Senator Fitzgerald the Mighty Sausage Maker?

Senator Scott Fitzgerald’s analogy of comparing politics to sausage making will be familiar to those who have had the unique experience of listening to Senator Scott Fitzgerald at one of his “District Listening Sessions.”

The senator has publicly stated something to the effect of, “Legislating is a lot like sausage making. It is a very messy process and you don’t really want to know what goes into it.  But the end result produces a good product.”

Someone else sent me the following on this: “My favorite Fitzgerald quote is “Legislating is like sausage making. You don’t really want to know what goes into it.” I heard him speak these remarkable words at a Watertown listening session before the recall began. The fact of the matter is yes, Senator, we do want to know what goes into it and who is writing it. And since this past January the most destructive legislation that has been passed was written by the American Legislative Exchange Council of which Fitzgerald is a member. And the Senator himself has used the most manipulative tactics to shepherd these bills into law. Things like conference committees, extraordinary sessions, violation of open meetings laws, running fake candidates to prolong their majority, manipulating redistricting maps and the process for redistricting itself, requiring other legislators to sign confidentiality agreements about legislation, assigning his staff to work on state business from a private law firm’s office and using their personal gmail accounts to avoid public record laws, and the list goes on. Now that we all see what has been going into his “sausage making” how could anyone, of any political background, find it palatable?”

I actually recall Senator Fitzgerald telling this analogy to my wife and I when we met with him in his office at the Capitol last year.  Then I heard him say it again at the Watertown listening session as did the person above.  When he said it to my wife and I, he also added that “sometimes you have to limit debate on bills and just push the legislation through into law, then let people get use to the changes over time.  Eventually they will come to realize that the law makes sense and it is for their own good.”   I would show you copies of the quote from the notes of the senator’s own staff, but they would not provide me with copies of their meeting notes that I requested.  In fact, when I pressed them on my interest in the open records request, the senator’s staff told me that they “purged” those notes.

I have many thoughts and deep concerns over Senator Fitzgerald’s political ideology that embodies the necessity to purposely avoid public transparency, and to hastily expedite the legislative process by limiting, (if not eliminating) public input or legislative discussions on key bills.  I believe that the mining bill failure was a great example of Senator Fitzgerald’s leadership style in action.  Those who followed that bill know that the senator had a heavy hand in its failed outcome because of choices that he made when things were not going his way.

Sausage making should be left to the professionals who respect all aspects of their craft, including customer service.  When it comes to legislation on the other hand, I will choose someone who listens to their constituents over a slick career politician any day; especially a career politician who carries the water of out of state special interest groups with deep pockets.

I firmly believe that June 5^th will show that I am not the only Republican looking for a senator who is a true legislator and a statesmen (or stateswoman) of the people, not a fake sausage maker in disguise. 

Sincerely,

Gary

Not All Republicans Support Senator Fitzgerald

When Senator Scott Fitzgerald talks about the thousands of votes that he received in each of his last few of elections, he might want to think about the number of people as myself who will be crossing-over to vote for Democrat candidate Lori Compas in the June 5^th recall election.  

Trust me; I am not the only Republican in the area who will be leaving the Fitzgerald camp.  In fact, take a look at the number of typical Fitzgerald supporters who signed the recall petition against Senator Fitzgerald.  Rumor has it that this upset the senator enough that he actually called some of the once-supporters personally to inquire about their signing against him.  Given that he actually called me at work last fall on my office line to let me know that he knew where I worked, where I use to work, and a summary of my military history, I would not put it past the senator to call dissatisfied prominent donors/supporters. 

For every Republican exiting his camp like me, that means a two point difference in the recall election, (one less vote for Senator Fitzgerald and one more for Lori Compas).  No matter how you spin it, that actually adds up in a hurry for Lori Compas.

Why the Republican exodus? Among many reasons, lack of demonstrated integrity is a big one for me and others.  Specifically the non-disclosure agreements (A.K.A the “Secrecy Agreements”) were a damning piece of evidence helping to affirm my change in support away from Senator Fitzgerald.  The secrecy agreements exemplified a total level of disregard for the Wisconsin taxpayers and it solidifies yet another reason to question the senator’s integrity on what he tells us.

For those who are not aware of it, attorneys for Wisconsin Latino group (Voces de la Frontera) filed a complaint with the District Attorney for Dane County alleging violations of both Wisconsin’s Constitution and statutes governing open meetings.  In doing so, the group discovered that 75 (nearly all) state Republican lawmakers signed nondisclosure contracts with attorney Eric McLeod, of Michael Best & Friedrich, who advised lawmakers on the new GOP-led redistricting maps for the state. That’s the same attorney who gave free legal services to state Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman.

Furthermore, attorneys for Voces de la Frontera discovered that Tad Ottman, Senator Scott Fitzgerald’s legislative aide, and Adam Foltz, Representative Jeff Fitzgerald’s legislative aide, conducted secret redistricting map meetings under the direction of attorney Eric McLeod.  From those meetings came the creation of the secrecy agreements that almost all of the GOP legislators signed.  

Senator Fitzgerald and other Republican lawmakers fought hard to keep the documents confidential, claiming that their process used granted them attorney-client privilege.  But a three-judge panel determined their arguments to be frivolous and ordered the release of related records.

In the agreements, the legislators promised to not comment publicly about the redistricting efforts or related talks about the GOP-friendly maps being drafted.  Apparently the secrecy pact by the legislators was intended to keep anyone from leaking anything or any drafts of the maps out to the public or to the Democrat legislators.  The secret agreement went as far as to tell Republican legislators to ignore public comments about the maps and only focus on what was being discussed in private strategy meetings.  There is even talk that the GOP legislators were given talking points to use in public regarding the redistricting efforts.  Senator Fitzgerald stated that such claims are false, but how can we believe that he is telling the truth about claims that others are lying?

A rather interesting point in all of this is the fact that of the 75 legislators who signed the secrecy agreements, Senator Fitzgerald was not one of them. Does anyone else find it odd that his aid was heavily involved in creating the agreements and the requirement that everyone signs them, but the senator did not have to?  Does this mean that the senator was so trustworthy not to be telling the public the truth that he was exempt or what?  Or was he the one calling the shots requiring that everyone else be compelled to act as he does and withhold information from the public even though $400,000 of taxpayer money was involved? The question that truly begs to be discussed is the matter of what were the consequences for any one not willing to sign the secrecy agreement?  Better yet, what were the consequences going to be for any GOP legislator who broke any of the requirements within the secrecy agreement? 

I have actually heard rumors that non-veteran GOP legislators or those who are not tightly aligned within the GOP’s “Good Ol’ Club” were actually shown two sets of redistricting maps, with one being a draft of an appealing map of their district boundaries if they played along and towed the party line throughout the passing of ACT 10.  Supposedly the second set of maps for the respective legislators were drafted with less favorable district boundaries that they could potentially get stuck with for not being a party team player.  Again, all hearsay, but then again is there any reason to put it passed the GOP to use such strong arm tactics on their own party members, given the contentiousness that the GOP has demonstrated over the last sixteen months?

Regardless whether the last statement holds any truth not, the secrecy agreements are now public knowledge and declared to be true. The redistricting process meanwhile is currently caught up in court costing the taxpayers more money every day.  If the maps end up having to be completely redrawn, the amount of taxpayer money will just keep climbing thanks to guys like Senator Fitzgerald and his seeming attempts to game the system and cheat the Wisconsin voters for his own possible gain with GOP friendly districts. 

The bottom line is rather simple. The secrecy agreements and the fiasco that the redistricting process has turned into is more than enough to demonstrate that it is time for Senator Fitzgerald to go.  The senator no longer demonstrates the values that I seek from my party and I worry that his actions are too extreme and too caustic for our state.  That is I am voting for Democrat candidate Lori Compas on June 5^th.  The question is how many other Republican constituents will be voting just like me?

Sincerely,

Gary

___________________________________________________________________________

Wisconsin GOP lawmakers signed redistricting secrecy pact; were told to ignore public comments

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/138850044.html

WISCONSIN: Co-Senate Majority Leader Takes On Michael, Best, And Friedrich

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/27/1078340/-WISCONSIN-Co-Senate-Majority-Leader-Takes-On-Michael-Best-And-Friedrich

Republicans against Senator Fitzgerald!

Are Republicans against Senator Scott Fitzgerald? ABSOLUTELY they are and I am one of them!  In fact, that number is growing and I believe that the decision to run a fake Democrat (Gary Ellerman) is actually hurting the senator.  Creating an unnecessary primary in order to push the election back a month seems to be giving the true Democrat candidate (Lori Compas) valuable time and opportunities to become more of a household name in Senate District 13. But more importantly, it is giving more Republicans an opportunity to see just how badly the senator needs to go.

Why the growing discontent by Republican voters?  For many it boils down to Senator Fitzgerald becoming too extreme, and too caustic for the state.  But overall those that I talk to are deeply disappointed in his change in attitude towards serving special interest groups and generous donors, (especially from out of state) over serving the taxpayers of his district.  In fact, the senator will and has stated publicly that the majority of his campaign funds are from out of state donors and that soliciting in this manner is the nature of the business in state politics.  If you do not believe me, just attend one of his listening sessions. Better yet, just ask him for yourself.  He actually seems proud to talk about it.

A growing number of Republicans tell me that the senator does not demonstrate that he cares about them or their families anymore and they are not going to vote for him on June 5^th.  They are saying that Lori Compas has their vote this time.  Some are telling me that they like what Lori represents  while other Republicans say that they just want to get the senator out and they will overlook that she is a Democrat.  The bottom line, they will be voting for Lori Compas and not Senator Fitzgerald.  When I ask them if they would ever consider staying home and not voting at all, they respond with such things as “not a chance!” In fact, some will go as far to say that they would vote for a monkey on the ballot if it meant getting the senator out of office.  Lori Compas is their person and they are going to take it to the polls on June 5th. I will be there with them.

In upcoming posts I will start offering my reasons for the cross-over vote from Senator Fitzgerald to Lori Compas.  But I would love to hear from others who will be supporting Lori Compas as well, or those who will no longer be voting for Senator Fitzgerald.  Share your reasons for the change because you are not alone and it is time for the media to stop ignoring that Republicans against Senator Fitzgerald are out there in a larger number than any are giving credit to.  

I look forward to posting your emails.

Sincerely,

Gary

Wisconsin Politics - The Open Letter Challenge

For those who are not already aware, Heather who has the candid but always thought provoking blog site (Monologues of Dissent) speaking out against Governor Walker and the GOP, has an open letter challenge to her readers going on right now.

While you may or may not agree with everything that the authors of the incoming letters are saying, there are some interesting points being made by people across Wisconsin.   

Heather is calling on readers to send in articles on the recall that address citizen questions on such matters as:

“Why do you think Wisconsin should vote Walker out? How has your life changed since Walker took office? What cuts or policies do you think have hurt Wisconsin the most? Why do you think Lori Compas deserves Scott Fitzgerald's Senate seat? What needs to be done to restore the rule of reason in Wisconsin? What does the recall effort mean to you?”

These are the types of questions that I feel the mainstream media in the state are not focusing much attention on - the voice of the people. 

Check out the site and see what people are sending in. Feel free to send something of your own in. http://monologuesofdissent.blogspot.com/

Sincerely,

Gary

Why the Criminal Defense Fund Governor Walker?

In my last post, “John Doe and Catch 22 for Governor Walker,” I left off the second piece to the conversation that begs to be discussed from the Capital Time article.  If in fact Governor Walker has not done anything illegal and if he is not under investigation as he claims, then why has he hired six top notch criminal defense attorneys from across the United States, and why has he created a legal defense fund?

I believe that Governor Walker needs to explain why he made public comments in February suggesting that he only recently began hiring former federal prosecutors and lawyers with experience defending high profile criminal conspirators — when, in fact, it now appears that he began assembling a defense team about a year ago.

In fact, records now show that Governor Walker has already racked up over $200,000 in legal fees related to the John Doe investigation, and the total bill is still climbing.

I am not an attorney, but It is my understanding that the only you can set up such a fund is if you are under investigation, being charged, or you have been convicted of a criminal violation.

If Governor Walker is as innocent and unassociated with the John Doe circumstances as he claims to be, then answering these questions should be in his best interest.  But I am going to assume that since even Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen stepped back from the investigation, that maybe Governor Walker’s ability to explain himself to his constituents is not in his best interest at this time?   

Regardless of the investiogation results, I wonder how all of Governor Walker's unanswered questions to the public will impact other Republicans like me when the polls open up on June 5^th?

Sincerely,

Gary

______________________________________________________________________

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/opinion/editorial/how-much-legal-trouble-is-walker-in/article_cd86fb72-8e35-11e1-a199-0019bb2963f4.html?mode=comments

http://www.politiscoop.com/us-politics/wisconsin-politics/792-governor-walker-sets-up-legal-defense-fund-john-doe-corruption-probe-closing-in.html

John Doe and Catch 22 for Governor Walker

There is no doubt that the Capital Times is a liberal leaning newspaper to say the least, but every once in a while it is interesting to see what they are publishing.  Today I found the John Doe article to be one of those articles because it gets at a point that I have been asking myself for a long time.  (see the link below)

Whether Governor Walker is guilty of anything or not in this investigation, at what point does the governor have “a responsibility to answer questions about his response to the John Doe probe, about why so many people who were hired by him, who worked at his side (and in some cases continue to work at his side) and who helped to fund his campaigns seem to be in so much trouble.”

In my opinion, it is more than fair to question such things as whether or not Scott Walker as the Milwaukee County Executive knew that the ultra secret and illegal email server existed in the room next to his office where one or more of his top staff members were supposedly doing campaign work on taxpayer time and money. 

Now comes the interesting part.  Ask yourself whether Governor Walker would be better off knowing or not knowing anything about what was going on with his top inner circle staff who some of are now under investigation? Remmber, some of them were litterally one wall away from his office at teh time.  If Scott Walker did know, then he broke the law and we had better start thinking about who we want as our Lt. Governor when we have to call upon them to step up to a new role.  But if in fact he did not know anything about what the inner circle was doing under his watch, then what does that say about his level of competency for leading our state if he couldn't keep track of people at the county level?

Whether the John Doe investigation turns up anything one way or the other before the June 5^th recall election, I feel that Governor Walker is not being forthright in telling us the truth.  For me, that does not fit with the expectations that I hold a governor to. It will be interesting to see if other Republicans feel the same way.

Sincerely,

Gary

_____________________________________________________________________________________

How much (legal) trouble is Walker in?

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/opinion/editorial/how-much-legal-trouble-is-walker-in/article_cd86fb72-8e35-11e1-a199-0019bb2963f4.html?mode=comments

Walker doesn't want Flexibility for Public Education

Below is my email exchange with Governor Walker’s office on the same question that I posed to Senator Fitzgerald regarding background checks for educators.  For those who read my last article “Education and Flexibility,” tell me if you find it odd how both the senator and the governor used the exact same term as the key descriptive in their response.

Personally, I do not see it as a coincidence by any stretch.  I truly believe that it is yet another indicator of how well coordinated the GOP is being coached on their public messaging for this topic.  

I encourage you to read the two articles and do your own comparison of the responses by Senator Fitzgerald and Governor Walker.  Tell if you feel like the messaging is or is not walking in lock step with a well organized plan to stay unified and deceive the public of their true intentions?

Sincerely,


Gary




______________________________________________________________________________


Governor Walker,

Your budget removed the requirement that teachers at independent charter schools be licensed by the state; instead requiring teachers at those schools have only a bachelor's degree of some kind.

The switch apparently allows people with revoked teaching licenses to potentially end up back in the classroom. Charter schools could voluntarily make background checks part of their employment requirements, but it would not be state mandated as is imposed upon educators of public schools.

Please explain your rationale for signing that piece of legislation into law, and s there any reason why you would not consider dropping the mandate for all educators?

Governor Walker, as a constituent I truly look forward to your response to my questions as I am certain that there must be a reasonable explanation to your actions that I am simply overlooking.

Sincerely,

Gary

_____________________________________________________________­­­­______

From: Hansen, Alex - GOV [mailto:Alex.Hansen@wisconsin.gov]
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 10:22 AM
To: Gary
Subject: RE: constituent response

Gary,

Thank you for your recent e-mail. Here is a response to your following question.

In an effort to give charter schools more operational flexibility, the standard licensing requirement was altered. Currently, Senate Bill 22 is being reviewed by the state legislature. This proposal will detail specific requirements for charter school teacher licensing and requirements. I would suggest that you offer your input on SB 22 to your state legislators while it is being debated and reviewed. A copy of the proposal, as well as an analysis by the non-partisan Legislative Reference Bureau, can be found here: http://legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/data/SB-22.pdf.

Thanks again for contacting Governor Walker's office. Please stay in touch as we work together to move Wisconsin forward.

Sincerely,

Alex Hansen

Office of the Governor

______________________________________________________________________________

Fitzgerald doesn't want Flexibility for Public Education

After posting my article yesterday on “Background Checks for Educators,” I thought others might find this exchange of email traffic rather interesting as well, especially the staffer’s use of the word “flexibility.”

Below is a series of email traffic that I exchanged with Senator Fitzgerald’s office regarding a follow up question that I had from meeting with the senator last year in his office at the Capitol.

The exchange brings out my more cynical side because the topic at hand and the flippant remarks by Senator Fitzgerald and his staff really shed light on his political ideology and  true colors towards public education.

Feel free to let me know what you think,


Gary




______________________________________________________________________________

Gary-

Just looking for a quick update from your end.  After the second meeting with the Senator I'm trying to see what questions you still would like answered.

Please let us know.

Thanks,
Tyler

Tyler Foti
Legislative Aide
Office of Senator Scott Fitzgerald
Senate Majority Leader
608-266-5660

______________________________________________________________________________

Tyler,

During our meeting Senator Fitzgerald remarked that legislators as himself did not want to include language in the budget provision on charter schools, to include mandates for private schools receiving public tax dollar funding to conduct back ground checks which public educators are held to. Senator Fitzgerald further said that such a measure would simply hinder the charter schools’ ability to effectively and successfully do their job.

At the time I did not fully understand Senator Fitzgerald’s rational on his claim and our meeting was coming to a close. Would you please explain how such a measure for public safety creates a hindrance to the educational process and would the senator consider supporting a bill to remove the mandate from public educators that was signed into law by Tommy G. Thompson in 1994? Furthermore, what other legislative mandates/laws does Senator Fitzgerald believe exist in public education that would serve as hindrances for private schools being able to have a positive impact on our youth?

Sincerely,

Gary

______________________________________________________________________________

Gary,

Thanks for the email. 

Allowing charter schools to hire without madating a background check gives these schools more flexibility.  Giving charter schools more flexibility will allow for success.  If charter schools and K-12 schools were held to the exact same rules you would create the exact same results.

SS AB-8, the Rules Bill was passed by both the Assembly and Senate and was signed into law by the Governor on May 24th.  Senator Fitzgerald voted for SS AB-8.  Under current law, the Governor still has veto authority and may reatain a rule that the legislature objects to.  Under SS AB-8, the Superintendent still retains all of his power and control.

