Thursday March 28, 2024

An Independent Progressive Media Outlet

FacebookTwitterYoutube
Newsletter
News Feeds:

Progressive Thinking

Discussion with education and reason.

Wisconsin Elections: "Don’t Kill the Referees"

Posted by Kathleen Vinehout, State Senator 31st District
Kathleen Vinehout, State Senator 31st District
Kathleen Vinehout of Alma is an educator, business woman, and farmer who is now
User is currently offline
on Tuesday, 27 October 2015
in Wisconsin

packers-seahawks-refs-blown-callBipartisan is not nonpartisan. When the Packers play the Vikings, we don’t want each side to appoint half the referees. Sen. Vinehout reflects on the bills in the Legislature that would change Wisconsin’s campaign finance laws, the Government Accountability Board and ‘John Doe’ process.


MADISON - “Just do the right thing,” my doctor told me. We were discussing politics. We just finished reviewing the x-rays of my new hip replacement. My doctor wanted to offer a little advice to my colleagues in the Senate.

“People want you to think of them,” he said. “They don’t want you to make decisions on what’s best for the party – whoever’s in power. They want you to make the best decision for the people.

“The problem,” I told him, “is that the interest groups are pulling the parties further and further apart. They don’t want to compromise. It’s very hard for the leaders of both parties to say ‘No’ to their favorite interest group.”

Republicans are struggling to round up enough votes to pass a bill that dissolves the Government Accountability Board (GAB) and places elections and ethics under the control of boards appointed by political party leaders. Nonpartisan judges now oversee Wisconsin’s elections, ethics and lobbying. Strongly GOP allied groups, like Americans for Prosperity and Wisconsin Manufactures and Commerce are pushing the change.

Conservative groups also support bills that open the door to political jobs in our civil service system, opt political crimes out of ‘John Doe’ criminal investigations and allow unfettered and undisclosed money in campaigns.

Nonpartisan does not mean bipartisan. When the Packers play the Vikings we don’t want half the referees appointed by the Vikings and half by the Packers. They would never agree on what was pass interference. It is the same with elections. We want the calls made by judges in pinstripes, not wearing the colors of the two teams.

‘Do the right thing’ means looking at the facts and acting to fix problems that are identified but not acting to advance one party over the other ‘just because we can’.

Nonpartisan audits did indicate lapses in the GAB’s performance. Seldom is there an audited agency that does not need improvement in performance. Even the best refs make some bad calls.

Wisconsin lived through extraordinary changes in elections in the past few years. The GAB was at the center of effecting these changes. Unprecedented recall elections happened in 2011 and 2012. During this time GAB oversaw a statewide recount; a redrawing of legislative boundaries that ended in court; an on-again, off-again voter ID that also ended in court and the enactment of 31 separate pieces of legislation affected the agency.

Overall, auditors identified a dozen problems in an agency with 154 separate responsibilities. Lawmakers themselves created some of these problems. For example, auditors pointed out the agency did not complete all the administrative rules related to the training of clerks. The GAB responded that the content of the training for clerks kept changing because of 31 new laws. When the GAB asked the legislature and Department of Administration officials for additional staff, they were told, “No”.

Wisconsin has a decentralized election process: 1,853 municipal clerks and 72 county clerks conduct elections. Keeping clerks supported takes time and staff. The GAB used federal grant money to hire staff. The grant is running out. Lawmakers in the majority on the budget writing committee did not extend the positions beyond the current budget – leaving many GAB staff to wonder about their future.

In other controversial legislation, we see a similar pattern: some problems exist, but rather than tweak the law to fix the problems, conservative interest groups are pushing lawmakers to use the opportunity to tilt the system in favor of partisan advantage.

A hundred years of civil service ought to tell us the system should not be disbanded in favor of opening the door to political positions. Wisconsin’s century and a half old “John Doe” process of investigating crimes may need tweaking. But not allowing investigations of political crimes opens the door to corruption. Couple the “John Doe” bill with unfettered, undisclosed money in campaigns – another bill waiting for Senate action- and Wisconsin will return to the big money heydays of the late nineteenth century.

No voter has told me they want that result.

Tags: Untagged
Rate this blog entry
0 votes

America’s True Conservatives

Posted by Mike McCabe, Blue Jean Nation
Mike McCabe, Blue Jean Nation
Mike McCabe is the founder and president of Blue Jean Nation and author of Blue
User is currently offline
on Monday, 26 October 2015
in Wisconsin

MADISON - Look up the word conservative. Webster’s says the word means “tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions.”

