Progressive Thinking

State highway Projects have cost $3 billion more than projected, and the quality of Wisconsin roads have deteriorated in just five years. What's wrong, and what can we do better?

MADISON - The Department of Transportation audit announcement felt like a sucker punch to the gut. Projects in the works for our state roads have cost $3 billion more than projected. $3 billion more than the Legislature planned for. This is simply unbelievable. Wisconsin roads have gone from 53% “good” to 41% “good” in just five years.

How do our roads deteriorate that much in just five years? Complete lack of adequate funding. The 2011 state budget cut road funding by delaying projects, postponing large projects and cutting funds to rural roads in Wisconsin. Each and every budget since then has done the same thing. The Transportation Fund has been in crisis mode since the Legislature repealed the indexing of the gas tax and there have been no true solutions put forth by the majority party.

Before the last biennial budget, this crisis was truly recognized statewide by all Legislators and the Governor. Governor Walker even asked his Transportation Secretary to come up with possible solutions to this economic crisis. A group of experts met and they came up with many different options for ensuring that our immediate road needs and our long term funding crisis could be addressed. Governor Walker and the Republican majority rejected each and every idea this group of experts put forth. Instead, they chose to borrow once again for our roads and delayed projects, postponed large projects, and cut funding to rural roads. It is like ground hogs day with an increasingly bumpy road.

Why is funding for roads so important? First and foremost is the safety of all of us going where we need to go. Hazardous roads equal unsafe roads for our families. Second is the economy. How can we expect our lagging economy to improve if we don’t have the infrastructure to support the businesses that work here? How can we expect new businesses to move into a state that has 41% “poor” roads? From farms to factories, road travel is still the cheapest and fastest way for businesses to move products and supplies. We will never catch up to our neighboring states if we do not invest in our roads.

Delaying and bonding and backfilling have been used time and time again to fund our roads and it simply is not working. Over 20 cents on every dollar we are spending now to build our roads is going to financing of yesterday’s projects. This credit card, funding scheme has to stop.

I stand ready, as I have for the last six years, willing to work with any Legislator with the strength to find a short term and long term solution for transportation funding. Governor Walker and Legislative Republicans need to put their money where their mouths are and help this state. No more excuses.

******

For more information on the Legislative Audit of the Department of Transportation or the Transportation Financing crisis contact my office at 608-266-6670 or 888-549-0027 or This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

The recent Legislative Audit Bureau audit of State Highway Program showed the estimated costs at the time of a highway project approval were much less than costs at completion. The LAB makes many recommendations to DOT to improve their practices.

ALMA, WI - “Let me see how much you spent,” my mother said when I returned from the store. As the oldest of five children, I was often sent to the store to buy groceries. When I returned home, my mother checked the grocery bag, the receipt and counted the change.

I knew I could buy no more than exactly what was on her list. She knew how much everything should cost. I needed to answer for every penny I spent. Everything needed to add up.

This simple accountability seems to be completely missing at our Department of transportation (DOT).

My mother has now gone to live with the angels. However, she would be appalled at the findings in a recent audit released by the nonpartisan Legislative Audit Bureau (LAB).

Auditors looked at spending on highways and found actual spending on individual projects much greater than the cost estimates provided to the Legislature at enumeration, which means legislative approval of the project. In some cases, actual costs for highways were four times more than the approved estimates.

Auditors examined highway projects completed from January 2006 to December 2015. At enumeration, cost estimates for none of the 19 completed projects took into account the increases in inflation during the life of the project. In every completed major highway project reviewed, actual costs were more than the cost estimates provided at enumeration. Over half of the projects had actual costs that were more than DOUBLE the cost estimates at enumeration. Two projects – including I-94 to Chippewa Falls were more than FOUR TIMES the cost estimates provided at enumeration.

The I-94 to Chippewa Falls project was enumerated in 1991 and the last bills were paid in 2011. Why did this information not become part of a public discussion before now?

Part of the answer lies in a lack of transparency and oversight.

This audit, just as prior audits, illuminated problems with missing paperwork and poor oversight. Because of prior audit findings, legislators changed the law to require DOT to report clear information on actual compared to budgeted costs.

Despite the new law, DOT did not provide complete information to the oversight body - the Transportation Projects Commission, which is made up of political appointees. The law required regular reporting by DOT to the Commission.

Auditors also examined current DOT highway projects and found similar problems. In every project reviewed, cost estimates in August 2016 were higher than the cost estimates at enumeration. Of the sixteen major ongoing highway projects, eight are more than double the cost estimates at enumeration, with one – Highway 10 from Marshfield to Appleton – over four times greater.

Why have project cost estimates increased so much?

Auditors mention two reasons: unexpected costs and inflation. DOT did not sufficiently consider the effects of inflation. They also made major errors (my words, not the auditors) in their cost estimates due to unexpected cost increases.

An example may help explain these unexpected cost increases.