Let me know if you have any further questions.

Thanks,

Tyler

Tyler Foti
Legislative Aide
Office of Senator Scott Fitzgerald
Senate Majority Leader
608-266-5660

______________________________________________________________________________

From: Gary
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 1:54 AM
To: 'Foti, Tyler'
Cc: 'Sen.Fitzgerald@legis.wisconsin.gov'
Subject: RE: Last email

Tyler,

What exactly is the “flexibility” that you are referring to and if this “flexibility” is such a key component to the overall obtainment of success for educating the youth of our state, why don’t the legislators (like Fitz) author a bill to simply repeal the 1994 law from applying to public educators? What other examples of “flexibility” is Senator Fitzgerald willing to offer to charter schools that public schools are not being granted in this effort to promote educational success? Why does Senator Fitzgerald have such a strong compulsion to pour public tax dollars into private schools and religious schools while supporting substantial cuts to public education? If the overarching goal of education for our state youth is success into adult career pathways, why does the senator want to enhance opportunities for private schools and religious schools to succeed when he is not willing to offer the same tools to public education?

Tyler, let’s cut to the chase. So much has already been said publicly about the Koch brother’s position on public education and their historical interests to privatize education. Many are claiming that ALEC promoted legislation with the help of the Koch brothers is helping to further this national agenda in Wisconsin. Show me that such statements are not true. Convince me that Senator Fitzgerald truly cares about the youth of our state and the quality of the education that they receive. Cite specific examples of his efforts to bolster school choice offerings without gutting public education in Wisconsin.

Tyler, these are the types of responses that I am requesting from the senator. Genuine dialogue that demonstrates honesty and transparency not canned rhetoric.  Can I count on you and Fitz to deliver that level of exchange for my questions, or am I asking for too much in the way of intellect on the facts? Again, your lack of discourse towards addressing my questions is not insulting to me as much as it is potentially embarrassing to the senator.

Is there any reason for me to believe that I will not receive a better response to my questions?

Sincerely,

Gary

______________________________________________________________________________

Republican Legislators Oppose Background Checks for Educators

"We have so many outstanding teachers in Wisconsin and they don't need their reputations tarnished by a few bad apples," said Republican Governor Tommy G. Thompson. The date was April 28^th 1994 and the event was the signing ceremony mandating that all Wisconsin public teachers undergo background checks as part of the hiring and retention process.  

Today, back ground checks are not limited to public educators. Many school districts require background checks for custodians, secretaries, bus drivers, volunteer coaches, and even parents wanting to donate time in their own child’s classroom. Such checks are not state mandated, but more and more schools are electing to voluntarily adopt such requirements in order to ensure greater safety for the youth that they serve. 

The WI Department of Public Instruction (DPI) is required by law to conduct a background check of each initial and renewal applicant requesting a public educator license. The primary purpose of a background check is to determine if the applicant has engaged in any behavior that endangers the health, welfare, safety or education of pupils.

Governor Walker's budget removes the requirement that teachers at independent charter schools be licensed by the state; instead requiring teachers at those schools have only a bachelor's degree of some kind. The switch allows people with revoked teaching licenses to potentially end up back in the classroom. Charter schools could voluntarily make background checks part of their employment requirements, but it would not be state mandated.

Topics of charter schools, vouchers, and virtual schools have certainly drawn contentious debate across the state in regards to the state budget. Putting all of that aside, I want to simply ask why in the world anyone would oppose background checks for any educator who works our children. Naively I was certain that this was going to be the one amendment that would receive true bipartisan support from the legislators in our area. I especially thought that legislators like Rep. Kleefisch who appears to be tough on sex predators and child molesters would proudly support the amendment.  I clearly missed the mark on this one as I watched Rep Kleefisch and both Fitzgerald’s vote it down.

Think about that for a minute, there are three assemblymen and one senator in our district, yet Andy Jorgenson was the only one who stood up and demanded that we protect our children from sex offenders in school! Do we really have to be so partisan based on such matters as child safety – sad, very sad.

Sincerely,

Gary

Wisconsin's Future Debt under Governor Walker - part 3

In my “Future Debt (part 2) blog posting, I wrote about the amount of money that Governor Walker pushed into the future in order to balance the current state budget. Since posting that article, I have had people ask me “how much money are we talking about” and “what is the impact on the taxpayers?”

Before answering that question directly, let me start off by giving the governor credit for balancing the state budget as he is legally obligated to do.  When talking about balancing the budget, I just wish that he would refrain from making such public comments as, “…our children and grandchildren aren’t saddled with mountains of debt…”  Nothing could be further from the truth and I cannot believe that more people are not calling him out on such comments.

