Progressive Thinking

Sen. Kathleen Vinehout writes about the annual Art Fair in Stockholm Wisconsin, reflecting on how the art mirrors the natural environment as well as the political environment in our state.

STOCKHOLM, WI - “If you came to Stockholm today, you came up or over a river,” musician Julie Patchouli told the folks gathered at the 42nd Annual Art Fair. The musical group, known by Julie’s last name, began a rousing river song as part of the celebration of art in the village of Stockholm, Wisconsin.

Stockholm is a picturesque Mississippi River town of 66 individuals (not counting the dogs and cats) that swells by many hundreds on art fair day. Most of the art fair is in the scenic village park on the riverbank of Lake Pepin – the widest spot in the Mississippi.

Over 100-juried Midwest artists brought their pottery, paintings, photography, jewelry, glass, leather, metal, wood, and hand painted silk clothing.

Mary Peterson of rural Stockholm brought her hand-woven alpaca ornaments and wearables. She also brought one of her partners in this artistic venture – the alpaca “Mabel”.

I was struck by how much the art fair – the art, artists, and attendees, mirrored the environment. For example, the hues, tints, shades, and tones of nature were reflected in the art.

I saw the greens and greys of a misty August morning in pottery, the vivid pinks and lavender blue of the tall, blooming Delphinium’s stalks in photography, the rich gold and red of autumn leaves in acrylic paints.

Artists’ renditions of Wisconsin’s natural beauty leapt to life: the rushing streams along deep green woods, the crashing waves of Lake Superior, the huge, fluffy cumulus clouds over a rolling landscape, and the multi-colored rocks washed over by a stream.

Much of the art that reflected our environment was three-dimensional: glistening water droplets in earrings, the graceful swirls of wood grains accentuated by the carvers’ hand in wooden bowls, and all sorts of clay lumps turned to art suited for daily activities of eating and entertaining.

Around every corner I found a new interpretation of the essence of our great state.

What is more Wisconsin than cows and fishing? I found artistic versions of cows in paintings, pottery, and even leather. But nothing matched the popularity of fish! I found fish everywhere: in photography, paintings, woodcarvings, jewelry, metal sculpture, and even T-shirts.

Renditions of Wisconsin’s beauty were not limited to objects of art. The group Patchouli entertained the art fair goers with “Folk Meets Flamenco” music including the song “Amarantha” (named after the grain, I suppose) from their CD “Dragonfly”. The music made me feel like dragonflies were darting around me.

This also might have been because art fair-goers were decorated with millions of mayflies. These rather large, harmless insects looked like Mother Nature’s works of art. In its flying form, the insect has two sets of delicate lacewings tinted grey, olive, or blue, large eyes, short, bristle-like antennas, and two or three long sweeping tails.

Once mayflies enter their winged state, they cannot feed. Sometimes their existence in winged form lasts only a few hours; which means the mass emergence of the mayflies – which nature timed perfectly to coincide with the art fair – reminded us of how our time on this planet is short-lived.

People came with family and friends to enjoy the festivities. Throughout the day, people I met shared ideas and concerns. Topics ranged from local affairs – especially sand mines and railroads – to state and national politics. I heard concern about cuts to the UW and spending on the Bucks Arena. Folks worried about the meager $1,400 per student the Pepin School District will receive in state aid. Pepin is among the 55% of public schools that will receive less state aid under the new state budget. Citizens raised concerns about privatization of health programs like FamilyCare and IRIS.

One woman, Marge Lorayne of rural Maiden Rock, told me of her fight with the telephone company to keep her home phone. “I have to go up to the top of the bluff to get cell coverage,” she told me. I spoke with her about policy in the budget related to landlines and my new bill to protect rural residents.

I found art also reflected our environment of frustration with recent governmental action. Perhaps none better than Paul Meddaugh’s comic photography of Wisconsin’s Capitol encircled by an enormous, puffy, white ghost. The photo’s title: “Who you gonna call?”

Sen. Kathleen Vinehout writes about the governor’s vetoes which eliminated provisions of legislative oversight. The power of the people resides in their elected officials. When the oversight provisions are eliminated, the power of the people is weakened.

WAUKESHA, WI - “I object to the infringement on gubernatorial power and duties,” wrote Governor Walker in his veto message. By his budget vetoes he made it clear he did not want legislative oversight.

The governor removed at least 15 portions of state law passed by the legislature that provided legislative authority or provided oversight of the executive branch.

Remember your 4th grade civics class lessons about the delicate balance of powers between the three branches of government – the governor (and executive agencies,), the legislature, and the judiciary. The power of the people lies in the power of their elected officials. The peoples’ representatives are their most direct line of power. When legislative power is undermined, so is the power of the people.

The governor began the budget process by taking away powers given to the people and the legislature. For example, the citizen board members of the Departments of Natural Resources and Agriculture lost all their policy-making powers in the governor’s budget. The legislature lost its oversight of state building projects in the governor’s changes to the Building Commission. The people lost budget restrictions in the governor’s gutting of the cost-benefit analysis requirements. These powers were all restored in action by the legislature.

However, through his vetoes, the governor again limited the power of the people through their legislature. For example, the legislature held onto funds the governor put in the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC) budget. The very troubled jobs agency was to submit policy changes to the legislature. Presumably, those funds could be released funds if the budget writing committee members were satisfied progress was made. The governor took the funds set aside by the budget committee through his veto pen.

The budget writing committee made changes in the requirements for agencies writing budgets – requiring more information be sent to the legislature on budget options. Lawmakers also set executive restrictions on short-term debt. The use of this type of debt (known as ‘commercial paper’) has long been unrestricted by lawmakers and invisible to the public.

The governor vetoed both of these common sense budget oversight provisions.

The most challenging aspect of the budget for lawmakers has been getting our arms around health spending. Medicaid is the largest budget program and spending is growing faster than any other part of the budget.

A few years ago, a Legislative Audit Bureau report found that poor state accounting in the Medicaid program made it difficult for legislators to gain needed management information about spending and program administration.

Lawmakers on the Joint Finance Committee (JFC) made changes to require reporting and oversight of such gubernatorial initiatives as drug testing of health program recipients, and funds collected from ambulatory surgery centers. Lawmakers required the Department of Health Services (DHS) report on details of a federal waiver to change BadgerCare both before the waiver was sought and after the waiver was approved. The DHS was to also report on the fiscal impact of BadgerCare changes. Budget provisions required DHS officials to consult with advocacy organizations regarding mental health changes and report these changes to the legislature.

The governor vetoed this oversight set by the legislature.

The Governor made major changes to Family Care and IRIS programs for the disabled, frail elderly and developmentally disabled. The JFC modified these changes including creating five regional areas of service delivery and an open enrollment period that coincided with the open enrollment for Medicare. The governor vetoed these changes.

To eliminate oversight by the public, the governor and the legislative majority worked together to severely restrict Wisconsin’s open records law. Intense public pressure caused the full legislature to restore the open records laws that gives citizens critical transparency into the activities of the legislature in the lawmaking process.

The governor already has wide leeway for executive action. Taken together, his vetoes continue a pattern of closing off legislative oversight and, with that, public accountability. With the total budget growing to nearly $73 billion, oversight has never been more vital to a functioning democracy.

Wisconsin (or the rest of the country) does not need an imperial executive that does not want to answer to anyone.

The Joint Finance Committee ended its work on the state budget last week by slipping in some policy changes in it's last minute Motion, #999. One of them affects landline phone service, which many rural residents depend upon for all purposes including emergencies. They don’t have the option of a cell phone because of lack of coverage in many rural areas of the state.

MADISON - I didn’t expect to look up telephone laws reading the state budget.

Snuck in the end of the Joint Finance Committee’s work is a law change that could affect the safety of rural residents. It had me asking, “What if you picked up the phone to call 911 and heard no dial tone?”

Rural residents rely on small legal protections to keep a dial tone on their landline phones. Thousands of rural residents live in an area where cell phones do not work and cable services do not exist.

We rely on landlines for business, neighborliness, family communication, and emergencies and safety.

In 2011 a “modernization” of the laws governing telephones removed state law protecting consumers. Part of this legal language was known as the “provider of last resort”. That “provider” would be your local rural phone company.