On today’s American political landscape, the people who best fit that definition are those who describe themselves as progressives or liberals. For quite a few decades now, the ones wearing those largely interchangeable labels have been principally devoted to maintaining the status quo. They’ve focused on keeping the 81-year-old Social Security program and 50-year-old Medicare system safe and sound. They’ve tried (quite unsuccessfully) to protect the worker rights established by the 80-year-old National Labor Relations Act and the 77-year-old Fair Labor Standards Act. They resisted changes to the 1933 Glass-Steagall Actregulating banking, only to see the law gutted in 1999, which they believe caused the collapse of the U.S. economy in 2007 and the ensuing Great Recession. Their calls to restore Glass-Steagall’s protective wall between commercial and investment banking have been ignored ever since.

Contemporary progressive or liberal thinking is firmly rooted in the 20th Century. Over the past several decades, the list of new ideas or policy innovations for the 21st Century coming from the left is a terribly short one. Even the signature Democratic policy reform in recent memory – the Affordable Care Act – was borrowed from the right-wing Heritage Foundation and was known as Romneycare in Massachusetts before it became Obamacare nationally.

This is not to say that self-proclaimed conservatives and progressives have swapped places, with conservative forces becoming the engine of innovation for the 21st Century. If today’s progressives seem stuck in the 20th Century, conservatives of this day and age seem bound and determined to return us to the 19th. They not only are intent on rolling back the New Deal reforms enacted on the heels of the Great Depression, but also are working in places like Wisconsin to demolish century-old laws ranging from civil service protections against cronyism and political patronage to prohibitions against corporate political spending that were inspired by the trauma of the economic depression in the 1890s brought on by the excesses of the Gilded Age.

A big problem in American politics today is the absence of true progressive impulses. We have conservatives who call themselves progressives, and retrogressives who call themselves conservatives. The right is determined to turn the clock all the way back to the 1800s in so many ways, and the onslaught-weary left is willing to settle for keeping us in the 1900s. Missing is a forward-looking vision for what America can and should become in the 21st Century and the drive to get us there.

Tags: Untagged
Rate this blog entry
0 votes

Vos Bill Opens The Door On “Dark Money” In Campaigns

Posted by Kathleen Vinehout, State Senator 31st District
Kathleen Vinehout, State Senator 31st District
Kathleen Vinehout of Alma is an educator, business woman, and farmer who is now
User is currently offline
on Monday, 19 October 2015
in Wisconsin

robinvosSen. Kathleen Vinehout focuses on the campaign finance bills currently moving through the Legislature that favor the rich and well-connected candidates, and open the door to “dark money” contributions where who wrote the check is unknown.


MADISON - “This bill strengthens democracy because it allows more citizens to participate,” Assembly Speaker Robin Vos told the Wisconsin State Journal. Vos is the lead author of a bill to overhaul the state’s campaign finance law.

Wisconsin was an early leader in campaign finance reforms of 1911 that limited money in campaigns and provided “rigorous penalties” including disqualifying candidates and sending them to prison. Ironically, the effort over 100 years ago was led by legislative Republicans.

Today’s Assembly leader may advocate for more democracy, but the bill he authored favors the rich and those well-connected candidates. I fear the bill’s effect will be more negative ads, less voter knowledge, more out-of-state contributions, more centralized control by legislative leaders, and an increasingly dispirited electorate.

The bill opens the door to so-called “dark money” or contributions not reported by who wrote the check. Loopholes created in the bill make it unclear which political action committees (PAC) or independent expenditure groups must report donors and campaign spending.

Unlimited campaign contributions are allowed in a host of new areas. Unlimited donations can be made to a PAC or to two new political committee types for a recall or a referendum. This makes me concerned more money and outside groups will try to affect local elections and referendum.

Corporations cannot contribute to candidate campaigns but corporations, labor unions and Native American Tribes can make unlimited contributions to independent expenditure groups, a referendum committee or a special fund for non-candidate contribution purposes run by a political party or a legislative committee (run by legislative leaders).

In addition, unlimited dollars can be moved from a political party or legislative campaign committee to a candidate. The latter increases the hold leaders have over legislative members. The former increases the power of the political party to pick candidates.

Donation limits to candidates’ campaigns are doubled. For example, the current limit for a single individual over a four-year Senate term is $1,000. This limit becomes $2,000 under Vos’ bill.

Who benefits from adding more money to campaigns? An analysis by Nick Heynen of the Wisconsin State Journal, shows that since 2008, $17.8 million in donations that reach the maximum limit were contributed to candidates for statewide office. Almost 60% of this money came from outside Wisconsin.