According to Fiscal Analyst Al Runde in the June 14, 2011 LFB memo, Governor Walker created two debt restructuring plans for being able to balance the budget through ACT 10.  According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau’s memo, under both plans the principal on existing general obligation debt and commercial paper remains outstanding for a longer period of time and therefore incurring greater interest costs for the state.  In fact, under the plan that Governor Walker chose to go with, we do not even start making payments on until 2013. Basically, the current state budget was balanced in part by pushing millions of dollars out over a twenty-three year repayment plan.   Even though we do not start paying on any of the debt until 2013, we are currently accruing interest each and every day.  The LFB memo shows that potential repayment schedule under the Joint Finance Committee’s “Debt Restructuring Proposal,” Governor Walker would finance $338,341,704.  By the time we make the last payment in the year 2034, we the taxpayers will have paid back $428,240,863, with $89,899,160 of it being interest payments alone.  I encourage everyone to look at the spreadsheet on the June 14, 2011 LFB memo to better understand the repayment plan for this money.

Now that the $306 million projected surplus has been changed to a $143 million deficit under ACT 10, Governor Walker has stated that he will not raise taxes but he may have to resolve the matter through additional debt restructuring.  Additional? Is he serious! We are already looking at taking twenty- three years and $89,899,160 in interest to pay off what we already borrowed from this budget as it is. What will the payments look like and how much interest will it cost the tax payers if we have to do the same thing for the next budget?

Governor Walker certainly is not the first governor to take on such debt structuring, nor will he be the last.  My issue is with Governor Walker doing all of this and then telling us that he isn’t.  That is not being honest or transparent with the taxpayers at all. Yet he keeps getting away with making such false claims.  I do not like the practice of taking on the debt, but I could accept it a whole lot easier if Governor Walker would simply come out and tell us the truth about what he was doing in order to balance the budget.  

For me, it is this type of political spin and deceit that is turning me off from being part of the party.  I would really like to know what others think about this topic and what you are doing to bring it up to your friends and neighbors who support Governor Walker and the GOP. 

Sincerely,

Gary

Governor Walker's Attack on Public Educators

In my last post, I wrote about the new powers that Governor Walker gave to himself, changing the entire process for handling proposed administrative bills.  Just like I said last time, you really need to read the article from yesterday’s Journal Sentinel.

This time I am just going to say it, I believe that under Governor Walker it is crystal clear that public education that isn’t the only thing under attack.  There is growing evidence to support the theory that Governor Walker and the GOP are specifically targeting the educators as a critical piece to busting the unions and eliminating collective bargaining.  Let’s face it; targeting educators of public schools is a dirty yet effective means to an end for Governor Walker’s plan because the plan needs to have the support of the people.  Sorry educators, but under Governor Walker you are extremely expendable. In the military we would consider you to be a “High Value Target” (HVT) because getting you has second and third order affects that are of great importance to achieving an overall goal of busting the unions and ending collective bargaining in Wisconsin .

Why are educators an HVT for the Governor Walker plan? First, there is a lot of talk about Governor Walker’s actions in Wisconsin being part of a national movement to impact future presidential elections that favor the Republican Party.  Whether you prescribe to that philosophy or not, it is obvious that Governor Walker has no love towards unions, organized labor, or the ability to collectively bargain.  But dismantling the unions takes more than big money from special interests groups, it requires winning the support of the voters and Governor Walker knows that.  But winning over the voters to support the process of making such changes is not a simple task, as we are seeing played out in our state.

Personally I don’t believe that this governor is intelligent or skilled enough to be game planning this all by himself without some serious help from out of state professionals who require large sums of cash for their services.  If I am wrong, then ask yourself what return on investment (in other words “what promises”) is Governor Walker offering to the out of state interest groups who are literally donating millions of dollars to his election campaign?

Because the execution of this type of plan requires winning over the voters, I believe that Governor Walker is needs that money and support purposely spin the truth and pit voters against one another in order to expedite the need to draw a majority of the voters to his side.  In which case openly and relentlessly vilifying state public works is of tremendous value in dividing the voters, but that is a very large elephant to wrestle to the ground.  Therefore Governor Walker is strategically singling out public educators as the specific group of state public workers who are fiscal enemy number one to the tax payers.

What I am saying may seem like a radical conspiracy theory concocted by some liberal agenda, but that is what makes it the perfect approach to busting the unions and ending collective bargaining in the state. On any given day under any given governor I am willing to bet that you could easily find a large volume of Americans who truly believe that teachers are overpaid, under worked, and recipients of lavish benefits at the expense of the taxpayers.  How many times have you heard people say that teachers only work until early afternoon, have off all holidays, they have off every summer, and no matter how bad they are at their jobs, you cannot fire them?  Come on, we have all heard those comments being tossed around, even by people whose children are being greatly impacted by awesome educators that work their butts off for those children.