Some phone companies are cooperatives heavily invested in serving rural residents - even providing high-speed Internet in some areas. But other rural providers are big city companies looking to invest in urban, not rural areas.

Recently the state’s budget writing committee finished its work. The final committee budget motion contained over 60 items amending state laws. Most of these items were policy unrelated to the spending of state dollars. In “capitol speak” we call these “non-fiscal provisions”.

One overlooked provision removed a date from state law – that is it. But the date, tying state law to consumer protections in federal law on January 1, 2010, protected rural telephone consumers from big telephone companies pulling the plug on their landline.

In another provision, the job of cleaning up those old telephone poles is left to land owners and local government (I find this incredibly irresponsible).

AT&T has made it clear they intend to eliminate all copper lines in the U.S. in the next decade. Call me pessimistic, but I do not see cable or cell coverage coming to the hills of western Wisconsin or the north woods any time soon.

So how are you going to call 911? Did anyone ask those 12 budget committee legislators – many represent rural folks – before they voted “aye”?

Much recent budget action would not endear legislators to their constituents if the people knew details about policy for which the 12 voted.

Here’s a sampling of the recent budget action. Take away powers of a locally elected (Milwaukee) county board to oversee contracts. Get rid of the (Madison) sanitary district county board appointees. Change the tax code to give more breaks to big business; Tax every dime of wage earners but remove mention of ‘living wage’ in Wisconsin law. Rewrite the minimum wage law. Make it harder to get employees represented by a union.

Added are new regulations of “pharmacy benefit managers” (those companies who tell you which generic drug you can have). Allow out-of-state “risk retention groups” to sell insurance. Increase the ways payday loan companies can dupe unsuspecting consumers. Provide details of how to resolve unpaid health insurance claims for chiropractors. Changes in septic and well pump installer electrician licensing and sprinkler codes adopted by cities. Some of these ideas might have merit – but they all deserve an open and transparent public hearing.

Fortunately, egregious changes to the state’s open record laws – sheltering the work of lawmakers from the public’s eye – became public. Under significant public pressure, the governor and legislative leaders agreed to remove any changes related to open records laws.

What about the remaining policy in the budget? All too often bills that fail to pass through the normal legislative process end up in the budget.

This is especially true with education policy that did not clear the Education Committee: special education “vouchers” for private schools; expanding who can “authorize” privately run charter school paid for with tax dollars; changes to the rules on “school report cards” for private schools paid for with public money and allow private schools to choose among several alternatives to the statewide student test.

Not all states struggle with policy hidden in the state budget.

Colorado, Oklahoma and Illinois are a few states I found that limit non-fiscal policy in the state budget. The latter uses a very simple Constitutional statement: Appropriation bills shall be limited to the subject of appropriations.

Sen. Kathleen Vinehout writes about the state’s transportation budget which has stalled deliberations on the state budget. Here are some options to break the impasse on the transportation portion of the budget by addressing the four major components: raising revenue, lowering spending, cutting debt and improving efficiency.

MADISON - “If it was up to you,” the Chamber of Commerce moderator asked area legislators, “How would you solve the transportation problem?”

Budget talks are stalled. Legislators can’t seem to find a way through the labyrinth of interests stalking the Capitol halls. One main sticking point is how to balance the transportation budget.

Governor Walker left lawmakers with $1.3 billion in new debt to pay for roads over the next two years. Among many decisions the governor made was to increase spending in the Major Highway Development Program by $100 million or over 13%. He borrowed $109 million to pay for this spending.

One decision the governor did not make was to take any of the two-dozen suggestions of his Secretary of Transportation to make possible changes in revenue – new taxes or fees.

Of course, borrowing $1.3 billion to pay for spending means someone in the future would have to increase taxes and fees. This is true because, by the end of the budget nearly a quarter of the spending on transportation is on debt service –an unsustainable amount.

So how to fix the transportation budget? The answer is to raise revenue, lower spending, cut debt and improve efficiencies in the dollars we spend.

Easy to say – hard to do.

To raising revenue: the simplest and easiest to administer is to increase the per-gallon gas tax. I suggest by a nickel.

Talking through options with our nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau (LFB) analysts, I was reminded of lawmakers’ changes in 2006 that eliminated indexing (or matching to inflation) of the gas tax. If this law were still in place, the tax would be 6.5 cents more and better kept up with rising costs.

The LFB analysts also reminded me average fuel economy has improved giving consumers a 2.7-cent “bonus” (my words, not theirs) as improving gas mileage gets us farther on a gallon of gas. To quote LFB analyst Al Runde:

Paying less in fuel taxes for the same miles driven means that while the state’s roads receive the same impact [wear], fuel tax revenues associated with those miles driven has fallen, making it more difficult for the state to maintain and construct its roads.”

To changes in spending: I suggest we cut the really big road projects in Southeast Wisconsin by about $100 million, not buy the 13% increase the governor wants in the “majors”. Instead, cut both it and the Highway Rehab program by $50 million each. Get rid of the TEA program (an economic development program that has no evidence of success) as well as a new pilot program to eliminate competitive bidding (not a good idea!).

I would limit the Freight Rail Program to its current balance. My constituents simply cannot justify borrowing $43 million to buy new state-owned railroad with all the other deep cuts in this budget.

These changes and others could cut borrowing in half and allow for significant spending increases in local and state road repair, transit, and other alternative transportation options. In my alternative transportation budget, I also add investments in rail-crossing improvements and rail emergency preparedness – two important constituent concerns. In addition, I return money the governor ‘raided’ from the general fund to pay for road repairs.

Finally, answering the thorny question of how to get a better “bang for our buck” in road spending. The conservative Reason Foundation studied state transportation spending for over two decades. A study released last fall provides clues to Wisconsin’s road spending.

I compared numbers between Minnesota and Wisconsin –two states with similar weather and miles of state-owned roads. Over three years, Minnesota’s total spending on transportation per state-controlled mile grew less than 3%. During the same period (2009-2012) Wisconsin’s spending per state-controlled mile grew 37%.

By 2012, Wisconsin spent $226,901 per state-controlled mile to Minnesota’s $132,230.

I don’t know why spending is so different but I think Wisconsin taxpayers ought to find out why. That’s why I am renewing my call for a comprehensive audit of Transportation.

Solving the Transportation budget will be difficult. Delaying projects will take their toll on residents and business. However, making our grandchildren pay for our inability to say “no” is not a responsible choice.

Sen. Kathleen Vinehout writes about the need to create a state-based health insurance marketplace in face of the potential devastating impact of the Supreme Court ruling in the King v. Burwell case. She calls on her colleagues to take action to protect over 180,000 Wisconsin citizens who currently receive federal subsidies.

MADISON - “Wisconsin has relied heavily on the exchange to expand health insurance coverage,” wrote President Eric Borgerding of the Wisconsin Hospital Association (WHA). In a recent letter to Legislators, he warned a looming Supreme Court decision “could strike down premium assistance.”

Many Wisconsinites are waiting to hear if they will still be able to afford their health insurance bill.

The U.S. Supreme Court will soon rule on the legality of health insurance subsidies for those living in states that did not create a state-based health insurance marketplace.

The WHA estimates over 180,000 Wisconsinites receive tax credit assistance from the federal government for health insurance purchased through healthcare.gov, the federal marketplace. That is roughly like the population of Green Bay and Racine losing an average of almost $3,800 a year.

In western Wisconsin, more folks receive assistance than the statewide average (89%). In just the nine counties that are totally or partially in our Senate District, 13,712 or 98% of people receiving health care through the federal exchange also receive federal tax credits. The number potentially affected by loss of assistance is more than the entire population of Buffalo County. Potential dollars lost to families in our 9-county area is $4.3 million and statewide the potential loss is $57 million.

Wisconsin can avert this crisis by creating a state-based marketplace.

The Legislature should take up Senate Bill 107 to create a Badger Health Benefit Authority. I introduced the bill earlier this year (for the fourth time!) and warned my colleagues of the potential disaster if the Supreme Court strikes down premium assistance going to hardworking Wisconsinites.

My bill creates both a Small Business Health Options Program and an individual marketplace for people buying insurance on their own. The proposal builds on unique aspects of Wisconsin health care including the work by health plans and providers to improve price transparency, control costs and maintain exceptional quality of care.

Because political winds blow both ways through Wisconsin, the marketplace should be independent of state government. This is why my bill calls for an autonomous authority to govern the exchange and a nonpartisan board to oversee operations.

To avert possibilities of corruption and assure public confidence, the marketplace must be transparent – follow state open meetings and records laws – and follow provisions related to accountability, conflict of interest, ethics and disclosure of financial interests. No person employed by a health plan, provider of health care or who sells insurance should be on the board governing the marketplace.

If the Supreme Court rules to invalidate insurance premium assistance for 180,000 Wisconsinites, the insurance market in Wisconsin could be thrown into chaos. Without assistance of an average payment of $316 dollars a month (lowering insurance costs on average to $125), many people will be forced to drop insurance.

When healthy people drop insurance and only sick people keep it, insurance companies end up raising rates. Hospitals and doctors face more people without insurance – also adding to the cost of health care for everyone else. Pharmacies, medical equipment companies and others who serve patients will likely experience a drop in business.

A recent New York Times article quoted Larry Levitt of Kaiser Family Foundation, “A reasonable assumption is that (spending on) healthcare by people who lost their existing subsidies will drop by at least half.” Nationwide the NYT reported this spending would be about $7.5 billion.

Arkansas, Delaware and Pennsylvania recently received permission from federal authorities to create their own state-based exchange. Officials in these states are preparing. So why not Wisconsin?

There is only one answer: Health insurance has become a partisan issue.

Recent action by the Obama administration granting approval to three states gives us a path forward. We could use the healthcare.gov website as the front of our marketplace and SB 107 to create a governance structure that takes advantage of Wisconsin ingenuity.

To the Governor and Republican Legislators I say, ‘People’s health is at stake. Take my bill, make it better, and get the job done!’

Sen. Kathleen Vinehout writes about one of the sticking points in state budget negotiations, the Transportation budget. She shares information about consequences of borrowing, consequences of delaying road rehab and ways to find savings. She calls for a comprehensive audit of the DOT to help inform lawmakers and the public on ways to wisely invest transportation dollars.

MADISON - “Senate leader on budget deal: ‘I don’t know where we are at’” was the headline of a recent Associated Press story on the budget deal. The story went on to report there’s “no agreement yet on how to pay for transportation projects…”

While the Senate leader gathered up votes, I gathered up a few studies to understand if all this borrowing was necessary.

Here’s what I found:

Transportation spending is about $6 billion - 8.5% of our total state budget. About 40% of that comes from the federal government.

Last April, the budget committee received good news that low fuel costs meant residents were driving more and gas tax money is up – by about $13 million over 3 years.

But that’s nowhere near the amount necessary to cover the problems the governor created for legislators when he decided to borrow $1.3 billion for transportation spending.

Debt costs are expected to chew up almost a quarter of all transportation funds by the end of the coming budget. Large increases in borrowing is causing concern. To lower debt, legislators must reduce spending or increase revenue. The governor’s own Secretary of Transportation suggested many ways to increase revenue in his nearly 600-page budget.

But if my Republican colleagues don’t want to take action that might look like a fee increase, what else can be done?

Many in the Capitol are talking about cutting spending. The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau (LFB) asked DOT officials what this might mean. One possible consequence of cutting road rehab money is an increase in road roughness – as measured by a federal standard.

In 2001, 9% of Wisconsin roads scored in poor condition for roughness and the DOT now estimates 17% of roads scored poor. With a $500 million cut to the transportation budget residents will see an increase to 32% of roads in poor pavement roughness over the next ten years. Maybe this is not what citizens want.

Another option is to be more efficient with our transportation dollars. I suggest we audit the DOT to find ways to improve efficiencies. The last truly comprehensive audit of DOT was done by the Legislative Audit Bureau (LAB) was in 1997. In that review, auditors raised questions about the effectiveness of outsourcing engineering to private firms.

Quality measures showed that DOT staff engineers had higher quality project design than outsourced engineers. Studies I reviewed showed use of these outsourced-engineers dramatically increased over the past two decades.

For example, spending on private construction engineers was only 8% of all construction-engineering costs in fiscal year 1987-88. Ten years later this spending jumped to a third of all dollars spent on construction engineers. By fiscal year 2009-10, three quarters of all dollars spent on construction engineers was spent on private firms.

Data I analyzed from a 2009 limited-scope review by LAB showed a 68% cost increase per project over 5 years for projects that involved private engineering consultants.

Further, a 2009 report to the State Engineering Association found use of outside consultants didn’t save the state money; in some cases private engineering firms cost up to 19% more than in-house state engineers. This study also recommended a comprehensive review of the role of consultants in state projects.

Increased use of internal staff instead of outside consultants is just one example of how to save money. The DOT Secretary and the Governor did request and receive 180 new engineering positions in the last budget. Unfortunately, I’ve heard from DOT staff that pay and benefits at private engineering firms are significantly better than DOT making it hard for the state to keep good staff.

Another concern is a program that allows contractors ‘flexibility’ in use of construction materials if they ‘warrantee’ the construction. A 2011 LAB report showed that DOT staff did not make inspections of over half of warrantee projects during the warrantee period; over a third of projects inspected didn’t meet DOT performance standards and in 6 projects that didn’t meet DOT performance standards, regional offices could not document that contractors performed required repair work.

These are just a few findings over the past few decades.

Any transportation ‘fix’ will be short-term until Wisconsin can get spending under control. To do that, legislators and the public need detailed management information – the kind that can only be obtained through an audit by the nonpartisan LAB.

Sen. Kathleen Vinehout writes about action by the Legislature’s majority party to eliminate the non-partisan Legislative Audit Bureau (LAB) annual financial audit of the UW System. The action is a recipe for corruption and is akin to eliminating the watchdog over the taxpayers’ money.

MADISON - “Suspend current law…requiring the Legislative Audit Bureau to conduct an annual financial audit of the UW System. Instead, require the UW System to contract with an independent accounting firm,” read the motion introduced by Senator Harsdorf and Representative Schraa.

Recent action by a majority of the state’s budget writing committee not only kicked the nonpartisan Legislative Audit Bureau (LAB) out of the UW System but also approved a process to get rid of state purchasing laws at the UW and waive the state’s bidding process for some UW building projects.

The motion effectively throws Wisconsin taxpayer controls out the window for a significant portion of the state budget. The UW System 2-year budget is over $11 billion – about a 7th of the entire state budget.

To justify suspending the LAB’s annual UW audit, the Harsdorf/Schraa motion required UW officials to contract with a private accounting firm.

This action kicked out the watchdog and replaced it with a goldfish.

Private accounting firms count things. They can tell us money was spent and the books were balanced. But their reports won’t tell us about how the money was spent and whether or not the spending was in students’ and taxpayers’ best interest.

Since its creation in 1966, financial audits are a primary responsibility of the Legislative Audit Bureau. In the past two years, the LAB completed 26 financial audits – including the audit opinion of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) of state operations.

In a recent letter to the Co-Chairs of the Legislative Audit Committee, State Auditor Joe Chrisman explained: “In conducting financial audits, LAB follows professional auditing standards issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as well as generally accepted government auditing standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States.”

The LAB financial auditors adhere to the same standards as private firms. They are required to be independent and sharpen their skills and knowledge through continuing education. Every three years the National State Auditors Association subjects the LAB to peer review. State law prohibits any meddling or outside influence with audit investigations and protects whistleblowers with strong confidentiality rules.

The LAB has extensive experience auditing the over $6 billion annual UW System budget.

Over the last 8 years or so the LAB reported on the following: how the UW allocates state tax money and tuition to campuses; the process followed to assess the financial reporting of entities like the UW Foundation and the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF); overpayments for retirement contributions and health insurance (some of the health insurance contributions were for employees no longer with the UW); audit differences including financial reporting errors by the UW System; changes in financial activities of the UW including an increase in unrestricted net assets; and internal controls.

The UW does not hire the LAB. Auditors answer to the State Auditor who answers to the Legislature, who answers to the people. No private firm involved.

The LAB answers questions my colleagues, taxpayers and I most often ask: What’s going on? How is it working? Can we do things better?