In planning construction on I-39/90 from Madison to the Stateline, DOT used five-year-old traffic counts. They updated the project with new counts in 2012. DOT then decided to increase pavement thickness and add two more additional lanes near Janesville. DOT bought additional real estate, moved power lines they had not anticipated, increased the shoulder width and provided alternate routes to avoid delays and accidents. These changes explained about three-quarters of the nearly half a billion of the increase in the project’s cost estimate.

All of these changes may appear reasonable. However, serious problems exist in the system when cost estimates increase from about $700 million to over $1.2 billion with no public accountability or legislative authority.

Auditors recommend legislators and the public are kept better informed. In its report, the LAB makes 45 separate recommendations. In response to the audit, Speaker Robin Vos called on DOT to provide details related to all DOT projects and actual cost.

But how is it the Department of Transportation has paid more –sometimes four times more – on projects than cost estimates provided at enumeration?

There are more details in the audit, which provide insight into the current budget problems facing the state as we contemplate the next budget. I will be reporting on these details and the activities of the audit committee. This is our opportunity as thoughtful citizens to say, “Let me see how much you spent.”

The Occupy movement on the left and the Tea Party movement on the right took different paths to effect political change. The new strategic blueprint called “Indivisible” is currently all the rage on the left, but may not be new at all.

ALTOONA, WI - During the Great Recession — the worst economic downturn in America since the Great Depression — more than 8 million jobs were lost, family incomes dropped and poverty spiked. Nearly 4 million homes were foreclosed each year.

These traumas brought millions of Americans to a fork in the road politically. Some went right at the fork, others went left, giving rise to two landscape-altering social movements.

The Occupy movement on the left, with its “We are the 99%” catchphrase, changed the national conversation by bringing income and wealth inequality to the forefront of public consciousness. Democrats weren’t focusing on it to speak of, nor were most liberal advocacy groups. Before Occupy, the term “one-percenter” wasn’t part of our political vocabulary and little attention was being paid to how the nation’s rich were getting vastly wealthier while the poor were growing poorer and the middle class was disappearing. Occupy changed that. Occupy made talk of economic inequality commonplace. That’s no small achievement.

The Tea Party movement on the right, with its “Don’t Tread on Me” mindset, changed the Republican Party. In so doing, Tea Partiers changed Congress and state legislatures across the country. They put the fear of God into mainstream GOP politicians. Those politicians were given a choice. Either grant Tea Partiers their wishes, or face their wrath on the campaign trail. A few, like House Republican leader Eric Cantor, took their chances at the ballot box. Most others fell in line, spooked by how the Tea Party made examples of the likes of Cantor.

Other than obvious ideological differences, the big distinction between the Occupy and Tea Party movements is that one deliberately steered clear of involvement with elections while the other jumped into elections with both feet. That says a lot about the right and left today. One side is dogged in its pursuit of political power and will go to any lengths to get it. The other prefers to protest and march and picket.

Any honest assessment of the overall impact of these two movements has to conclude that the Tea Party has had the bigger influence on our country’s direction. Which suggests the ballot is mightier than the placard. Which calls into question the strategic impulses of the forces gathering in America to resist the turn the nation has taken.

A new strategic blueprint called “Indivisible” is currently all the rage on the left. The brainchild of some former Democratic congressional staffers, it suggests people on the left can block the Trump agenda by copying tactics the Tea Party used to stymie President Obama’s. They claim to offer “best practices for making Congress listen” to the people. Question: If former Capitol Hill staffers know the best practices for making Congress listen to us and now have a fail-safe blueprint for resisting Trump, how did they manage to become so utterly powerless in Washington and why couldn’t they prevent the Tea Party takeover of Congress?

A part of the Tea Party’s approach — the most important and effective part — is conspicuously missing from the strategy cooked up by these Capitol Hill operatives. Tea Partiers not only condemned Obama’s every move, they contested Republican elections. They ended up being unable to deny Obama a second term. But they did end Eric Cantor’s career and the careers of a slew of his establishment Republican colleagues. They seized power in Congress to the point where they could dictate terms to House Speaker John Boehner as well as his successor Paul Ryan.

Considering who concocted the left’s new recipe and what key ingredient they chose to omit, it looks less like an effort to cook up a Tea Party-style insurrection on the Democratic side and more like an attempt to head one off at the pass.

Project Labor Agreements (PLA’s) are one of the few tools that local governments have left to put “Wisconsin first” when it comes to public construction projects, but Madison legislators want to eliminate it as part of the bidding process.

MADISON - As President Trump takes the initial steps to get America out of poorly negotiated trade deals like NAFTA and TPP, Wisconsin Republicans are negotiating amongst themselves to eliminate guarantees that public construction projects are completed on time, on budget and built using local workers.

The issue at hand is legislation to prohibit local governments from using Project Labor Agreements (PLA’s) as part of the bidding process for government construction projects like schools, libraries and jails. Poorly negotiated, like NAFTA and TPP, this legislation will take job opportunities away from Wisconsin workers on taxpayer funded construction projects.

