivision and shoreland zoning rules all came about to protect our communities. We, collectively through local elected leaders – want nice places to live and raise our families.

This bill is just one of several bills that take away the collective rights of a community and the individual rights of neighbors to protect themselves. Lawmakers should reject this bill and others like it.

In 2016, Wisconsin’s voter ID law is in place for all elections. Voters, even veterans and older people who are registered and have voted many times before, will not be able to vote this year without a proper government-issued identification. For many the voter ID law will just be inconvenient, but for the elderly, college students, city dwellers who rely on public transportation, people who have moved and those who frequently travel, it may mean the lose of the right to vote.

UNION, WI - “I spent all day trying to get an ID for my mother,” Joe from Union Township told me. His mother, age 84, recently gave up her driver’s license because of a vision problem. She’d moved into an apartment in Eau Claire.

By changing her address and surrendering her drivers’ license, Joe’s mom was without the necessary current “government ID” she needed to legally vote in 2016.

Happy New Year! And welcome to Wisconsin, a state that now has some of the strictest voter identification laws in the nation.

Even if you’re registered and have voted many times before, you will not be able to vote this year without a proper government-issued identification. And “government-issued” doesn’t always mean what it says. For example, a veteran cannot use an ID issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs for voting.

After four years in the courts, Wisconsin’s voter ID law is in place for all elections.

Voters in 2016 will go to the polls for nonpartisan primaries on February 16th. On April 5th Wisconsin will elect a new Supreme Court justice and many local officials including every county board member. April 5th is also Wisconsin’s Presidential Preference vote. Delegates, who will be elected in separate partisan caucuses, will be sent to the national conventions to nominate presidential candidates.

The partisan primary (not including president) will be on August 9th. The General Election for President, all members of the State Assembly, half the State Senate and other local partisan positions will be held November 8th.

For eighty percent of voters the voter ID law will be no more inconvenient than remembering to take your wallet to the polls. But voting will be more of a hassle for some elderly, college students, city dwellers who rely on public transportation, people who have moved and those who frequently travel.

To increase confusion, and despite firm opposition by the local election clerks, the nonpartisan Government Accountability Board will not exist after June. In a bill recently signed into law by the governor, two partisan commissions will replace the nonpartisan GAB.

As Joe found out, the process of getting an ID may take longer than you planned. The place to start is the local Department of Motor Vehicles office. For many rural residents these offices have severely limited hours. For example, in Buffalo County, the office is only open from 7am to 5 pm on Monday and Wednesday.

DMV office locations can be found at http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/online-srvcs/find-dmv/default.aspx.

IDs are free. You will need to bring proof of your name, date of birth, Wisconsin residency and your social security card (if you have one).

If you cannot vote at the polling place, you will need to vote by mail or during much-restricted early voting hours. For those who travel, hours are so restricted you will likely need to vote by mail. You need a copy of your ID to vote by mail unless you are military or a permanent overseas voter. You can find more voter ID details at http://www.bringit.wi.gov.

While the state’s political focus will be largely on the 2016 presidential election, the state legislature will continue its One-Hundred and Second Regular Session throughout the spring. Rumors in the Capitol are that this session will adjourn earlier than its scheduled April conclusion.

Expected to pass this spring, with large bipartisan support, are a series of bills aimed at reducing drug addiction. Wisconsin, as well as many other states, has seen an alarming uptick in drug related deaths. These bills will increase funding for treatment alternatives to incarceration – the highly effective Drug Court Program; encourage best practices in prescribing pain medication; federalize some rules related to drug treatment facilities and make illegal the manufacture and use of synthetic urine used to avoid drug tests.

At the end of the session all bills not passed will die. I’ll be working to kill several bills that take away local powers to decide, among other things, where industrial sites and sand mines are located and certain actions of school boards.

Wishing everyone a very happy and prosperous 2016. Exercise your right to vote, and remind your friends and family to get that Voter ID now!

This week, as the holidays draw near,  Sen. Kathleen Vinehout does an overview of the issues about which Wisconsin constituents contacted her.

ALMA - Happy Holidays! While Santa is making a list of who is naughty and nice, I spent time making a list of what folks cared about enough to call or write.

I am always impressed by how many people take the time to become engaged in their government. “Democracy” is truly a verb for the 7,007 individual people who communicated with me in 2015. Many offered their opinion not once but several times. My office recorded a total of 15,811 contacts with citizens.

This year was a budget year. It was also the year the Governor ran for President. Both had an influence on the amount and type of communication I received.

People did not favor the Governor’s budget. Many wrote on several budget issues. Seven topics really stood out based on the number of contacts I received.

Most concerning, in terms of a common complaint, was the Governor’s proposal to dramatically cut back SeniorCare. The program helps elders of modest means afford prescription drugs. The Governor wanted to replace Wisconsin’s program with Medicare Part D. Over 800 people contacted my office to oppose this plan. Many of these people had never contacted me before on any issue.

No one contacted me in favor of the plan. The immense amount of citizen involvement against the proposal led legislative leaders to drop SeniorCare changes!

Deep cuts to the University of Wisconsin System troubled many citizens. Over 250 people wrote specifically about the cuts to the UW System. Not one citizen wrote or called in favor of the cuts.

Changes at the Department of Natural Resources riled 145 people enough for them to contact me specifically asking to stop the changes, which included eliminating the powers of the Natural Resources Board, cutting DNR scientists and the stewardship program. Citizen action did help restore the powers of the boards at both Natural Resources and the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection. The DNR is now suffering under budget cuts to its programs. No one contacted me in favor of these changes.