Kick out the LAB? Doing away with state procurement policies on contracting and hiring private firms? Doing away with some bidding rules? Contracting with a private auditing firm who knows nothing about the complex accounting and operations of the UW?

When I reviewed the Harsdorf/Schraa motion, I was left with a serious question: Why?

Recently Representatives Craig (R-Waukesha) and Jarchow (R-Balsam Lake) drafted a bill to entirely eliminate the Legislative Audit Bureau and the Legislative Audit Committee. They want to create an Inspector General for each state agency over 100 employees. They transfer all legislative oversight of the executive branch and the fraud, waste and abuse hotline to two partisan leaders. Their bill imbeds auditors in the agencies making them ripe for corruption by executive staff and partisan leaders.

The breadth of the Representatives’ ignorance of LAB activities and processes is staggering. Their bill shows a complete unfamiliarity with the skills of auditors, the efficiencies in government LAB staff helped created and the fraud, waste and abuse auditors discovered and further prevented through their oversight. All I can ask is why would legislators want do away with the LAB?

Last week, the Joint Finance Committee took action to strip away teacher standards, leaving education leaders and state citizens up in arms and more concerned then ever about the future of education in Wisconsin. Senator Vinehout writes about the importance of highly qualified teachers and calls on the public to contact legislators about this issue.

MADISON - “I’m counting on you,” Tracy from Mondovi wrote me.

“The architects of the Joint Finance Committee’s education budget package wrongly assumes that anyone can teach by allowing those with minimal qualifications and little more than a high school diploma to educate our children. Their action will degrade the quality of teaching in Wisconsin and represents a race to the bottom.”

Tracy was one of many constituents who recently contacted me about a big change in the state’s teaching standards.

In late night budget action, after freezing the school revenue limit and allowing no increase in aid, the Republican majority voted to strip away teaching standards.

As State Superintendent Tony Evers described in his statement, the changes “would require the Department of Public Instruction to license anyone with a bachelor’s degree in any subject to teach English, social studies, mathematics, and science.” Private schools or public schools would decide “that the individual is proficient and has relevant experience in each subject they teach.”

In addition, the state would be required to issue a teaching permit for “individuals who have not earned a bachelor’s degree, or potentially a high school diploma, to teach in any subject area, excluding the core subjects of mathematics, English, science, and social studies. The only requirement would be that the public school or district or private voucher school determines that the individual is proficient and has relevant experience in the subject they intend to teach.”

At the heart of this proposal is a complete disregard for the profession of teaching.

Proponents of this proposal assume that because you know something, you can also teach it. Any parent who has tried to assist a child with their math homework knows there is a big difference between knowing and teaching a subject.

Teaching shapes young minds for future learning. A great teacher has an impact on a youngster that lasts a lifetime. A poor teacher can have the same effect. The fifty-something who says “I can’t do math” might have been told as a youngster “you can’t do math.”

Learning comes differently to each of us. Part of the process of teaching is finding the unique learning style of each child and tailoring the lesson to allow each child to succeed. Knowing the content is the beginning, not the end of teacher education.

It’s been a long time since I took college classes to be educated as a teacher. But the lessons I learned follow me into every town hall meeting.

I thank the professors in the School of Education for the lessons they instilled in my intensive two-year teacher-training program. What I do in a public setting is effective because I consciously put in practice what I learned long ago.

Teachers know it is not just what you know but how you act that makes the difference for students mastering new knowledge or entirely turning off to a subject.

As Mr. Ryan, from Prescott, wrote to me, “Education preparation includes not only the history and psychology of education over time, it also includes opportunities for aspiring professionals to learn best practices, current theory, apply and collect data to develop proven methods, and much more. Moreover, it includes the most important aspect...live, in-person, human interaction and collaboration, …with all the attention placed on accountability, why in the world would legislation be put forth that moves the state of Wisconsin to the back of the line in terms of teacher training and preparation?”

Why indeed? Do we want Wisconsin to lead the nation in a lack of standards for teachers? International research tells us high standards for teachers and intensive teacher education result in the best outcome for students.

We need a widespread public outcry to stop what’s happening in this budget.

As Tracy told me, “I’m counting on you.” But to stop the race to the lowest standards and below national average funding for local schools, I need Republican legislator’s votes. They need to recognize, as the Pepin Superintendent wrote, “No one who votes for this budget can claim to support public schools.”

Everyone in Wisconsin has a stake in providing the best education possible for the generations to come. Now is the time to get involved. Your grandchild’s future depends on your action.

Recent action taken by majority party members on the Joint Finance Committee on funding for public education provided limited additional revenue to public schools while opening the door for expansion of private vouchers. It will take dollars away from public schools.

ALMA, WI - “Our number one priority gotta to be make (sic) sure that we make K-12 schools, public education in the state, a priority to make sure they’re held whole,” said Governor Walker on April 23rd, as quoted by Wisconsin Radio Network.

I agree, Governor! Let’s make public schools “whole.”

In a recent late night session, the state’s budget writing committee took up public school funding. Many advocates expected a turnaround in the governor’s proposed funding for local schools. Instead folks got a big surprise: lots of changes asked for by private school lobbyists. Not so for public schools.

In a press release, State Superintendent Tony Evers described the actions this way:

• For the first time ever, there is no increase in state imposed revenue limits over the next two school years, while voucher and independent charter school payments are increased in each year.
• State general equalization aid to public schools is cut in the first year to pay for voucher expansion and increased independent charter school payments. This leaves public schools with less state general aid than in 2010.
• Continues the freeze on state special education aid for what will be the eighth consecutive year, covering roughly a quarter of district special education costs while creating a new voucher program that drains funds from public schools.
• Essentially eliminates teacher licensing standards by allowing public and private schools to hire anyone to teach, even those without a bachelor’s degree, planting Wisconsin at the bottom nationally, below states with the lowest student achievement levels.

Republicans on the Joint Finance committee opened wide the spigot of state money flowing to private schools. Created in late night actions was a new statewide special education “voucher” program with $12,000 per student leaving the local school district; permission for the multiplication of some privately-operated independent charter schools and statewide expansion of private vouchers for all students with a cap of 1% of the local district’s enrollment in the first year and moving to unlimited expansion after several years. Money for this statewide subsidy would come from the local public schools.

In addition, to keep competitive sports programs, public schools would be required to accept private and home-schooled children into their sports programs and extracurricular activities and not charge these students any more than a public school student would be charged for sports or extracurricular activities. This rule would essentially ask public school parents to underwrite the cost of these private school children coming back into the public schools to partake of after-school activities – as the school would receive no additional fees from the state for these students.

Republican Finance Committee members also voted to create a new private school take-over of Milwaukee public schools. This system would leave no public school alternative in many Milwaukee neighborhoods. Many residents are concerned this action violates the state’s constitution to require an equal and public education for all children.

Left far behind was the governor’s promise to make sure public schools are “held whole.”

Ironically the day before, the governor spoke to a pro-private school group in New Orleans - the American Federation for Children - according to a Wisconsin State Journal report.

Had the governor been here, I would have told him that to make schools “whole” means returning the money cut from public schools.

The cumulative cut to public schools since 2011 – the first Governor Walker budget – is nearly $1.7 billion. These cuts happened at a time when Wisconsin collected and spent a cumulative increase in revenue of nearly $13.8 billion.

These staggering cuts – at a time when the state was spending much more – drained the savings of school districts, delayed maintenance, caused pay cuts and freezes to staff and left children with fewer resources.

As state school aid dropped and districts used up all available budget cutting measures, many districts were forced to go to referendum. The Wisconsin Taxpayer recently reported 78% of referenda passed in April of 2015 – a significantly higher rate than prior years. Property taxpayers, committed to their local schools, are picking up more of the burden.

Local public schools are at a breaking point. These new private school proposals will hasten their demise. Governor, it’s time to stand by your promise and make our public schools “whole”.

Sen. Kathleen Vinehout writes about the recently released audit of the Non-Emergency Medical Transportation Program, used by many in Wisconsin for rides to medical appointments.

MADISON - Last April I wrote about many complaints I received concerning rides to medical appointments for folks in BadgerCare and other Medicaid programs.

People complained drivers didn’t show up, rides were late, drivers didn’t arrive for the return trip home and – at least in one case – the heater did not work in a van taking an elderly woman for her dialysis appointment.