Donors would not be required to report their employer. This makes it difficult to track the relationship between a company that receives grants or tax credits from the state and donations of their employees to candidates.

Removed from the statute is the purpose of campaign finance laws: The legislature finds and declares that our democratic system of government can be maintained only if the electorate is informed. It further finds that excessive spending on campaigns for public office jeopardizes the integrity of elections….When the true source of support or extent of support is not fully disclosed, or when a candidate becomes overly dependent upon large private contributors, the democratic process is subject to a potential corrupting influence.

Perhaps Speaker Vos found his bill a bit in conflict with the real purpose of campaign finance laws. If he truly wants to improve democracy by increasing citizens’ participation in campaigns, I wonder if he’d join me in supporting an amendment to his bill suggested in the testimony of Matt Rothschild, the executive director of Wisconsin Democracy Campaign.

In a March hearing, Mr. Rothschild cited one way to amplify the voice of small campaign donors was to use public financing to match – by five times – the donation of anyone who gave $175 or less to a candidate. This sounds like a great way to strengthen democracy.

I haven’t met a single voter who thinks we need more out of state or dark money in Wisconsin elections. Without regard to political affiliation, people think there is already too much influence on elections from outside Wisconsin.

Every donation to influence an election needs to be reported in a way citizens can see who is behind the nasty ads. Not only should groups disclose their donors, they should register every patriotic or feel good name used to influence elections.

We don’t need more dark money. We need more democracy and the best way to get that is to let the light shine in.

Tags: Untagged
Rate this blog entry
0 votes

Putting Political Parties Back in Charge of Elections and Ethics?

Posted by Kathleen Vinehout, State Senator 31st District
Kathleen Vinehout, State Senator 31st District
Kathleen Vinehout of Alma is an educator, business woman, and farmer who is now
User is currently offline
on Tuesday, 13 October 2015
in Wisconsin

republicanRepublican politicians in Madison want to replace the Government Accountability Board (GAB) with partisan appointed commissions. The GAB has received national recognition and needs to remain non-partisan. The legislation is rapidly moving through the Legislature.


MADISON - “Wisconsin is the only state with a truly nonpartisan board structure,” wrote Professor Daniel Tokaji in 2013. The Ohio State law professor hailed the Government Accountability Board as “America’s Top Model” of nonpartisan elections.

Clean elections and corruption free elected officials are goals most of us share. Yet few states have laws that truly create a nonpartisan watchdog to assure public confidence. Wisconsin is blessed to be a national leader.

“The United States is an outlier among democratic countries when it comes to the institutions charged with running our democratic elections,” Professor Tokaji wrote in the UC Irvine Law Review. He continued, “There is one conspicuous exception to the partisan character of state election administration: Wisconsin’s Government Accountability Board (GAB).”

The GAB and its staff have received several awards and accolades.

In January of 2014 the Presidential Commission on Election Administration cited the GAB as a model for improving accessibility to polling places for the disabled. Their frequent and unannounced audits of polling places identified 10,488 issues for disabled voters during the study period April 2011 to April 2013 as reported in a 2014 Legislative Audit Bureau report.

In April of 2014 the PEW Charitable Trusts ranked Wisconsin third in the US for election performance. The nonpartisan group measured elections 17 different ways including ballots rejected, post-election audits, voter turnout, registration rate, waiting time to vote, online voter education materials. PEW researchers reported only Minnesota had a higher voter participation rate than Wisconsin in the 2012 presidential race. Researchers also reported Wisconsin had dramatically improved its data since 2008 – the year the GAB began operations.

These accolades are but a few received by the only nonpartisan state watchdog of elections in the United States. Adding further to the evidence of a well-run government accountability agency, the Legislative Audit Bureau recently released an analysis of complaints and investigations conducted by the GAB and found no major concerns with the activities of the agency. Auditors recommended a quicker resolution to complaints and the GAB responded with a new computer system to track complaints.

As a reward for excellent service to the people of the state, two western Wisconsin legislators, Representatives Dean Knutson and Kathy Bernier, introduced legislation to kill the watchdog and fire its long serving administrator. It is widely believed this legislation is partisan “payback” for investigations in which the GAB was involved.

The bill replaces the nonpartisan judges of the GAB with two partisan appointed commissions to control elections and ethics and creates a partisan confirmed administrator of the commissions.

