Progressive Thinking

Some in our Legislature want an Article 5 Constitutional Convention for a "Balanced Budget" amendment, but once opened, those at the convention would not be bound to that proposal and the liberties and freedoms we hold dear, even our system of government, could be changed.

MADISON - What do the League of Women Voters, the American Civil Liberties Union and the John Birch Society have in common? They all think legislation calling for a federal constitutional convention is a bad idea. A very bad idea.

The last time we had a constitutional convention was a long time ago… in 1787 to be exact. At that time, the entire United Stated Constitution was rewritten.

Some lawmakers are calling for a new constitutional convention. They want the convention to consider a Balanced Budget Amendment. However, there are no guarantees that Congress who calls the convention will limit the call to a Balanced Budget Amendment; or that, once called, the convention will limit itself to a Balanced Budget Amendment. Then what?

As the nonpartisan League of Women Voters testified, a convention “is a particularly dangerous path to take.”

First, let’s consider a bit of background.

Article 5 in the US constitution allows two ways to change our Constitution. The first, and the only way used in the last two hundred and thirty years, is to change the constitution one amendment at a time. The specific language of the amendment must pass both Houses of Congress with two-thirds vote and be ratified by three-fourths of the states.

The second way is for two-thirds of the states (34 states) to call for a convention to propose amendments. When the 34-state threshold is reached, Congress issues the convention call. Delegates are selected by states and those delegates decide on rules governing the convention.

About four years ago lawmakers belonging to the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) began meeting to discuss how to bring states together for a constitutional convention. Groups supporting the idea targeted 11 states including Wisconsin and Kentucky who are now taking up the issue. If both adopt the proposal, they would be the 30th and 31st states of the required 34.

Last week after a hearing lasting almost eight hours during which dozens of people opposed the idea, our Senate Committee voted to call a convention. My colleague Senator Risser and I were the only “no” votes.

Before the hearing I did some research. Much of what I learned about an Article 5 convention comes from the Congressional Research Service.

Once called, the convention and its delegates write the rules of the convention. They can write any rules upon which they can agree. They can take up any action upon which they can agree. More unsettling, as re-writers of the Constitution, the delegates become the sovereign power of the land. In its analysis, the Congressional Research Service, referred to the doctrine of “constitutional sovereignty” quoting Cyril Brickfield who in 1957 wrote, “… the convention is possessed of sovereign powers and therefore is supreme to all other Government branches or agencies.”

In short, the liberties and freedoms we hold dear, those values that make us uniquely American, even our system of government, could be changed.

Perhaps this is why the conservative John Birch Society (JBS) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) both opposed the bill. Larry Greenley of JBS reminded our committee the last constitutional convention in 1787 not only completely rewrote the Constitution, they also changed the ratification process so that only 9 (not all 13) states had to agree.

Proponents of the Wisconsin efforts say their plan is to only take up a balanced budget amendment. But after repeated questioning from Senator Risser, no one could describe how such amendment might be worded or how, if passed, the amendment might work. We heard, instead, the convention itself would decide the rules and the specific language of any proposals. The safeguard, if one could call it that, was that the states would have to ratify what the convention proposed.

At odds with this reasoning was the history Mr. Greeley pointed to – the 1787 convention invented its own ratification process. The hearing left me agreeing the idea was “a dangerous path to take.”

A more prudent approach, one we have always taken since 1787, is to change the Constitution, when necessary, one specific amendment at a time.

Assembly Democratic Leader says allowing individuals to carry firearms without proper safety training, especially on school grounds, goes too far.

MADISON - Wisconsin Republican legislators have proposed a bill to allow individuals to carry firearms without proper safety training.

The authors of the bill put forward extreme provisions that go beyond even constitutional carry by allowing guns in schools, secure mental health facilities and police stations, while placing the burden on these facilities to protect citizens. This will also create confusion and a lack of clarity on where weapons are allowed, which is troubling.

Law enforcement, school administrators, Democrats and Republicans have been long opposed to allowing guns on school grounds, yet this bill changes that safety presumption. Additionally, the authors have some explaining to do as to why they reduce the penalty from a felony to a misdemeanor for illegally carrying in a school zone. This is a serious legal breach that should be treated as such.

Finally, when concealed carry was enacted, there was a clear bipartisan emphasis on proper training to make sure those with a concealed carry permit to understand the gravity and responsibilities of carrying a gun, especially in high risk facilities. Allowing anyone to carry a loaded, concealed firearm without a background check or safety training has implications almost certainly do not fully understand.

Republicans are not willing to stand up to rich gun manufacturers looking for profits at any costs, even our kids’ safety.

MADISON - Republican legislators here have made a decision to blindly ignore public safety concerns by introducing legislation to put more handguns into the hands of teenagers; circumvent safety training for concealed carry; and open the door for more guns in school zones, school grounds, and even directly in our schools.

In the wake of recent, tragic shootings that devastated several Wisconsin communities, this bill is a slap in the face to our neighbors that are demanding real solutions to our state’s gun violence public health crisis.