Often patients were told no drivers were available. But local transportation companies told me they were not getting enough business. Local drivers thought the St. Louis-based contractor, Medical Transportation Management, Inc. (MTM) favored a few large companies over small local ones. MTM is the statewide Non-Emergency Medical Transportation ‘broker’ the state hired to arrange rides for eligible patients.

Complaints about poor service helped my colleagues and I convince other legislators to approve a full investigation of the program.

Over 300 people called the Legislative Audit Bureau’s (LAB) hotline to share their complaints. These calls and over 50 interviews conducted by LAB staff were used to analyze problems with the Non-Emergency Medical Transportation Program. In addition, a survey was sent to 5,000 patients and their families. Also 311 transportation providers completed an internet-based survey.

The results of the year-long investigation are now in.

The new LAB report shows evidence of late rides, drivers’ failure to pick up people for their return ride home and the tendency of MTM to choose a few large transportation companies over smaller, local companies.

Despite problems, of the 773 riders who responded to the questionnaire, almost 87% were satisfied or very satisfied with their overall experience.

During the audit study period (August 2013 through June 2014), MTM provided 2.3 million trips and, by its own standard, estimated 99.6% of these trips were complaint free.

The LAB reviewed 12,748 complaints filed with MTM. Two-thirds of the time the company did not provide patients timely updates on their investigation of complaints.

The most common substantiated complaint was that the patient had to reschedule a trip because the driver never arrived. Second most common was the driver was late.

Analysis by auditors showed problems, particularly in rural areas, with no vehicles available to transport patients.

A majority of transportation providers surveyed reported they were dissatisfied with MTM’s trip scheduling, poor trip volume and poor compensation.

Drivers complained they were given a request for a ride after the time and date of the appointment. Since drivers were penalized for late rides, this led to time and energy spent by the provider to correct MTM’s mistake.

The audit also provided unexpected insight into a significant cost of drug abuse – in this case transporting recovering patients to treatment for addiction. Trips to drug treatment programs accounted for almost a quarter of the cost of services paid to providers during the audit period. In addition, 91 of the top 100 high cost patients had at least one drug addiction treatment visit.

Auditors mentioned that the lack of drug treatment services in rural areas contributed to high costs. In one case an individual made 540 trips between Ashland County and Eau Claire for treatment. In another case, an individual traveled 321 times between Polk County and Eau Claire. Recently enacted legislation to create new treatment programs in underserved and rural areas should help bring down future transportation costs.

Auditors found there was clearly a difference in patient satisfaction levels measured through an independent survey and the complaint rate of patients directly to MTM. These findings suggest a future independent survey could provide a more accurate perspective in determining actual patient satisfaction.

Nearly all complaints I heard leading up to this audit were verified by auditors. At the same time, most patients were satisfied with the ride service they received.

Some state programs might be pleased with such high satisfaction. But given the seriousness of the patients’ conditions – needing renal dialysis for example – it makes sense that we should hold MTM to a very high standard.

As Representative Peter Barca testified at the hearing that began this audit process, “When people are in the most sensitive period of their life, we must ensure they receive services and are treated with respect and dignity.”

Sen. Kathleen Vinehout writes about the latest audit of the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC). The Legislative Audit Bureau reports again on the failure of WEDC to follow state law and its own policies when awarding grants, loans and tax credits to businesses and to verify whether or not promised jobs were actually created.

MADISON - “When do we return the economic development initiative and the checkbook to the control of a state agency” John Dunn of Mauston asked in a letter to Legislators. “The WEDC has again failed to follow state law and its own policies in awarding taxpayer-funded incentives to state companies. We need accountability to taxpayers.”

Not following the law, and not acting in a transparent and accountable way is a frequent criticism of the state’s economic development operations.

The Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC), created in 2011 as an independent authority, fell under criticism again with the recent release of another audit showing that WEDC failed to follow state laws and its own policies when awarding grants, loans and tax credits to businesses and failed to independently verify whether or not promised jobs were actually created.

In 2013, the Legislative Audit Bureau (LAB) found WEDC did not have policies to oversee, for example, the multi-million-dollar economic development grant and loan programs. In October 2013, WEDC officials reported to our Legislative Audit Committee they had addressed the problem.

But two years later, the new audit found while WEDC established policies, they weren’t following the grant and loan policies. For example, loans can be “forgivable” – meaning they aren’t paid back – only in “extraordinary circumstances”. But the audit found in FY 2013-14 two-thirds of the loans in one program were determined to be “forgivable”. In another case a taxpayer-subsidized loan was “forgiven” to a company unlikely to create full-time jobs – a requirement of the loan program.

Similar circumstances existed in the state’s business tax credit programs. Credits are awarded to companies to offset taxes owed to the state. In some cases tax credits are “refundable” meaning if the company owes less in taxes than the credit, the state “refunds” or sends taxpayer money to the company.

Auditors found examples of officials not following established rules for tax credits, like not determining if the project would happen without the tax credit; awarding credits without determining if the company’s tax liability fell within the law limiting credits to 125% of the companies tax liability; and instances of awards made without required financial information.

State law also requires that a portion of tax credits must go to rural and small businesses. In July 2014, the WEDC board revised its own policies to eliminate this requirement – in direct conflict with the state law.

Several of these problems were a repeat of a previous audit.

In another case WEDC awarded tax credits to an Illinois company under the Jobs Tax Credit program in conflict with state law that required activities funded by this program to occur in Wisconsin. Auditors wrote, “The business would be awarded tax credits in amounts based on the wages they paid to their employees while working in Illinois, and such amount would increase the longer the jobs remained in Illinois.” As of December, Wisconsin awarded two Illinois businesses $53,678 in tax credits.

Enterprise Zone and Jobs Tax Credits are refundable and they cost us a lot. The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau reported the cost of just these two programs was $42 million last year. In another report, the LFB noted that Wisconsin contracted with companies for $352.5 million in tax credits over three years.

Does the substantial state money given to these companies result in any economic activity that would not already exist? This question remains unanswered with the most recent audit.

State law requires WEDC to verify jobs created, retained, and if contractually specified wage requirements are met. A previous audit found WEDC did not conduct verification. This recent audit found that even during site visits to companies, officials failed to review payroll records to independently verify jobs. Without information on wages and jobs, it’s impossible to know if the hundreds of millions in state dollars going to companies accomplished anything.

All of this adds up to one inescapable conclusion: WEDC is a failure. With Wisconsin job growth in the lower third among all states, it is time we reevaluate our state economic development policies. The first step must be putting hundreds of millions in state economic development expenses once again under the accountability and transparency rules of the rest of state government.

It can be difficult for legislators to know the full effect of cuts without the critical input of citizens. Senator Kathleen Vinehout writes about how citizen input provided her with details about the effect of cuts in the DNR budget.

MADISON - “Why is it I keep hearing more about what’s in the governor’s budget?” the woman asked me. “Don’t you see it all at once and then decide what to do?”

It can be difficult for legislators to know the full effect of cuts without the critical input of citizens.

For example, news of cuts to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) made its way to western Wisconsin. Constituents communicated back to me the effect of these cuts. Through emails, phone calls and office visits I was able to piece together the real effect of a few lines of DNR budget cuts.

County conservation staff assists locals in protecting water resources and rehabilitating lost habitat. For example, last summer I was delighted to attend the “opening” of a rehabilitated trout stream in Buffalo County. While only Mother Nature can create a trout stream, a hard-working coalition of people made possible the restoration of habitat to bring spawning trout back to Buffalo County.

There are dozens of best practices farmers can use to protect waterways and keep nutrients where they belong – on the crops. Investing in the assistance farmers need to be good land and water stewards is an investment that will pay off for future generations.

One way to accomplish change in the quality of our waterways is to engage groups of farmers through a process known as farmer-led councils. This water quality enhancement process focuses energy of many community members in a transparent and democratic process. But to be successful, projects need a dedicated coordinator. This role falls to UW Extension staff funded in part through a line in the DNR budget called nonpoint source contracts.

When I first saw this budget line, I imagined contracts to private industry. Only through emails, phone calls, office visits and more phone calls did I realize the full extent of the decision to eliminate these funds. Further, I began to understand the value of farmer-led watershed councils and the important role conservation and extension staff play in coordinating the work of many community groups and levels of government.

