Issues- From A to Z

I can't possibly know all the areas of concern that we'll all be talking about in the next 8 months, but I'll try to get any concern that anyone asks me about listed and addressed here.

Act 10

It's simple. Act 10 is a violation of the constitutional rights of assembly and association guarenteed in the First Amendment. It is arbitary and capricious (legally) in which public sector employees it imposes limitations on. It is also a major assault on Local Control, but that is a issue that means more to me than most.

For these reasons, one day someone will find a judge/court that believes that you can't override the constitution to "save money," nor can you protect certain classes of public employees while harming others. The Act will eventually be tossed out and we will be back where we were when this whole mess started. Then we will all be living the old adage, "You can't unbreak an egg."

It would be better if the State fixed this through the Legislature than wait until the courts halt it and there is nothing in it's place. That will be chaos for everyone. Local governments, represented groups, non-represented employees, everyone will be clamoring for their own interests and it will be a series of skirmishes as groups of employees work to get the benefits and protections they desire. The State can lead the way by clearly framing it's relationship with local governments and building better relationships. Let's look at pensions for an example.

The State should not want nor have the authority to tell local governmental bodies how to handle wage and benefit decisions. This violates local control. The State certainly has the power to set how much money it sends to local governments, and set rules for what they expect local governmets to do with or in relation to those funds. So if the State thinks employees should contribute amount X to their pension fund and the local government should contribute amount Y, they can make those rules but for the State run program only. The State cannot tell local governments they must use this program. They certainly can show that the power of a statewide collective program will mean a better, more robust plan for everyone, but it cannot compel participation. Can the State use monety incentives to encourage participation? Of course, but while the State may have the best way to fry an egg, it cannot claim to have the only way. If 18 local governments want to create their own pension program (foolish and risky as this may be), they should be free to do it.

To be sure, the end of Act 10 is inevetiable. The State can move now to help everyone be ready for the post-Act 10 world.

AI and Data Centers

It's sad when government has to legislatively promise to do nothing until they figure a real plan.

You are right to worry about NDA's, Sweetheart Deals, and dollar signs dancing before your local officials eyes.

Wisconsin has long worked to protect our natural areas and keep our waters clean. The State Legislature need to quickly create rules that apply accross the state that will protect our natural resources , ensure that any greater consumer of electricty pays more, not less than lessor users (more to follow), and is providing family supporting wages.

The Budget Surplus

I know this is a complicated issue and everybody has an opinion on it, but you deserve legislators who act on fact, and who share those facts with you.

For 6 years the State has collected revenues that are in excess of the planned budget. This is a good thing. I'm sure many of us remember the bad old days when the State had deficit budget after deficit budget and worked to correct this and build a "rainy day fund" to soften emergencies pushing the State into the minus column at the end of a two year budget cycle.

There's more good News! The rainy day fund is at $2 billion! That provides the State with real security for many unexpected expenses.

The bad news is that the new 'game' in Madison has become "what do we do with the surplus?" Does our State Legislature really need another thing to argue about? When people are arguing about who wants to give you more of your money, or claiming they will grant you tax relief for taxes they don't collect in the first place, I'd suggest you grab your boots because it's gonna get deep.

So is there a surplus? Yes and No. If you look at the final legislative decisions on how to pay out the collected moneys, we do indeed have a surplus. If you looked at the original 'planned' spending by past legislators, probably not.

Here are two quick examples. The State built a plan for Public Education funding based on a simple and straight forwards 1/3 to 2/3 rule. The State proposed that local taxes should cover 1/3 of the costs of local schools and the State would provide the other 2/3. Unfortunately, as of this writing the State has not provided their full 2/3 in funding. When the State doesn't hold up their end, your local school board as to cut programing or tax you more. Since the State (and Feds) prescribe what schools must do, nobody can cut to what the State is sending to schools. (This is also how they planned to give you "tax relief." By covering more, not all, of their 2/3, your school district can tax you less.)

As you've seen elsewhere here, the Legislature won't replace money spent out of the Knowles-Nelson Fund. That fund will disappear and natural resources will be lost if it is not restored.

There are plenty more examples of places where the State simply didn't spend money it had. The power of the purse rests with the Legislature so fair enough, but why are we collecting taxes for programs and promises they don't support?

First we need a real accounting of the real costs of education and the State needs to commit to the State's share. These need to be first dollars so the State can't cut it's fair share later. This would provide real, and lasting, local tax relief.

Then we need to set a "roll-over" percentage so any surplus under that percentage goes directly into the next budget cycle. Anything above that can go back to tax-payers in a tax holiday or other mechanism. However this has to be after the fact so we are dealing with real dollars.

There has been a lot of hullaballoo over public support for the Evers-LeMahieu-Voss plan. Most people are unaware that this was a plan for a projected surplus. They also don't know that the $1.8 billion spending plan was projected to create a $2.95 billion deficit for the 2027-29 budget.

I understand that everyone wants to popular by giving money away, but leaders need to stop and get all the facts before acting.

Flock Cameras

The hullabaloo over these cameras is understandable. People have expressed real and reasonable concerns with what has been happening with the data these cameras collect.

I believe the problem isn't the cameras, but the abuse of the data that needs fixing. No single individual should be free to go searching through the data. In the US, we are all protected from unreasonable search and seizure. Anyone using Flock data to track anyone for personal reasons has violated those protections. The State needs to create a structure that assures that no non-judicial (or business) agency has access to the data. Second, Law Enforcement must demonstrate (to a judicial evaluator) a need to search for information and must only retain information that matches their request.

To be sure, should officers find evidence of another crime while searching Flock data, there must be a way to refer that for appropriate follow-up.

Flock cameras have the potential to keep everyone safer, and speed up investigations and enforcement. With thoughtful legislation, we can have that without sacrificing our constitutional rights.

Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program

The little appreciated Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program was (yes, was) a great innovation here in Wisconsin to preserve, protect, and improve our natural areas. The fund supplied additional dollars to local governments and non-profit conservation groups to purchase or improve areas. It was also an improtant source of funds for our DNR. Sadly, the legislature (yeah, the guys sitting on billions of dollars) has failed to renew funding for this important program. It won't get fixed this nonsensical non-session session, but I will be working to restore the program and find at least a partial continuing funding source to keep this from happening again.

Restore Knowles-Nelson!

Marijuana

This is a simple and a complicated issue at the same time.

Simple- Medical Marijuana must be legalized. I saw first hand the relief it could bring as my brother battled the last stages of cancer. I cannot know that the good in those pain-free or pain reduced moments outweighs any risks.

Complicated- Recreational Marijuana is a much many sided issue.

There is, quite honestly, the economic concerns. Right now, we have Wisconsinites crossing into neighboring states, purchasing there, and then coming right back. In addition to the actual purchase dollars going to businesses in other states, we also have the tax dollars their governments are collecting also being lost. It is a lose-lose economically.

There is also the issue of adequate enforcement for impaired use of vehicles. We need to be sure we have the laws and systems in place to protect everyone if we legalize recreational use.

There is the matter of what happens to all the penalties meted out when it was against the law, how will we correct for those judgements.

Finally, there is the matter of education. If it is legalized, we will need a major educational campaign about how it is legal, at what ages, and consequences for impairment.

It's a lot, but a thought committee of State Representatives and State Senators could get this done and use our neighboring states a resources for how they did it and what did (or did not) work.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse