Progressive Thinking

There are many myths concerning the 2013-15 State Budget just signed into law in June. Senator Kathleen Vinehout presents each myth and provides the facts about the budget - the state spends more; the state is left with a deficit and greater debt.

MADISON - “The State is spending less.” “This budget took a deficit and turned it into a surplus.” “Wisconsin has paid off its debt.” Which of these are true statements regarding the new state budget?

The answer is NONE of the above.

Getting information about what’s happening in Madison is one of the most common complaints of my constituents. The slow summer news cycle allowed writers and readers to begin to catch up on, for example, the plethora of policy unrelated to the budget.

Lost in most budget reviews are the basic financials – the fundamentals of the budget.

Myth number one says the state spending is less and implies the size of government is smaller.

But, according to numbers released by the nonpartisan Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, the 2013-15 budget spends $4 billion more than the previous. In fact, state spending is greater than it has ever been in Wisconsin’s history.

The new spending goes to a number of expensive new programs. Half of the $4 billion goes to health spending. But for first time in many years there are fewer people covered by state health programs. Nearly 100,000 people are expected to lose state health coverage by January. Not taking federal money for Medicaid expansion left the state budget and citizenry in worse shape.

Myth number two says this budget took a deficit and turned it into a surplus.

The opposite is true. A recent Legislative Fiscal Bureau (LFB) report tells the story. The 2013-15 budget began with a small surplus. Tax collections are improved. Wisconsin is emerging from the recession. The state had a bit more money to spend.

But the recently passed budget spends more than it is projected to collect in revenue.

When spending is greater than revenue – a deficit exists. Lawmakers are bound by the state constitution to balance the budget.

To do this, budget writers carried money over from the last fiscal year to create a technically balanced budget. But when spending exceeds revenue the imbalance catches up with us in the next budget creating a “structural” (or built in) deficit.

A recent report from the LFB pegs this deficit at the end of the 2015-2017 budget at MINUS $545 million.

People are rightly confused about the difference between the deficit and the debt. Sometimes lawmakers use the terms interchangeably. But they are very different.

A deficit is a mismatch between spending and revenue - spending more than money coming in. Debt is borrowing and must be paid back. Spending more than money coming in can certainly lead to more borrowing. This is exactly what’s happening in Wisconsin.

The third myth says the state eliminated the debt. This is false. In fact, state debt reaches record levels in the 2013-15 budget.

Why? The budget increases borrowing by more than $2 billion. Almost half of this borrowing goes to transportation spending. In addition, debt payments not made in the last legislative session catch up to lawmakers.

When debt payments are not paid, interest adds up. In the depths of the recession, Governor Doyle delayed debt payments to gain cash and keep government going.

In the 2011-13 legislative session, Governor Walker did not pay an even larger amount of debt payments coming due. Because debt payments were not made more money goes to pay off debt in this budget than ever before.

I often hear smart budget decisions mean better times ahead. But delaying debt payments always has a cost. This budget pays that price in a greater percent of tax dollars going to pay off debt than ever before in our history. New borrowing only adds to the debt. As a result state debt reaches an all-time high of $14.7 billion - or about 101% of general tax revenue.

Another myth even state officials parrot is the only alternative to spending cuts is tax increases. This assumes everything in government is at peak efficiency. This is far from the truth.

Smarter budget decisions mean smarter spending decisions. An example is paying debt bills when they are coming due – so as not to add interest and penalties.

But to do that would not have allowed the “surplus” used to justify the modest but politically popular tax cut.

This week, we focus on the issue of Treatment Alternative Diversion or TAD. Studies show investment in TAD would save taxpayer dollars that currently go to incarceration.

ALMA - “You need to read this book,” the judge told me. “Then you need to get every other Legislator to read the book before you take another vote.”

The book was Clean written by David Sheff.

“Addiction is a preventable, treatable disease, not a moral failing. As with other illnesses, the approaches most likely to work are based on science – not faith, tradition, contrition, or wishful thinking,” writes Sheff.

David Sheff is a journalist whose son suffered from drug addiction. A decade ago he sought answers to help his son. In 2008 he wrote about his son’s addiction in A Beautiful Boy.

Clean is Mr. Sheff’s call to action to wake up, learn and act to “overcome addiction and end America’s greatest tragedy.”

Part of the tragedy is the great number of treatments that don’t work and aren’t based in science. Treatment of most illnesses has moved to evidence based practices or those treatments based in science. For the most part, the treatment of addiction has not.

Difficulties arise partly because of the nature of the disease itself. For example, denial is a symptom of the disease - making it difficult to diagnose. Relapse is part of recovery making it difficult to determine success.  Mental illness often contributes to addiction. Sheff writes at least a third of those with a psychiatric disorder abuse drugs or alcohol. Diagnosis involves accurately assessing underlying mental illness.

Some treatments do work. Effective treatments include cognitive behavioral therapy, motivational interviewing and dialectical behavioral therapy. DBT therapists assist clients in emotional regulation and distress tolerance.   Those with addictions can recognize cravings and tolerate them.

Misdiagnosing and mistreating addiction and related mental illness comes at a tremendous cost to the individual, the addict’s family and to our society.

Often those with addictions are sent to prison with court-ordered treatment for addiction and later released from prison without having received required treatment. It should be no surprise that roughly 60% of Wisconsin’s prison population is a repeat offender.

Failure to adequately diagnose and treat addiction costs all of us. For example, the recently passed state budget spends almost $100 million new dollars to renovate prisons and address the expected 2% increase in the prison population.

Over 60% of Wisconsin’s prison population is addicted to drugs including alcohol according to a 2009 audit by the Legislative Audit Bureau. The audit also found over 30% of inmates are mentally ill. Over three quarters of women in Wisconsin prisons are mentally ill.

The solution lies in correctly diagnosing and treating the addiction and preventing further crime.

Treatment Alternative Diversion (TAD) programs include drug and alcohol court, day reporting centers, mental health treatment courts and other initiatives. These programs are highly successful at reducing recidivism and treating substance abuse and mental illness.

Local courts in Western Wisconsin are among the leaders in alternative courts that work to end addiction in our communities. I recently spoke with individuals who work with those struggling with addiction. I learned how drug courts teach accountability, provide structure and save jobs, families and lives.

Yet the programs are underfunded. Few who are eligible are able to participate in the interventions.

During the budget debate I introduced an amendment to invest $75 million in TAD which would yield over $150 million in savings. Instead budget writers put a meager $1 million in new TAD spending. The Governor and Republican legislators who voted for the budget refused to recognize results that show the first million invested by the state in seven pilot programs saved almost $2 for every $1 invested.

Numbers from a 2011 study released by the Office of Justice Assistance project with a $75 million investment Wisconsin would cut annual prison admissions by nearly 40% and cut jail admissions by 21,000. Recidivism rates would fall by as much as 16% and crime rates would drop by 20%. There would also be a drop in the number of children in foster care.

Not quantified by the study are the lives and families restored. I now know what must be done, thanks to the judge who set my summer reading.

Take a look at this book. Then help me act to end addiction.

Senator Kathleen Vinehout of Alma writes about the reality facing many entities, including municipalities and counties, of small government. Deep budget cuts and shrinking resources make it difficult for state government to provide assistance to communities in need. Kathleen met with officials in Arcadia – one of those communities hit hard by flooding and by shrinking state government.

ARCADIA, WI - People were friendly but anxious. They’d come to a meeting with local leaders to learn about protecting Arcadia from flooding.

Arcadia is nestled in a beautiful valley. Water from the surrounding hills drains into the Trempealeau River that runs right through town. Next to the river is the sprawling international headquarters of Ashley Furniture.

Ashley’s spokesperson began the recent meeting by sharing jobs created and businesses supported: 4,700 jobs created in western Wisconsin. More than 670 local and regional businesses supported.

Local leaders nodded. Many in attendance owned companies that benefited from Ashley’s location.

The problem is how to pay for upgrades to dams, dikes and levees needed to protect the city from flooding when rains drained water from surrounding hills right into the center of town.

Everyone remembered summer storms of 2010 that flooded Arcadia. Company representatives made it clear if storms came again and the company had to be rebuilt it would be in another country. Not in Arcadia.

The company asked for $13 to $20 million to improve the levy along the river.

Congressman Ron Kind said pending legislation could help. The Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act - passed the Senate but was tied up in the House because Republican Congressional leaders did not want to spend the money.

An Army Corps of Engineers official explained Corps programs and limits. Times are tough. Funding cuts had eroded the Corps’ building authority.

Local officials explained they did not have the resources to pay for the project. Upstream the Mayor of Independence explained he needed help too.

Digging out Bugle Lake in Independence would hold more water running off the hills. Better yet, put in erosion structures, grass waterways, buffer strips and other conservation efforts. Keep rain on farm fields where it could do some good.

But the Governor and Legislators who voted for the state budget cut back funds for farmer conservation efforts.

Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC) officials did have money and were close to an agreement for another part of the project. But WEDC officials didn’t want state efforts washed away with the next big rain.

What was unspoken in the room but on everyone’s mind: elections have consequences. Folks were running up against the new world of smaller government that many of them had promoted. The easy political talk about “cutting government” had turned into real cuts to real programs they wanted and needed.

It is a lesson we all need to take to heart. Let’s be real and specific when we talk about budgets and taxes and spending. Be careful what you ask for. You may get it.

The reality of the budget is this: 85 percent of state spending goes to six priorities upon which most of us agree -- transportation, education, health, local government, prisons and our public universities.

Programs like farmer conservation and dam, dike and levy repair make up a small part of state government. That part is getting smaller. Therefore, there is little money to slow water coming through fields into the Trempealeau River. We need money to keep water on the fields to nourish crops and out of downtown Arcadia.

I came away from the meeting realizing once again that we are a community.

Workers depend on companies for jobs. Companies depend on workers to get the job done.

Everyone depends on the infrastructure created by government, a government that together we have created.

We all have a part in making political decisions. What we decide will shape the communities in which we live, making them better or worse places to raise a family, find a job, and run a business.

GREEN BAY - Maybe, if you don’t look at it, it will go away? That seems to be the conservative stand on the Affordable Health Care Act, commonly known as ObamaCare.

In Washington, the right wing in the House has voted 40 times to kill ObamaCare, while the pressing problems of the nation like job creation and immigration go unanswered.

Governor Scott Walker, darling of the national conservative right wing and Tea Party, decided to shun millions of tax dollars the federal government wanted to give back to Wisconsin to help set up health insurance exchanges.

Right here in Brown County, a Republican “non-partisan” Supervisor named Brad Hopp tried to get a resolution passed preventing the county, and its employees, from assisting Brown County residents in accessing health care made available through the Affordable Care Act.

Now the Walker Administration has still not released the insurance rates for the companies who will be on the new health marketplace. We know who the companies are that will join this marketplace and ensure greater security and control for consumers, but not what the plans will cost!

Some sort of price control on health care costs is fundamental to Affordable Care.

For years, one of the main problems with the American way of providing health care has been it’s ever raising cost. That’s why people needed insurance to pay for health care in the first place. It is why many employers cut full time jobs or moved them overseas rather than pay the costs here to insure employees. That’s one of the major reasons they called it the Affordable Care Act in the first place.

According to our former Congressman, Dr. Steve Kagen of Appleton, one of the authors of the Affordable Care Act, the way to control these costs is the open market place. You go to two or three stores and notice that one store is offering the product at the lowest price. You go back to that store to buy it. The other stores have to lower their price to complete. All you have to know is who has the thing you want and the price.

The Big Health Care Industry and their insurance provider partners have been in the business of hiding the true price of specific health care services for years. Have you ever tried to get an itemized bill after a stay in the hospital? Once we know the price, the free market will drive the costs down.