Residents of Dunn and Barron Counties are working hard to restore Lake Menomin and Tainter Lake. Restoration efforts are enhanced by the Red Cedar River Water Quality Partnership, made up of 14 different groups including businesses, Wisconsin Farmers Union, nonprofits and local residents through their lake association. But without the coordination of UW extension staff, the partnership would not be effective.

I received a letter and office visits from Dunn County Board Chair Steve Rasmussen who told me about the work to “mitigate the pollution of the watershed and algae blooms” in the lakes.

Chair Rasmussen wrote, “Elimination of these two positions would be a major setback in a multi-county/multi-municipality effort to improve the health of the Red Cedar River Watershed…The health of the Red Cedar River is of critical importance to the citizens of Dunn County.”

Later I spoke with Mr. Rasmussen who told me 68% of all pollution in the Red Cedar came from agriculture. Farmer-led initiatives were an effective way to address nonpoint source pollution. Farmers talk with each other. They learn from each other. Sometimes folks will more readily accept new practices if they see their neighbors doing it.

Cutting conservation and extension staff comes at a critical time for the Red Cedar and watersheds across the state. I spoke to a man with intimate knowledge of land and water conservation, Jim VandenBrook, the executive director of Wisconsin Land and Water Conservation Association. He said “The facts are clear: water quality has progressively gotten worse since the 1990s; Great Lakes Initiative money is disappearing; DNR does not have the staff to do education. We are the educators for DNR.”

In our discussion about the work of the conservation and extension staff Jim noted the watershed partners “are all worried all our work is going by the wayside.”

Indeed. The partners know why we work so hard to protect land and water.

Thank you to all who wrote or called. Your input is critical for Wisconsin’s future. In the words of the ancient proverb, “We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”.

Why doesn’t the press cover what’s happening with refundable tax credits? This week Sen. Kathleen Vinehout writes about tax credits – the difference between non-refundable and refundable tax credits, the impact on the budget and Wisconsin taxpayers.

MADISON - “Why doesn’t the press cover what’s happening with refundable tax credits?” I asked the journalist. We were chatting about what I found in the state budget.

“Because the press doesn’t understand them,” she told me.

“Doesn’t understand them?” I thought. “There has to be an easy way to describe what’s happening...”

Imagine if you had no state tax taken out of your paycheck. You filed your tax return but you owed nothing. Now imagine the state sent you a refund check. Wow!

This is like a refundable tax credit. A company owes little to nothing in taxes but gets a check back from the state - cash from the taxpayers of Wisconsin.

Tax credits are different than deductions on your income tax form. The credit is subtracted dollar for dollar from the tax you owe - simple subtraction. You owe $1,000. You have a $500 credit. You now owe $500.

But what if your credit was $10,300,000? Under a refundable tax credit you would end up with a check for $10,299,000.

According to the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau (LFB) Wisconsin has two refundable tax credit programs: “Enterprise Zone Tax Credits” and “Jobs Tax Credits.” The “Enterprise Zone” used to refer to a designated place in which eligible businesses received tax credits for economic activity. In recent years it morphed into a credit to designated companies for jobs created and retained, training, capital expenditures and purchases from Wisconsin vendors.

A recent publication from the LFB details the 18 recent recipients of “Enterprise Zone Awards”. The table below is in millions of dollars:

Mercury Marine $65.0

Kohl’s Corporation $62.5

Quad/Graphics $46.0

Oshkosh Corporation $35.0

W Solar Group $28.0

Fincantieri Marine Group $28.0

Bucyrus $20.0

Uline $18.6

Kestrel Aircraft Company $18.0

Plexus $15.0

Northstar Medical Radioisotopes $14.0

Amazon.com.dedc LLC $10.3

Weather Shield Manufacturing $8.0

The report also details five other designated “Enterprise Zones”: 1) Insinkerator; 2) Ashley Furniture; 3) Medline Industries, Inc.; 4) Trane; and 5) Exact Science. The LFB reported in January that Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC) had not yet entered into contracts with these five companies to finalize the amount awarded.

WEDC is authorized to designate up to 20 “Zones” and the Governor designates an additional ten “Zones” in the budget. The Administration estimates this action would have a ten-year price tag of $168.8 million for Wisconsin taxpayers.

The Governor also wants to take a nonrefundable tax credit (economic development tax credits) and convert it into a refundable tax credit. WEDC is currently authorized to spend $164.2 million on the “economic development tax credits”.

Why rush to create NEW refundable tax credits? Perhaps the Manufacturing and Ag Tax Credit has something to do with the rush. A late budget amendment in 2011 created this credit targeted at manufacturing companies. The tax credit takes tax rates for manufacturing and ag corporations down to .04% by 2016.

What happens if you owe less than 1% on your profits? Pretty soon your tax obligation is so small another tax credit isn’t help much. Step in the refundable tax credit. You owe nothing? You still get a check.

How much might these companies have paid if not for the tax credits slipped into the budget in 2011? The LFB estimated the fiscal impact of just the Manufacturing and Ag credit at $509 million in the coming budget.

So what’s lost to Wisconsin taxpayers when the companies owing little to nothing in taxes cash their refundable tax credit checks?

School funding reform for one – the manufacturing tax credit money would more than cover changes in the school funding formula and hold harmless the wealthier suburban schools. The University of Wisconsin System for another – the credits awarded in the table above would more than cover the Governor’s proposed university system cuts.

Fixing things like the state parks, Wisconsin Public TV and Radio, Family Care and IRIS could be done with the money given in credits to just Plexus. Dollars headed to Uline could instead fund SeniorCare and the School Violence Prevention Program.

Decisions made to give dollars away to profitable corporations have a big impact on future choices.

Senator Kathleen Vinehout writes about some of the myths that are circulating about the Wisconsin state budget. A popular myth is Governor Walker has spending under control, but did you know the state owes $600 million more than when Governor Doyle left office or that the 2015-17 state budget spends $4.76 billion more than the last?

MADISON - “I’m okay with the cuts,” the man wrote me. “It’s shameful to pass debt on to our children.” In the man’s message, he implies a common misconception about Wisconsin – there is no state debt.

Wisconsin owes a lot of money. The state budget proposes that we borrow even more money. The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau (LFB) reported in January that the state owed about $13.8 billion. This is slightly less than the previous year, but almost $600 million more than when Governor Doyle left office.

The conservative Tax Foundation reported in 2011 Wisconsin ranked 18th of 50 states in terms of the worst state debt per person ($4,013). In 2013, Wisconsin ranked 16th of 50 states ($4,044 per person). Wisconsin is headed the wrong direction in paying off the debt.

The Governor is proposing a great deal more borrowing in the new budget. Of greatest concern is the borrowing to pay for roads and bridges. The LFB estimates by the end of the coming budget almost a quarter of every dollar in transportation will be spent on debt payments.

Adding to future debt is the Governor’s proposal to build a stadium for the Bucks. The LFB estimates the interest alone on this proposal exceeds $400 million using the plan proposed by the Governor. Final payments are estimated to be in fiscal year 2046-47.

I’d say that’s passing debt on to our grandchildren.

Another common budget myth is the Governor paid all the debt bills coming due. To answer that myth – the Governor is not paying about $108 million in debt payments coming due this year.

In order to free up cash, governors of both political stripes did not make debt payments. Governors Doyle and McCallum did not make debt payments during downturns in the economy. The largest delayed debt payments were under Governor Walker in the 2011-13 legislative session in which over $550 million were delayed.

I imagine the reason the Governor delayed making debt payment this year was to free up cash to cover a deficit in the current budget; which brings us to another budget myth.

A popular myth is Governor Walker has spending under control. But spending in the current budget outpaced revenue.

In February of this year the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance analyzed three factors leading to an imbalance between revenue and spending.

“Tax cuts, the technical college aid jump, and soft tax collections led to revenues once again falling short of expenditures. The shortfall was $261 million last year and could grow to as large as $800 million this year, which would be the largest gap in over 20 years.”

These problems continue going forward. Using estimates released by the LFB last month, spending is estimated to outpace revenue in the next budget by over a billion in the first year and nearly $700 million in the second year.