Wisconsin should be focusing on making our communities safer with laws that are both proven and have widespread public support. One such policy is having stronger background check laws, which has support from 85% of Wisconsin voters. In the 19 states and Washington, D.C., who have universal background checks, 47% fewer women are killed by their intimate partners, and 53% fewer law enforcement officers are shot and killed in the line of duty. Additionally, the majority of Wisconsin voters – 65% – oppose allowing guns near our schools. With 26,252 gun-related deaths nationally in 2015, this proposal takes Wisconsin in the wrong direction. Republicans are rejecting common sense and logic by ignoring public safety and the needs of our community.

We have the solutions and public support to make our communities safer. Unfortunately, Republicans are not willing to stand up to rich gun manufacturers looking for profits at any costs, even our kids’ safety. Instead of fighting this public health crisis, Republicans in control of the Legislature are proposing to give guns to teens with no training – an idea that is unwarranted, absurd, and dangerous.

As Republicans in Washington move to substitute their own Supreme Court pick under Trump for President Obama's, the very legitimacy of our democratic system is at stake. Stand up for the legitimacy of our Supreme Court.

MIDDLETON, WI - Barack Obama won the 2012 presidential election by approximately 5 million votes. Donald Trump lost the 2016 election by approximately 3 million.

So when Republicans block President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court for nearly a year in order to install their own pick under Trump, they completely undermine the meaning and weight of the votes all those Americans cast.

And undermining the meaning of our votes undermines not just the legitimacy of President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court -- but the very legitimacy of our democratic system itself.

Stand for the legitimacy of our Supreme Court and our democracy. Sign the LegitAction petition opposing President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee today.

Real signs are emerging that Republicans won’t be able to move past a filibuster (or eliminate the filibuster itself) if Democrats and Independents draw a line in the sand here. We need to show Democratic and Independent senators that we’ll have their backs if they stand for us.

Thank you for standing up for our democratic legitimacy,

Russ Feingold

With repeal efforts in Washington on hold for now, the biggest immediate threat to affordable health coverage may be sabotage by the Trump Administration, Congress, and states like Wisconsin.

STATEWIDE - In the aftermath of the implosion of the Affordable Care Act replacement plan late Friday afternoon, the biggest immediate threat to affordable health coverage may be deliberate sabotage by the Trump Administration, Congress, and states like Wisconsin where conservative politicians are bitterly opposed to the health care law. With the legislative vehicle for radical restructuring the American health care system closed for the time being, State Innovations Waivers with states like Wisconsin may become the new method for achieving the goals of repeal.

After House Speaker Paul Ryan pulled his replacement bill on Friday President Donald Trump said: “I’ve been saying for the last year and a half that the best thing we can do politically speaking is let Obamacare explode. . . . It is exploding now.” But the Congressional Budget Office and independent researchers conclude that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) as currently constituted will be stable for years to come. This assumes that the Trump Administration does not use its substantial administrative power to undermine the health care law.

The willingness of conservative politicians to play politics with the health coverage of the American people has been in evidence since the original passage of the ACA. As Citizen Action of Wisconsin has continuously documented, the Walker Administration has sought to sabotage the ACA by encouraging healthy people to buy substandard policies outside of the market; refusing to enact robust rate review; turning down Medicaid expansion; hamstringing health care navigators, rubber stamping health insurance industry mega mergers, and seeking waivers that would allow insurance companies to take larger profits. Taken together the Walker Administration has aided and abetted the on-going effort of the national for-profit insurance companies to continue to insure healthy people and find ways to avoid people with pre-existing health conditions.

The conservative majority in Congress has also played a major role in sabotaging the ACA. For example, they dramatically cut risk adjustment payments to insurance companies who insure more people with health conditions. This hit insurers that were doing the right thing with huge unexpected costs, driving many out of the the ACA marketplace and many new health care Co-ops out of business.

Before the failure of the latest legislative attack on the ACA last week, there were already indications of an intent to sabotage the health care law by not enforcing the individual mandate, pulling public promotion in the final weeks of open enrollment, not defending against a Congressional lawsuit that could pull tax subsidies from moderate income Americans, allowing substandard health insurance policies to be sold, and by cooperating with with states like Wisconsin that want to undermine the law. Trump’s selection of the vehemently ideological Tom Price as Health and Human Services Secretary is also evidence of an intent to disrupt the ACA. Major media outlets such as the New York Times, Washington Post, and Politico are now reporting that the Trump Administration may double down on sabotaging the health care law.

If the Trump Administration adopts sabotage as the next front in it’s attack on the Affordable Care Act, the biggest opportunity for radically changing the health care law may be State Innovation Waivers which under the ACA can be negotiated starting this year. These waivers permit states to submit plans to dramatically restructure health coverage. The Walker Administration would be an ideal partner for Secretary Price to develop a State Innovation Waiver which undermined the purpose of the ACA.

With conservatives in charge of the government they have a solemn moral obligation to uphold the laws of the land and to protect the welfare of the American people. It is stunning that conservative politicians are so bent on getting their way that they are willing to play politics with the lives of their own constituents by throwing sand into the gears of the American health care system. The right of every American to have quality affordable health coverage ought not to be a partisan issue. Now that the American people have resoundingly rejected their disastrous replacement plan, it is time for conservatives to take on the responsibility of actually governing by working with Democrats to move beyond the divisive health care battle and improving and building on the Affordable Care Act.