Wisconsinites need the facts on prices. We deserve to know how much the new insurance rates are. If the news is good and we have lower rates like Maryland and New York, we need to know. If Walker is going to try and spin the numbers like Ohio or Indiana then we need transparency! In either case the truth demands to be told.

###

Our progressive friends at Citizen Action of Wisconsin have started a Petition to force Walker to release the new Health Insurance Rates he’s hiding. If you wish to sign the petition, click HERE.

This week Senator Vinehout writes about a poll conducted at the Jackson County Fair regarding the Citizens United Supreme Court decision and money in politics.  Most fairgoers favored amending the constitution to change the Citizens United decision.  Across Wisconsin, efforts are ongoing to push an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that states inalienable rights belong to human beings only, and that money is not a form of protected free speech under the First Amendment and can be regulated in political campaigns.

ALMA - “Corporations are not people,” the Black River Falls woman told me. “People in corporations already get a vote and a chance to speak out just like the rest of us. Giving corporations a vote and a chance to speak out means those people are getting two votes. That’s not fair.”

That statement summarized the opinion of three quarters of the fairgoers in Jackson County who chose to stop and vote on the statement “corporations are people.”

“We should amend the constitution to limit money in politics” garnered support from nearly 9 in 10 participants in the voluntary poll. A nearly unanimous 98% of fairgoers voting in the poll agreed with the statement “Every citizen should be encouraged to vote.”

Although unscientific, the poll does reflect attitudes across the United States related to the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision which held that corporations and unions can spend as much money as they like in elections. The court decision opened the door for the “super PACs” of the 2012 presidential race.

In a later 2012 court ruling, Knox v Service Employees International (SEIU) Local 1000, the high court limited the ability of unions to use money in campaigns making the inequality in contributions between unions and corporations even greater.

Immediately following the high court decision on Citizens United an ABC News Washington Post poll of over 1,000 adults found 8 in 10 opposed the court ruling and 72% favored legislative action to reverse the court decision. People of all political persuasions were opposed to the decision including 73% of those who strongly agreed with the Tea Party’s position on issues.

A 2012 Greenburg Quinlan Rosnex Research poll found 56% of respondents agreed the constitution should be amended to change the Citizens United decision and nearly as many agreed that corporations should not have the same rights as people.

Fairgoers told me corporations’ “speech” is not the same as individual’s speech. The dollars corporations can sink into campaigns far outweigh most people’s ability to contribute to campaigns. Because of the 2012 rush of corporate money in campaigns people feel more distant from and more cynical about the operations of government.

But this feeling has not kept people from being involved in efforts to change things.

Efforts are afoot across Wisconsin to amend the U.S. Constitution to change the Citizens United decision. The group, Move to Amend and others around the state are organized to push an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that states inalienable rights belong to human beings only, and that money is not a form of protected free speech under the First Amendment and can be regulated in political campaigns.

I recently co-sponsored a bill that would call for a statewide advisory referendum on the Citizens United decision.  Voters would be asked if they support action by Congress and the State Legislature to amend to the Constitution to state that only human beings are endowed with constitutional rights, and money is not protected speech.

Most fairgoers hadn’t heard about formal efforts starting the process to amend our constitution. But they were eager to share their opinion about money in politics.

Many felt money from outside the state of Wisconsin should be banned from campaigns. Others felt outside groups should not be allowed to campaign. Still others wanted the veil of secrecy lifted from so-called “independent expenditure” groups – those private third party groups with appealing sounding names that spend so much money in campaigns.

Overall, citizens wanted to express their opinions and wanted elected officials to listen. And they wanted to learn, in an unvarnished way, what was really happening in Madison.

I put together a slide show about the state budget and brochure summarizing provisions of the budget. Fairgoers took time to look at the printed version of the slide show and offer their opinions on the state debt and the deficit.

When I left late one night, a woman stopped me and said, “I really appreciate you being here – you’re the only state elected person I got the chance to speak with. Thanks for coming.”

To everyone who stopped to vote or to offer an opinion I say thanks! I value your opinion!