The Legislature is required by the state Constitution to submit a balanced budget to the Governor. Therefore, when the budget passes in June, spending will be trimmed or revenues enhanced to deal with this imbalance.

Another common myth related to spending is that the Governor is spending less money in this new budget than in prior budgets.

The truth is the 2015-17 state budget spends $4.76 billion more than the last.

At $74.7 billion this budget is the largest in state history. That said, because of inflation, nearly every new budget is larger than the previous one.

But to say this budget is smaller than the last is false.

One reason the myth of a smaller budget exists is because some estimates of the size of the coming budget did not include all University of Wisconsin spending. Of course, to make an apples-to-apples comparison we need to include all the spending from the UW as we have in the past.

I hope this clears up a few of the common budget myths. If you want to learn more, please come to one of my budget town hall meetings. Check my website for dates, times and locations of upcoming town hall meetings

This week, Senator Kathleen Vinehout writes about a recent Eau Claire listening session held regarding the State Budget proposal.

EAU CLAIRE, WI - “This is not my cup of tea,” the farmer said quietly as he moved up to the microphone at the Eau Claire budget hearing.

“I’m a UW grad. I’m a farmer. I’m a tech college grad. My kids went to public school. There’s a lot I could talk about today. But I’m here today for Craig, my son. He loves where he lives.”

“I don’t want to lose that,” said Craig sitting between his parents. Craig had surgery to remove brain tumors at 3 years old. His mind is quick and his words are heartfelt.

“IRIS gives Craig the opportunity to be as independent as he can be, to do the things he enjoys” said his dad. “It helps allow my wife and me to work and be taxpayers.” IRIS is a self-directed option under Medicaid.

Many others spoke about the long-term consequences of changing the health programs for the elderly and disabled.

“People like Judy cannot support themselves,” said Mort, of his disabled 41-year-old daughter, “cannot lobby and cannot speak for themselves…they certainly do not need their programs to be seriously damaged.”

“We take care of others. We take care of people less fortunate,” Glory told listening legislators. “That’s who we are.”

A Menomonie School Board member shared his concerns about cuts to local schools.

“I wasn’t going to speak... But I can’t stand by with what I see happening. Our teachers pay a lot for their health insurance. We’ve been using our ‘budget tools’ all along. The current proposal will cost the Menomonie School District $1 million. Can’t the governor figure out schools’ costs go up but we don’t get any additional money? No increase in the first year? Some back in the second year but it doesn’t make any sense to put it all in school levy credit. That doesn’t go to schools. How do we keep young people in Wisconsin if we keep cutting?”

He continued, “We need good news sources. WPR (Wisconsin Public Radio) offers people a choice they can’t get anywhere else. News is less balanced these days. We need a balanced source of news. And efficiencies? I’m all for that. But to put banking and credit unions into an agency that regulates tattoo parlors? I have nothing against tattoo parlors. It just doesn’t make sense. There’s a reason why we have careful regulations over banks and credit unions.”

During the presentation before the public testimony, I talked about refundable tax credits - state checks given to large businesses that owed nothing in taxes. “It’s like no state taxes taken out of your paycheck, but when you file taxes you get a check in the mail,” I told the group.

Chris, of the Eau Claire school board, did some quick math before she came forward. “You know those refundable tax credits you talked about?” she asked me. “They are the same dollar amount as the cuts to the Eau Claire School District over the last 16 years.” She handed me a three-page, double-sided list of 210 separate items reflecting the cuts made by the district.

“Even if the revenue limit is increased to $150 per student,” she continued. “We will still have a $3 million hole. Now it’s about $5 million.”

Many people spoke about the long-term consequences of cuts to the UW. One Eau Claire City Councilman said the city calculated the cuts would take $7.6 million out of Eau Claire’s economy. He talked about the budget process in Eau Claire and encouraged legislators to look at a more open, deliberative process at the state level to reflect the views of all the people.

“One of our goals on the City Council is to create a community that is enticing for people to come to Eau Claire.”

“Take the policy out of the budget. There is no way these things could ever be done on their own. No legislator would put their name on these proposals…. This is an entire state’s budget. It affects all the people… people need to have a bigger say.”

Thanks to all who came and shared concerns. Your advocacy is making a real difference.

This week, Sen. Kathleen Vinehout writes about a bill pending in committee that would preempt local control of computer app-driven ride share Transportation Network Companies (TNCs). Companies like ‘Uber’, a San Francisco based company that provides services in Wisconsin, are behind the bill to prohibit local governments from setting rules related to TNCs.

Senator Kathleen Vinehout joined her legislative colleagues at a press conference today announcing the 13,500 petition signatures gathered to Save SeniorCare. Governor Walker wants to cut SeniorCare funding and force participants to sign-up for MediCare part D. She turned in over 1,000 signatures gathered by her office alone. The petitions were delivered to the Governor and legislative leaders.

MADISON - Today, I was happy to join several of my legislative colleagues, including Assembly Democratic Caucus Chair Andy Jorgensen (D- Milton) and Senate Democratic Assistant Leader Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay), at a press conference announcing the number of petition signatures gathered calling on the Legislature to Save SeniorCare.

Governor Walker included a provision in his budget to cut SeniorCare funding by $15 million and require all SeniorCare participants to sign up for Medicare Part D. Thousands of Wisconsinites are united in opposing the governor’s proposed changes to SeniorCare.

I added over 1,000 signatures gathered by my office from people in the 31st Senate District and surrounding communities to the more than 13,500 petitions calling on the Republican majority to save SeniorCare. The petition signatures were delivered to the offices of the governor, legislative leaders and the co-chairs of the Joint Finance Committee.

The people of Wisconsin told us in no uncertain terms, Save SeniorCare! People all over the state are calling on the legislature to preserve SeniorCare just as it is with no fee increase or limitations on enrollment.

SeniorCare is a cost effective Wisconsin invention that helps seniors of modest income afford prescription drug coverage. Swapping out SeniorCare for expensive, confusing Medicare Part D makes no sense.

I want to thank the office of the people of the 31st Senate District who turned in over 1,000 signatures on petitions to Save SeniorCare. Thank you to everyone who circulated and signed the petitions. Your citizen advocacy makes a real difference.

This week, Sen. Kathleen Vinehout writes about details in Governor Walkers’s budget bill that include Wisconsin-Minnesota Tuition Reciprocity, the Educational Approval Board and the Government Accountability Board. She believes these provisions should be removed from the budget bill and deliberated publicly on their merits.

MADISON - “I didn’t know that was a part of the state budget,” the parent told me.

That was the reciprocity agreement between Wisconsin and Minnesota to allow students from across state lines to attend public universities at in-state tuition costs. This arrangement saves students and parents out-of-state tuition costs.

The governor’s budget removes state funds to pay for the tuition reciprocity program and tells University officials the program is optional.

Tuition costs vary at universities. Non-residents can pay as much as triple the tuition of in-state students. Generally the UW system is less expensive for in-state tuition so the program does cost Wisconsin.

Without funds in the state budget to pay for the program and in the face of $300 million in state cuts, it is unlikely officials will continue the agreement between the two states.

Eliminating the tuition reciprocity program will significantly increase tuition over a four-year degree for more than 20,000 students in Wisconsin and Minnesota.

Also affecting certain college students and their families is the governor’s proposal to abolish the Educational Approval Board (EAB). This board sets standards for, and examines details of curriculum and facilities of, the for-profit colleges operating in Wisconsin.

Operating much in the background, the EAB currently inspects for-profit higher education schools, examines such areas as curriculum, professor qualifications, facilities, equipment. The board enforces rules to prevent fraud, misrepresentation and false advertising. The EAB sets standards for information schools must provide to students.

The board also protects students from schools that would take tuition payments and not deliver the promised education. Many of these schools exist on-line in other states. Students participate in classes on-line and communicate with professors and students thousands of miles away.

Eliminating the EAB also changes laws related to enforcement of words that protect the University of Wisconsin and the state Technical Colleges. One of the board’s functions is to stop the unscrupulous for-profit school operator from appropriating the words “Wisconsin”, “state”, “college” or “university”.

The governor’s proposal would move a few of the EAB functions to a new state agency called the Department of Financial Institutions and Professional Standards. Under the governor’s plan complaints about for-profit colleges would be handled by the Department of Ag, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP).

The effect of this agency shuffling and the elimination of the EAB are to rubber stamp at the state level any “accredited” for-profit “college” or “university.” Placing enforcement for fraud on the already overworked staff at the Consumer Protection Division of DATCP is a way to keep the appearance of consumer protection without the real teeth that exist in current law.

Another function of state government that protects people – this time from unscrupulous public officials – is the Government Accountability Board (GAB).

Created in bipartisan action in 2007, the GAB oversees elections, lobbying, ethics of public officials and campaign finance. The agency has come under scrutiny by leaders of both parties, which to me indicates the board is doing its job.

Recently the Legislative Audit Bureau released an audit showing among other findings, the GAB had embarked on setting up a new computer system to upgrade its many technological functions. The governor’s budget would centralize all these information technology (IT) functions in the Department of Administration (DOA).

The DOA, often called by insiders the Department of ALL, is the right hand of the governor; his political appointee oversees all of its functions.

At risk is the integrity of the state’s voter file including new voter registrations, provisional and absentee votes, updated poll lists and the canvas reporting system used by clerks to report election returns. Also at risk is the reporting system for disclosing campaign donations, lobbying activity and the financial relationships of elected or appointed officials.

Moving the computer functions of the nonpartisan GAB into the DOA is tantamount to setting the fox to guard the henhouse.

Many governors slip major changes into the budget bill to avoid public scrutiny. It’s the job of the people’s representatives –the legislature - to act now and get rid of these changes.

This week Senator Kathleen Vinehout writes about the advocacy of hundreds of Wisconsin citizens in support of Family Care and the IRIS programs. Gov. Walker’s budget proposes significant changes to these programs and the adverse impacts of the changes were shared in personal stories from people all over the state.

MADISON - I remember when I first met a man I’ll call ‘Ron’. He came to my office with his caregiver. He couldn’t speak but used a speech synthesizer and an iPad to introduce himself. He was joined by several friends – all in wheelchairs – who told me their inspiring stories of independence.

Ron passionately detailed how his caregiver assisted him with everyday activities we take for granted. He wanted me to work for funding so he could pay his caregiver a living wage. Wages for care workers are very low and have been for years.

Fast-forward a few years. Ron and his friends joined hundreds of citizens in the Capitol to advocate for critical long-term care programs. Many of the visitors had never been the Capitol and never met with a legislator. These citizen lobbyists were advocating for programs that provide them or their family member with health and independence.

The governor’s budget proposal would likely turn Wisconsin’s Family Care system over to a large for-profit insurance company in a no-bid contract. Wisconsin’s IRIS program would be eliminated. Opponents are concerned the insurance company would deny services and eliminate caregivers.

Parents, family members, caregivers, neighbors and participants in the Family Care and IRIS programs called on legislators to stop the governor’s proposed changes. These people gave a strong voice to the often voiceless participants in the long-term care portion of the state’s Medicaid program.

Family Care is organized around regional non-profit Medical Care Organizations (MCOs) that oversee services for over 40,000 frail elderly, developmentally and physically disabled. In 2011 the Legislative Audit Bureau reported that nearly 60% of Family Care participants were able to stay in their own homes. IRIS is a fee-for-service option that establishes a small budget participants can self-direct to certain services and caregivers. Another 11,000 people use this option. Without these services most people would be forced to reside in expensive institutions.

Instead many individuals live more independently in Group Homes. An owner of a Black River Falls group home recently contacted me. She was forced to close one home because of previous budget cuts. She now worries about the other home she and her dairy farm family operates.

“I am scared for our disabled and mentally ill people, and I don't want to see the MCO's go away. They provide such wonderful care for these people! The teams I work with are amazing people, and they sincerely care about these clients, it's not just a job. Several of the team members have given me their cell phone numbers in case of issues outside of business hours, they do not get paid for this. Please help keep these MCO's intact: the people need them.”

Family situations are all unique. The self-directed IRIS program allows flexibility in services based on those unique circumstances. I was contacted by an Eau Claire County couple who maintain their independence with the help of IRIS. The husband is a Gulf War vet; his wife of 16 years has severe disabilities because of a brain tumor.

“If IRIS loses funding, Karen and I will be separated, her to a nursing home and me out of a job and homeless. Can you help us please?”

Tammy McKelvie recently shared with me how IRIS changed her son Noah’s life and “gave him a voice.” IRIS allowed her son to live independently despite the fact he needs constant care.

“Noah may never reach the level of independence most people strive for but at least let him have choices over the parts of his life he can control. Let him be the architect to design blueprints to create a life of meaning."

“As human beings, none of us are totally independent. In some ways we are all interdependent upon each other and that is how it should be because we all live in society together."

Indeed. As Hubert Humphrey so eloquently said, “It was once said that the moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.”

As Farmers come in as part of Ag Day at the Capitol, they focus on parts of the state budget that hurt rural communities. That includes rural schools, conservation, on-farm research, the Natural Resources board, the spring Conservation Congress, funding for the U.W. Extension, 4H, and farm safety. Many wonder why the governor is doing away with needed services.

MADISON - “It’s very important that we are here today,” the farmer from Independence told me. “In fact, it’s more important that we be here than anywhere else.” Here was in my Capitol office. Local farmers were visiting as part of Ag Day at the Capitol.

The weather that day was dry and warm. It was perfect for getting early spring chores done. Instead, these farmers drove hundreds of miles to meet with their legislators.

They were on a mission to change parts of the state budget that hurt rural communities. The first thing on their mind – in every group that visited – was rural schools.

“What are you going to do about rural schools?” the Buffalo County man asked me. “Our local school has two referenda on the ballot in April – one to fix the furnace and other delayed improvements; another to continue to keep the school open”.

“See this binder?” I showed him a large binder full of pages with red and green Post-It notes. “This is the Cliff Note version of the budget: It’s over 500 pages.”

“Everything in red I’m trying to get rid of. Everything in green is money I’m trying to get for education, the UW and other cuts,” I explained. Red notes far outnumbered green ones. Changes to agriculture and conservation were among the notes I flagged in red.

We talked through the farmers’ problems: managing tillage, conservation, chemical applications and nutrient management – i.e. when to spread manure. Many of the management questions farmers had to answer were assisted by on-farm research.

The flagship system of on-farm research is Discovery Farms. At twenty farms across the state, scientists monitor details like water and nutrient flow, erosion and soil structure, to help farmers develop best practices.

Thousands of farmers and ag support folks visit Discovery Farms to learn first-hand from U.W. Extension staff, scientists and the farmers themselves. The research brings a steady stream of knowledge to help preserve land and protect water for all of us.

Farmers also strongly opposed taking away the power of the citizen Natural Resources and Ag Department boards. “We just got a farmer on the Natural Resources board,” one farmer said. “This takes away our voice,” said another.

We talked about spring Conservation Congress meetings. Folks gather by the hundreds in school gyms around the state. Anglers and hunters use wisdom they’ve gathered over decades to make recommendations related to conservation. For example: should the pan fish limit at the local lake be changed?

The vote goes to the state Conservation Congress board, made up of members elected by their neighbors, and on to the Natural Resources board. Policy is made from the votes of those affected by the decisions. But the governor’s proposal would eliminate the input of the Conservation Congress by taking away the power of the citizen Natural Resources Board.

Many farmers also served on town boards. More than once I heard about the governor’s proposal to take away towns’ ability to hire property assessors. “This just doesn’t make sense,” one farmer told me. “The counties don’t want to take over the assessors, the state hasn’t given money to do this. And we lose our powers.”

We talked through other farmer concerns including funding for U.W. Extension, 4H, and farm safety. The conversation came back to schools and education. “Our schools pay for the independent charter schools in Milwaukee. I don’t think that’s fair,” said one farmer. “My children already spend an hour and a quarter on the bus,” said another.

“You know I was just appointed to the environmental education board,” said a third. “I really don’t understand why the governor is doing away with environmental education. These programs help school kids learn about Wisconsin’s natural resources.

As he got up to leave one of the farmers gestured to my budget binder still sitting on the table. “I like the way you did that,” he said, referring to the red and green tabs.

“It’s a big budget with a lot of bad in it,” I nodded. “You’ve got to eat an elephant one bite at a time.”