Notably, the bill restricts the ability of the new commissions to initiate investigations including prohibiting any member of the commissions from submitting a sworn complaint to initiate an investigation. The bill limits money to conduct an investigation to that specified by the legislature – and makes no release of funds. The effect of curtailing access to money is to shut down investigations of illegal activities related to elections, ethics and lobbying.

Currently the GAB has access to funds needed to conduct an ethics or elections violation. The bill forces the commissions to come back to the legislature to beg for money needed to investigate – leaving the lawmakers holding the purse and, essentially, starving the watchdog.

Any current employee or investigation would be reviewed by the politically appointed Secretary of Administration who would direct the transition to the new system, deciding which employees, assets, contracts and other matters are transferred to which of the two new commissions.

The proposed law would be in place for the 2016 elections.

In less than a week the bill has gone from invitation for cosponsors to a full joint hearing – providing citizens with what is likely to be the only opportunity for testimony.

Professor Tokaji concluded his article saying, “the GAB’s experience therefore provides a ray of hope for those of us who believe that the United States should move away from its partisan system of election administration.”

The people of Wisconsin now appear to be the last ray of hope remaining to save the GAB. Please let lawmakers know you want to keep our nonpartisan system of elections and ethics. Our democracy is at stake!

Tags: Untagged
Rate this blog entry
0 votes

Republican Agenda in Madison Full of Misguided Priorities

Posted by Gordon Hintz Press, Rep. 54th Assembly District
Gordon Hintz Press, Rep. 54th Assembly District
Gordon Hintz (D-Oshkosh), State Representative 54th Assembly District, is a memb
User is currently offline
on Thursday, 08 October 2015
in Wisconsin

walkerMADISON - In August, the Marquette University Law School poll showed 60 percent of voters in Wisconsin think Governor Walker "doesn't care about people like them”. Based on the current Republican Legislature’s priorities, it is not hard to understand why.

The Legislature’s focus should always reflect challenges facing the people of our state. Based upon the Republicans’ fall agenda, those issues are 1) disbanding the Government Accountability Board, Wisconsin’s campaign finance and elections watchdog, 2) removing anti-corruption protections from civil service laws, and 3) criminalizing life-saving research that uses any cells derived from fetal tissue.

These self-serving power grabs and extreme ideology are not even on the radar of most Wisconsinites. Many of my constituents’ most common challenges have to do with insecurity over future opportunity for themselves and their families. They ask me to address the real problems that make it hard for them to get ahead. Problems such as stagnant wages, the overwhelming cost of child care, and out-of-control student loan debt.

Wisconsin’s job growth has lagged behind the nation over the past four and half years. To make things worse, many of the new jobs are in low wage positions. Low wages make it harder to afford housing, food, child care and higher education. Low wages also reduce consumer spending (one of the main drivers of the economy) and increase the need for government assistance.

Declining income is not a new or temporary problem in Wisconsin. But if many of our new jobs created are lower wage, it would make sense to consider a minimum wage increase. It has been six years since minimum wage earners got a raise in Wisconsin. Raising the minimum wage to $10.10 would increase wages for over half a million Wisconsin workers, the average age of which is 35 years old. Yet as many other states take action, our Republican led Legislature won’t even hold a public hearing on a bill to gradually increase the minimum wage to $10.10 over three years.

Another huge challenge for working families is affordable child care. The annual cost of infant care in Wisconsin is $10,775. This is significant considering that a single mother’s median income in Wisconsin is $23,568, while a two-parent family is $79,589. For families who depend on low and moderate-income jobs, the high cost of child care can wipe out their income to the point where it is cheaper just to stay home.

I am a co-sponsor of a bill that creates a tax credit for expenses for daycare services. Depending on income, the credit may be worth up to a maximum amount of $3,000/year if there is one qualifying individual and up to $6,000/year if there are two or more. This bill would make child care more affordable, allowing parents who want to get back to work to return to their jobs.

Student loan debt remains a massive obstacle for many former students and their families. The high cost of student loan debt has an impact on all of us. Wisconsin currently has over 800,000 people with outstanding student loan debt, which prevents many from buying a home or saving money for the future. There is a Democratic bill that would allow borrowers to refinance their student loans, providing some relief from this crushing debt. This should be a priority.

Many of the challenges facing people in our state do not have a simple answer. But these challenges deserve our attention and consideration. These issues should be priorities for our Legislature. Unfortunately, Republicans seem more interested in serving themselves than truly serving the public that elected them.

 

Tags: Untagged
Rate this blog entry
0 votes
Tweet With Us:

Share

Copyright © 2024. Green Bay Progressive. Designed by Shape5.com