Over 100 people contracted me to oppose changes in FamilyCare and IRIS. This issue stands out as one that got people really engaged. Many wrote impressive and personal snail mail letters. Some came to the Capitol in wheelchairs and with caregivers. Others came to one of more than a dozen town hall meetings I held on the budget. For many people this was the first time they became involved in the political process. I received no contact from anyone in favor of the changes.

Changes to education, including teacher standards, cuts to public radio and television and changes to the public open records laws rounded out the list of major specific issues people took the time express an opinion. In every case, people expressed opposition to the governor’s budget provision.

In past years, some people always wrote in favor of some budget changes. This year was exceptional in that I received very little contact in favor of any part of the budget. I suspect the Governor’s run for President led to the ill-conceived proposals for which there was little vocal support.

On other legislative issues, the misnamed “Right to Work” bill garnered the most attention. Ninety three percent of over 300 citizens who contacted me were opposed to the bill. Next of concern were changes to the campaign finance laws and the elimination of the Government Accountability Board (GAB). Ninety percent who contacted me were opposed to these two bills.

Some folks are surprised when I describe about half my job as “social work”. By that, I mean listening and connecting people with resources to help solve their problems. Over 100 people contacted me with significant personal concerns. Some of the issues we assisted people with related to BadgerCare, unemployment insurance, DNR permits or other parts of state government.

A big thanks to my dedicated Senate staff: Linda Kleinschmidt, Ben Larson and Beau Stafford. In addition, thank you all who contacted me this year. You make democracy work!

Sending you and yours fond Holiday Greetings!

Phone companies are changing and copper phone lines are expensive to maintain. Modern technology is making copper lines obsolete. But Sen. Kathleen Vinehout wonders if state law should allow phone companies to dump their landline customers in the name of profit.

CHIPPEWA FALLS, WI - “I was furious,” said Cindy from Chippewa Falls. “I wouldn’t have stayed on the phone this long with this dinky cell phone.” She just found out state law allowed phone companies to dump their landline customers.

Cindy waited 40 minutes on her “dinky cell phone” to join a telephone town hall meeting with 7,373 other seniors.

AARP (formerly the American Association of Retired Persons) hosted the town hall. I was the guest senator. We joined forces to promote my “Home Phone” bill – Senate Bill 240. The bill would return state law to pre-2011 language and protect phone customers from losing landlines.

Phone companies are changing. Modern technology may make copper phone lines obsolete. Copper lines are expensive to maintain. That is the industry’s side of the story. The last point – copper lines are expensive to maintain – is what led to Marge’s problem.

Marge lives in Maiden Rock surrounded by the hilly, rocky, rural bluffs. The phone line is aging and quality is poor. But cell phones don’t work unless Marge gets in the car and drives to the top of the bluff. When I met Marge last summer, she had been without her landline phone service for several weeks. At that time, the phone company refused to repair the line. We weren’t certain they would ever do the necessary repair.

Landline home phones are vital to the protection, security and social support of not only seniors but many of the residents in rural areas. Prior to 2011 Act 22, Wisconsin residents were assured of landline telephone service through “provider of last resort” obligations. This law required telephone companies to make basic voice service available to all residential customers within the area in which they operated.

Four years ago, when I fought to stop 2011 Act 22, I was told not to worry because a federal law would protect landline phones. Now, one of Wisconsin’s largest telecommunication providers petitioned the federal government to remove the federal regulation, putting Wisconsin citizens at risk.

The Wall Street Journal reported in 2014 telephone giants “are racing to replace their phone networks with new technology.” Further, the WSJ reported the “FCC decided to allow carriers to launch ‘experiments’ aimed at weaning people off old, circuit-switched phone networks…two carriers, with a total of more than 250 million customers, aren’t shy about their ultimate goal: turning off their old networks forever”.

In our town hall meeting, we heard from seniors who lived through harrowing experiences saved by their landline phone.

James from rural Hayward told us his neighbor would not be alive without the connection of her landline phone to “Life Alert”. Marilyn fell outside in the winter and broke her hip. She pushed the emergency button connected to her landline phone, which alerted emergency responders.

“I used to work for AT&T,” James told town hall participants. When he worked for the company, they were proud to guarantee phone service. “What’s happened?” he asked.

Doris from Cornell said a landline phone is a lifeline for her husband who has a heart condition. The machine that helps his heart beat is monitored through a signal that can only be transmitted over a landline phone. The signal goes to Pennsylvania and then back to a hospital in Eau Claire.

Another concerned participant explained that her 84-year-old Aunt wears a bracelet that connects her to emergency services. The cell phone company will not support the service needed to make her bracelet work. A landline phone is critical to allow her Aunt to stay safely at home.

Cindy from Jump River lives in a low area and said she cannot get any cell reception. She was worried about reaching emergency services. “I have my landline and I wouldn’t want to give it up.”

Helen Marks Dicks, AARP’s Associate State Director/Advocacy Director, asked seniors to call their elected representatives and “tell them why landline service is so important to them.” People should “ask their legislator to request a hearing on SB 240.” The bill is in the Senate Committee on Workforce Development, Public Works and Military Affairs chaired by Senator Roger Roth.

You can use the AARP hotline to call for action: 844-254-6876. Call now – while you still can!