Targeting educators and pitting them against the public is not a difficult challenge and Governor Walker knows it.  He is showing that vilifying educators and turning the public against them helps him to more effectively turn the public against all state workers, which enables the governor to get at the unions and organized labor.  Just look at how well Governor Walker has the public believing that all state publics workers were part of a union.  That seemingly subtle piece is actually one more way for him to achieve even greater public divisiveness.  In conservative circles he is branding himself as the fiscal hero for the supposedly victimized taxpayers.  Note how Governor Walker is effectively convincing the public that they are unfairly paying for state public workers to have high salaries and premium benefits that are above and beyond those of the private sector. He is also convincing them that educators are draining our budget and not producing quality results. He is convincing them that he is the night in shining armor of long overdue fiscal responsibility.

Do not get me wrong, it costs a lot to provide educational services (much less quality educational services), and that money does come from us the taxpayers (which educators and other state public workers are part of).  I support public education, and I too want greater fiscal responsibility, but not by the means that Governor Walker is pushing through.  

We could discuss and even argue back and forth all day about the results of education in Wisconsin public schools, or the degree of difficulty versus cushiness of being a public educator.  But in the end, we still need to consider the fact that Governor Walker seems to be intentionally, strategically, and caustically achieving his plan of busting the unions and ending collective bargaining by selling an extremely negative stereotype about educators and the impact of public education on the taxpayers’ wallets.

Governor Walker’s use of his new power to oversee the administrative rules as described in the Journal Sentinel article may not seem like much on the surface, but it truly does have deep implications towards his master plan to bust the unions and ending collective bargaining in the state.  Unfortunately educators appear to be a key means to justifying his end and that unfortunately makes the educators incredibly expendable.

Feel free to tell me if you believe otherwise, because I would love to be wrong about educators being in Governor Walker’s political crosshairs so that he can achieve his larger ambitions against the unions.  Because the process of such pitting is tearing our state apart and that is not acceptable to me.

Sincerely,

Gary

New state rule would limit cost-of-living increases for teachers

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/new-state-rule-would-limit-costofliving-increases-for-unions-8153h46-148330765.html

Walker aims to increase governor's power, limit agency rule-making ability

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_655ff8b6-0d1a-11e0-a369-001cc4c002e0.html

Bill to give governor new power on rules advances

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/115787174.html

Governor Walker's new powers in action

All I can say is “read the article.” If you are like me, you may have to read it more than once to grasp what this move by Governor Walker means for public school educators.  But no matter what impact it has on educators, it is actually a rather concerning example of what else is to come under Governor Walker.

So when you get done reading the article, keep in mind that this is simply one example and one example only of the authority being exercised by Governor Walker under the new powers that he gave to himself. I am talking about early last year when Governor Walker literally changed state law to give himself more legislative control over administrative rules.  Up until Governor Walker, administrative rules used to implement state laws where always proposed by state agencies and reviewed by the Legislature. Governor Walker changed the process in which he will now sign off on all of these bills before sending them to the Legislature.

For anyone out there saying “so what” “what’s the big deal?”  Under these new powers, requiring state agencies to get Governor Walker’s approval before the bill goes to the Legislature is truly the creation of a new power never had by any governor.  The change even authorizes Governor Walker to have power over state agencies not controlled by the governor.

I know that it sounds like I am getting off point from the article and its potential impact on educators, but the power itself is the real issue of concern. Think about state agencies such as the Department of Workforce Development, the Department of Financial Institutions, or the Department of Natural Resources, and so on. Each one of those state agencies is led by a Secretary who is appointed by the governor.  Each Agency Secretary in turn is allowed to appoint one or two people directly under them as under-secretaries, along with appointing a Division Administrator for each division within their respective agency.   

Keep in mind that almost all of the state agencies are led by Secretaries who are actually handpicked appointees of the governor, with key administrators in each agency being handpicked by the handpicked secretary. Each agency is assigned a key area of responsibility, such as road issues being tasked to the Department of Transportation (DOT), and so on.  Therefore the DOT Secretary is ultimately the states foremost leader and advisor to the Governor and the Legislature on roadway matters.  But under Governor Walker, agency leaders are no longer authorized to propose rules that have the force of state law unless Governor Walker says yes to the rule.  That literally means that each and every rule of this kind coming from any of the state agencies needs to be reviewed and approved by the governor himself, with him having the ultimate power to single handedly approve or deny with the stroke of a pen. This is a complete change from anything that I have ever heard of under any past governor, including Tommy Thompson.

Where this becomes even more interesting is when Governor Walker applies his new powers to agency leaders such as State Superintendent of State Public Schools (Tony Evers) who leads the Department of Public Instruction (DPI).  The State Superintendent of DPI is not a political appointee of the governor, that person is actually voted into office by the public, just as the State District Attorney who heads the Department of Justice.

When it comes to public education, it is in our state constitution that no one has greater authority over public schools than the State Superintendent.  Yet under Governor Walker with his newly self-appointed authority, things just do not function that way anymore with public school issues. There are now two chefs in the kitchen. Personally I question how this is even legal. Furthermore, I feel as though Governor Walker is taking away my vote that I cast to help place Superintendent Evers into office.

