Progressive Thinking

Members of Gov. Scott Walker's administration joined with the bill's sponsor as the only testifiers in support of the measure that is moving quickly through the Legislature. Proposal would eliminate objective civil service exams, replacing them with a review of "qualifications" by administration appointees, and cripple workplace protections for our state workers.

MADISON - Today, the Senate Labor and Government Reform Committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 285 to change the state’s civil service system. It must have seemed like deja vu, from French literally "already seen", to state workers still smarting from Act 10 in 2011.

The bill comes four years after the Legislature passed Gov. Scott Walker's proposal, known as Act 10, that effectively eliminated collective bargaining for most public workers, including state employees. Walker said then that he wasn't interested in making changes to the civil service system.

Today's public hearing was nothing more than a parade of Walker’s political appointees pushing for gutting civil service protections and doubling down on politicizing our state workforce.

The proposal would eliminate objective civil service exams, replacing them with a subjective review of "qualifications" by administration appointees, and cripple workplace protections for our state’s civil servants. These changes open the door to hiring partisan political hacks and making party loyalty a qualification for a state job, the very hiring practices that civil service was established 110 years ago to root out.

A parade of State workers testified the Republican-backed bill that would make it easier to hire and fire public employees, saying the proposed overhaul of Wisconsin's 110-year-old civil service system would lead to political patronage and cronyism.

Members of Gov. Scott Walker's administration joined with the bill's sponsor as the only testifiers in support of the measure that is moving quickly through the Legislature. The Senate Labor and Government Reform Committee hearing came just one week after the bill was publicly released.

"The legislation's not needed and does not address problems that are alleged to exist," said Jim Thiel, a former 40-year state employee representing the Association of Career Employees, which advocates for maintaining the civil service system. "This will lead to a patronage system."

An appeal that fell upon deaf ears from the Republican majority.

Democratic Sen. Chris Larson, of Milwaukee, said the bill would gut the current system and lead to buddies of politicians in power getting jobs whether they're qualified or not.

"What's to prevent patronage? What's the check? Right now we have a neutral exam to make sure that doesn't happen," said Larson, a member of the committee that held the hearing. "This is the elimination of good government. This is just another step in that."

In a statement released after the hearing, Sen. Larson went on to say:

“Make no mistake, Wisconsinites are not fooled by what Walker and the GOP are trying to do in our state – consolidate power and fast-track corruption. In fact, we already have proof of what happens when we throw out strong hiring standards and replace them with subjective evaluations by looking at the failed Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC). The quasi-private state agency does not use the same civil service standards as other state agencies. As a result, corruption and high turnover has run rampant within WEDC since its creation.

“Walker’s Wisconsin already has the fastest shrinking middle class in the U.S., is last in the nation for new business startups, and lags in job creation. Wisconsin families face real challenges every day and are tired of the cronyism and political power grabs by Republican leaders who are focused on undermining our open records laws, eliminating government accountability, and shielding themselves from criminal investigations.

“My Democratic colleagues and I are listening to the hardworking neighbors in our communities. Rather than looking for ways to tear down Wisconsin workers, Democrats are focused on strengthening our middle class, boosting family wages, and ensuring greater retirement security.

“Unfortunately, this bill is more political Snake Oil being pushed at Walker’s carnival of corruption; it fails to remedy the employment problems created by this administration, and poisons our heritage of good government.”

Gov. Walker and GOP lawmakers in Madison want to change the state’s civil service system, eliminating objective civil service exams and replacing them with a subjective review of "qualifications" by their appointees. These changes open the door to hiring partisan political hacks and making party loyalty a qualification for a state job, the very hiring practices that civil service was established to root out.

MADISON - “Please do what you can to stop the dismantling of the civil service system,” Mary from Trempealeau County asked me.

Mary is a retired social worker. Her call is one of a number of contacts I received lately from residents unhappy with a bill that would change state employment. Residents expressed concern that government jobs will be filled with political friends and relatives of those in power and will fail to serve its citizens.

A newly introduced bill would do away with examinations for state jobs. Under the bill, every resume for filling 30,000 state positions would go to the behemoth state Department of Administration (DOA) and into the hands of political appointees. The bill would keep employees on probation for two years and use new vague language to fire state employees.

This language includes as grounds for firing “personal conduct” the boss “determines to be inadequate, unsuitable, or inferior”. This ambiguous rule could become a proxy for political retribution. Is recall petition signing “inadequate” for a social worker? Is singing union songs in the Capitol rotunda “unsuitable” activity for a scientist? How about a state employee attending a rally on off time?

The bill opens the door to an employee hiring process completely controlled by politically appointees hired by the Secretary of Administration.

But to understand the context of the newly proposed law, one must step back and look at changes to state employment – especially major changes made just this summer.

Governor Bob La Follette is credited with creation of Wisconsin’s civil service system. La Follette wrote in his 1912 autobiography that public service “has been democratized by a civil service law opening it to men and women on an equal footing independent of everything except qualification and fitness for office…There is no longer any political pull in Wisconsin.”

Major credit for modernizing the system that eliminated “political pull” should go to Democratic Governor Patrick Lucey and Republican Governor Lee Dreyfus.

In 1976, through executive order, Governor Lucey created the Governor’s Employment Relations Study Commission. The Commission recommended a distinct cabinet department, headed by a Secretary appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The Commission reasoned that policies related to personnel must have “accountability to the executive office, protection from the possibility of manipulation and independence from the general bureaucratic structure.”

According to a paper written by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau “after extensive legislative debate” a new law was passed and signed by Governor Dreyfus creating the Department of Employment Relations. In 2003, the legislature made a number of changes to the department including changing its name to the Office of State Employee Relations (OSER).

The independence of a separate office lasted until this summer when Governor Walker’s budget became law. Tucked into the budget was a provision to eliminate OSER and bury its functions in the Department of Administration. I write ‘bury’ because DOA has a $2 billion budget and over 1,000 employees making the new employment process opaque to legislators and the people of the state.

Efforts to politicize employee relations by the current administration began in 2011 with Act 10. This law took 38 civil service positions and made them political appointments. The law also allowed bosses to turn “other managerial positions” into political appointments. Both the 2011-13 budget and the 2013-15 budget added more political appointment positions.

Changes made in 2011 signaled the intention of the administration. But few paid attention to the signs. As an example, here is what I wrote on March 19, 2011:

Yesterday I had in interview with a reporter, and I told her about what the Governor was doing to our civil service put in place by Bob La Follette - how three dozen civil service jobs were made political appointments; how the definition of a political appointment was made so broad the team leader who helps clean the Capitol could be a political appointment. The reporter had no idea this was in the bill.

That bill became Act 10 – known only for stripping public employees of their labor protections, not stripping the citizens of their good government. With the most recent legislation, intentions to politicize state government just became clearer.

Sen. Ron Johnson's comment "we got the $800 billion stimulus which basically went into the pockets of public unions"  at a Green Bay campaign stop last week is dead wrong. I was there in 2009 and we faced a $50 trillion hole in the economy, and unions did not cause the mess. It was the losing Republican ideas of "Trickle Down" economics, deregulation, borrow and spend budgeting, and our nation’s unnecessary involvement in wars overseas.

APPLETON, WI - Sen. Ron Johnson's comments last week about the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 deserve our attention.

In wrongly stating "... we got the $800 billion stimulus which basically went into the pockets of public unions," Johnson suggests working class women and men caused our economic mess.

Johnson is wrong.

By 2008, our economy had been driven into the ditch by irresponsible Republican policies including trickle down economics, where money was supposed to trickle into pockets of working class families after rich people were given huge tax cuts. It failed miserably.

Johnson’s majority party also borrowed and spent money government did not have and deregulated banks on Wall Street, sinking us even deeper into debt.

These were not union ideas; they are Republican realities.

The fact is that without paying for any of it, Johnson’s party handed out tax cuts to billionaires, created massive federal budget deficits and wasted $3 trillion destroying Iraq where 4,488 American heroes gave their ultimate sacrifice.

Johnson is dead wrong.

I was there in 2009. We faced a $50 trillion hole in the economy from the housing market collapse; the stock market was crashing; 750,000 jobs across the nation were being lost each month; and our financial system was frozen — a combination not seen since the Great Depression.

There was a complete lack of confidence in capitalism itself. Banks would not loan money to anyone, for they were not certain they would be paid back. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson told me 75 percent of America’s assets were in 17 banks and these banks had no money: "They are bone dry."

Working together with Democrats Dave Obey, Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold, I helped create the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the boldest action taken by government since the Depression. We brought back billions of our own tax dollars to Wisconsin to rebuild our schools, roads and bridges while delivering the biggest tax cut in American history.

Johnson just does not get it.

Unions did not cause this mess. It was the losing Republican ideas of Trickle Down economics, Deregulation of Wall Street, Borrow and Spend budgeting and our nation’s unnecessary involvement in never ending religious civil wars overseas.

Now more than ever we need elected officials who will think things all the way through; women and men who will enact laws to reward work instead of wealth as we begin to solve our differences in conversations not confrontations.

***

Appleton’s Dr. Steve Kagen is a former congressman who represented Wisconsin’s 8th District.

Public hearing on Higher Education Lower Debt Act authored by Sen. Dave Hansen of Green Bay and Rep. Cory Mason of Racine set for the Senate Committee on Universities and Technical Colleges on Wednesday, October 7 in the State Capitol.

MADISON - Legislation which could help thousands of student loan borrowers throughout Wisconsin refinance their debt will receive a public hearing in the Senate Committee on Universities and Technical Colleges on Wednesday, October 7 in the State Capitol.

Senate Bill 194, authored by Senator Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay) and Representative Cory Mason (D-Racine), is often referred to as the Higher Education Lower Debt Act. If enacted, it would create a state authority to help borrowers refinance their student loans, allow borrowers to deduct student loan payments on their state income taxes, and require borrowers to receive counseling about student loan debt prior to taking out loans.