Project Labor Agreements are one of the few tools that local governments have left to put “Wisconsin first” when it comes to public construction projects. Taxpayers throughout the state will be spending hundreds of millions of dollars building new schools and maintaining those already in use. Project Labor Agreements allow local governments to get up front guarantees to make sure that these schools are built by local workers and completed on time and on budget.

No one wants the jobs for these projects to be filled by workers from Iowa, Illinois, or Minnesota, but this legislation sets the table to allow just that. Project Labor Agreements protect Wisconsin jobs on Wisconsin construction projects. PLA’s are in place for the Northwestern Mutual expansion project in Milwaukee, Lambeau Field, Miller Park and the new Bucks arena. Toyota has used Project Labor Agreements for every American auto plant they have built. Even Wal-Mart is increasingly using PLA’s for their construction projects.

Like NAFTA and TPP, this legislation is another example of poorly negotiated policy from politicians who believe in a one size fits all approach. A one size fits all approach from Madison is bad for local governments, bad for construction workers and bad for Wisconsin.

This legislation is a completely partisan effort to undercut both local government and construction workers. The bill prohibits local government from asking for up front guarantees in the bidding process to make sure that school, libraries, jails and other public construction projects are done on time, on budget and built with local workers.

Instead, the proponents of this legislation believe that local governments should ask contractors to provide workplace guarantees out of the kindness of their heart. We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars in construction projects in every part of Wisconsin. No guarantees for taxpayers, no guarantees for workers.

It’s poorly negotiated, completely partisan and bad for Wisconsin.

Proponents say that they don’t want to force non-union workers to contribute to a union. Wisconsin’s new Right to Work law specifically prohibits forcing any worker to join or make contributions to a union. The proponents of this legislation have brought forth a litany of “alternative facts” to defend these poorly negotiated bills. And last, but certainly not least, proponents of this legislation want to eliminate any up front leverage that local governments might have to guarantee that projects are done on time, on budget and built with local workers.

With wide majorities in both houses of the legislature, Republicans will decide the direction that Wisconsin is going take. The irony is that with one party rule in Madison, Republicans are negotiating with themselves to undercut both taxpayers and workers. The only question is just how far they will go.

Eliminating the use of Project Labor Agreements as part of the bidding process is a bad deal for Wisconsin. It is a poorly negotiated piece of partisan legislation. Unfortunately, the proponents of this legislation say that this is the path we are going to take whether you like it or not.

Walker’s golden shower economics haven’t been the answer, which leaves him in need of a whipping boy, a scapegoat, someone to bear the blame for his administration’s failings. This time it's food stamp recipients.

ALTOONA, WI - For as long as there have been politicians, there have been whipping boys. Politicians need someone to punish for their own shortcomings.

No one is better with the whip than Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. He is highly skilled in the use of divide-and-conquer tactics, a master at pitting one group of struggling and vulnerable people against another.  It’s his favorite play, the governor’s political equivalent of Vince Lombardi’s Power Sweep or USC’s famed “Student Body Right.”

Walker turns to this page in his playbook repeatedly, whenever he’s feeling the least bit threatened politically. He just did it again, proposing stricter work requirements for those receiving food stamps in Wisconsin.

He is counting on Democrats to rush to the defense of food stamp recipients. He wants them to accuse him of beating up on the poor. He needs them to. They surely will oblige, which is critical to the successful execution of the governor’s play.

Once they do what they always do, Walker can paint the Democrats as the party of handouts, the party devoted to taking from those who work and giving to those who don’t. And he can pit those who are having a hard time making ends meet but don’t qualify for food stamps against those who rely on them to eat.

Most importantly, he can divert attention from the dismal failure of his feed-the-rich economic policies. With Walker at the helm, Wisconsin is leading the nation in shrinkage of the middle class. The state is dead last in new business start-ups and entrepreneurial activity.

When Walker does what he always does and the Democrats respond how they always respond, the questions that most need asking don’t get asked. The debate that is most needed is never had.

Wisconsin should be debating how to create an economy where if you work you won’t be poor and won’t go hungry. It is undeniable that we don’t have such an economy today. We should be aspiring to an economy where food stamps and other forms of welfare become unnecessary.

We should be talking about the fact that government spends more on corporate welfare than it does on social welfare that makes up the proverbial safety net. We should be discussing how to create an economy anchored in a free and fair market for everyone, not crony capitalism for a favored few. We should be demanding that Walker’s corporate welfare office be shut down.

We should be acknowledging that demand and not supply is the primary driver of economic growth and that feeding the rich in hopes of stoking supply has been a miserable failure, never producing more than a trickle for the masses and causing the grotesque economic inequality and the slow but steady extermination of the middle class we are experiencing today.

Wisconsin is a shadow of its former self economically. Walker’s golden shower economics haven’t been the answer, which leaves him in need of a whipping boy, a scapegoat, someone to bear the blame for his administration’s failings. That’s where food stamp recipients come in handy to him, so long as the Democrats play into his hands and do their part to help him isolate and stigmatize them.