Again, I encourage you to read the article by the Journal Sentinel, dealing with cost of living raises for educators.  It really makes you wonder how far Governor Walker and his GOP legislators are going to go with the use of these new powers.  Specifically how far will they go in attacking public education, especially the educators?

As always, I would enjoy hearing the perspective of others, especially from fellow Republicans as myself who are not supportive of Governor Walker. Is this use of his new powers something that you support?

Sincerely,

Gary

New state rule would limit cost-of-living increases for teachers

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/new-state-rule-would-limit-costofliving-increases-for-unions-8153h46-148330765.html

Walker aims to increase governor's power, limit agency rule-making ability

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_655ff8b6-0d1a-11e0-a369-001cc4c002e0.html

Bill to give governor new power on rules advances

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/115787174.html

Governor Walker Approves Bonuses and Pay Raises for State Workers

No I am not making this up. It is true that yesterday the media discovered that Governor Walker quietly reinstated the merit pay program for most state employees. It is the same program that Jim Doyle suspended in 2008 that allows state managers to offer employees bonuses or raises to keep them from leaving or to equalize their pay.

Since January 1st, approximately 218 state public workers across nine agencies received raises or bonuses adding up to $765,195 thanks to Governor Walker. Some of those receiving the money were already making well over $100,000 per year.

Bonuses and raises for hard work and excellence is great for those employers who can afford to offer such perks to deserving employees. But I for one am trying to understand how in the world reinstating this program fits with the relentless claims by Governor Walker that “we are broke,” and the claims that state workers are already way over paid or over compensated in comparison to private sector workers.

It simply does not make sense to be making deep cuts to state programs in need, and to be forcing state public workers to increase their financial contributions all in the name of the state being broke and the tax payers deserving a break, only to offer bonuses and raises at the same time? Think about that, the Department of Justice reduced funds to the “Sexual Assault Victim Services” program because their budget was short on money. Yet they somehow found money in that very same budget to give one of the Assistant Attorney Generals a $1,000 bonus and a $1.50-an-hour raise in March, which increased her annual salary to $104,730. Or how about the Deputy Attorney General who got a $2.51-an-hour raise bringing his pay to $134,307.

The list goes on and on, so I encourage you to read the link to the Journal Sentinel article from yesterday’s paper.

Again, I am not questioning the work performed by any of the 218 state workers who received the raises or bonuses. They may very well be deserving of such performance based recognition. But not when we are supposedly broke and we are cutting funds and services to victim assault programs. Besides, how can state agencies like DOJ really justify their claims that they had to offer the money in order to keep certain employees from leaving and going to the private sector. Is DOJ for real in saying that $5,000 was enough to retain someone who supposedly could double their already $129,000 income by leaving the state and going into the private sector?

This topic rubs me the wrong way because I will never forget being in Senator Fitzgerald’s office at the Capitol when he told me that public schools need to get their budgets under control by getting rid of the 30 plus year teachers and replace them with college graduates at half the base pay. I asked him about his concerns over the loss of institutional knowledge that such veteran educators bring to the classroom and the impact that they have on both educating the children add on mentoring younger teachers. He literally laughed at me and responded with incredible flippancy that I found to be caustically disrespectful to educators everywhere. He knew I felt that way about his remarks and he let me know that he really did not care.

You know that Governor Walker is going to tell us all about how he did not want the agencies to offer any merit pay bonuses or raises until after the fiscal year. But he created the legislation to include himself as the final approving authority for such requests by each agency. All 218 requests had to pass his desk for his signature. Now that makes it slightly difficult to push the blame onto someone else, doesn’t it? I cannot wait to see how he spins this one.

Not surprising, just since yesterday the blogs are already filling up with comments by Governor Walker supporters trying to justify the merit pay. But I would be willing to bet that many of those people are the same ones who were jumping on the band wagon with comments agreeing with Governor Walkers claims about the overpaid state workers. I call that hypocrisy in action and it is unacceptable to for the Governor to have it both ways. Are we tightening our belts and creating shared and proportionate sacrifice or all, or are we simply assuring future votes?

Governor Walker keeps telling us that he is looking out for the needs of the hard working tax payers who would love to have the benefits of a state employee and that his requests for increased contributions is a modest request at most. If he is serious about wanting to protect the tax payers, (which public workers are) then how can he justify this move, especially in an election year?

Does anyone else agree with me on any of this or are you content with letting Governor Walker’s actions. I would love to hear from you, especially if you are a conservative or a Republican.

Sincerely,

Gary

Walker reinstates bonuses despite budget shortfall

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/walker-reinstates-bonuses-despite-budget-shortfall/article_3d9e5de4-8b0f-11e1-affa-001a4bcf887a.html

Lawmakers OK wage freeze, new overtime rules for state workers

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/lawmakers-to-hear-testimony-on-compensation-plan-for-state-workers-u933il5-134049798.html