“I am very pleased that the committee will be holding a hearing on this bill,” said Sen. Hansen. “Since this legislation was first introduced last session I have heard stories from people across the state who are struggling to pay back their loans.”

“These are not deadbeats, these are hard-working taxpayers who sought to pursue the American Dream by furthering their education and training. They only want a better future for themselves and their families. This legislation seeks to help them lessen the burden of paying for that education.”

The hearing will be held in room 300 Southeast of the State Capitol at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, October 7th. The hearing is open to the public and individuals are encouraged attend and testify.

***

Legislative Staffer Jay Wadd contributed to this story.

The Supreme Court has imposed a fictitious alternate reality on American democracy, telling us to think of property as part of “we, the people” and see massive sums of money spent on elections by large corporations as “free speech.” We, the people, need to stand up in defense of democracy.

MADISON - Much too much is made of red voters and blue voters and red states and blue states, as if they make up two separate Americas (they do not) and their differences are forever irreconcilable (they are not). But for the moment anyway, there is no denying that partisan divisions have intensified in recent years and that America is more politically polarized than at any time in the last two decades.

Against this backdrop, it can be a challenge to find values and attitudes that unite Americans of every political persuasion. But people of every imaginable stripe stand on common ground when it comes to the broadly shared exasperation with money’s dominion over democracy. Four out of five Republicans agree with four out of five Democrats and a supermajority of independents that the U.S. Supreme Court messed up bad when it ruled in 2010 that unlimited political spending is a constitutional right. Five years after the decision, it is as unpopular than ever. In fact, rather than slowly fading from memory the court’s decision in the Citizens United case is becoming the symbol of how the economy and the government have been rigged in favor of a privileged few at the expense of everyone else.

It’s helpful to remember that Supreme Court rulings come and Supreme Court rulings go. Our nation’s highest court once ruled that people could be property. It took not only a presidential proclamation but a bloody civil war and amendments to the Constitution to relegate that shameful decision to its rightful place in the trash bin of history. Today’s Supreme Court blesses oligarchy with the similarly warped logic that property can be entitled to the constitutional rights of a person. In time Citizens United will be tossed in the dumpster too.

Undoing the harm this ruling has done already and continues to do should not need to involve warfare but could very well require a constitutional amendment if the Supreme Court in the fairly near future does not come to its senses and overturn Citizens United before a 28th amendment is ratified. How this all plays out and how promptly this inevitable outcome is brought about largely depends on legal creativity bordering on hubris.

It’s been written that Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation declaring 3 million slaves free was “based on a highly contentious, thin-ice reading of the presidential war powers.” Ample evidence suggests Lincoln knowingly and dramatically exceeded his legal and constitutional authority, and the nation is so very fortunate that he did.

American democracy needs a modern-day equivalent of the Emancipation Proclamation. Whether in the form of an executive order, or an act of Congress, or measures enacted by states or local communities, the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United must be defied. The constitutional right of unlimited political spending invented by the court in its Citizens United decision must be exposed for what it truly is – the legalization of bribery.

Elected representatives of the people anywhere and everywhere should knowingly and dramatically exceed what the Supreme Court says is the limit of their legal authority and declare our government free from its current state of indentured servitude to billionaires and corporations. Whenever justices dictate injustice, legal ingenuity is required. Executive orders should be issued and laws should be passed declaring that giving more than $200 to anyone holding or pursuing public office or any group helping to elect a politician is a bribe and therefore a felony.

In throwing down this gauntlet, the Supreme Court’s warped logic in Citizens United is countered with this alternative reasoning: If you wish to demonstrate your support for politicians, their parties or surrogates, giving $200 is demonstration enough. Giving $200 or less does not distinguish you much from your many fellow citizens who are likewise giving small amounts or the much larger number who give nothing at all. But go past the $200 threshold and that puts you in the top one-quarter of 1% of the population. That makes you stand out, separates you from the crowd, and makes it start looking like you might want more than just the honor of participating in a democracy.

Lincoln-style hubris is needed because we are beyond the pointwhere campaign financing can be reformed. It can’t be reformed because we no longer have campaign finance in America. We have legal bribery and there’s no reforming bribery. It has to be outlawed.

All laws and respect for the rule of law in general are demeaned and ultimately undermined when any law ceases to be rooted in reality. The reality is that Americans – Republicans, Democrats and independents alike – see big political donations for what they are, namely bribes. The law of this land needs to reflect that reality. Instead, the Supreme Court has imposed a fictitious alternate reality on us, ordering us to think of property as part of “we, the people” and see massive sums of money spent on elections as “free speech.” Just as a past court ordered all Americans, including President Lincoln, to accept that people could be regarded as property.

Lincoln defied that court. He was said to be on thin ice legally when he did. The ground held beneath his feet.

In defense of democracy in our time, we need to be willing to stand on what we’re told is thin ice. Two hundred dollars is plenty. Anything more is a bribe.