Progressive Thinking

Senator Smith writes about Republican flat tax proposals. Instead of providing tax relief for those who need it the least, Wisconsin has an opportunity to invest our surplus in targeted programs and put money in the pockets of the middle class.

MADISON - In the last year, Republicans talked a lot about a flat tax. They call a flat tax a “simplification” of our tax system, but that’s a simplification of the truth. They make it sound good, but in reality it shifts a bigger share of the tax burden onto middle class families.

So why do Republicans want it? Just last week, Senate Republican Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) said, “We have the resources to do this.” Just because you can do something doesn’t mean it is a good idea. Why spend our hard-earned surplus on the wealthy when we face so many challenges?

Our income tax system only applies higher rates to “marginal” income, or income in excess of the base tax rate. This means wealthy residents pay the same as the rest of us on a certain amount earned, any income in excess of that is taxed at a slightly higher rate. Lowering the rate at which marginal income is taxed provides a windfall to the wealthy, while passing the middle class and the working poor by.

It seems intuitive that the same tax rate across the board makes everything “equal,” but “equal” does not mean “equitable.” The working poor and middle class already pay a greater percentage of their total income when it comes to sales and property tax. These types of taxes concentrate the tax burden on the very poorest.

Let’s do some quick math for the Republicans’ 3.54% flat tax scheme. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Wisconsin’s average estimated individual income is $53,120 per year. That equates to roughly $2,076 in taxes paid for single filers (adjusting income to reflect the state sliding scale standard deduction and personal exemptions). Someone making $1 million per year is paying $69,537 in income taxes. With a flat tax, someone earning the state average income would see a $484 tax cut, or about a 23% cut. Someone earning a million would see a $34,161 tax cut which equals just under a 50% tax cut.

The broader numbers further illustrate this. As cited by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Wisconsin’s nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau (LFB) projected the effect of Wisconsin moving to a 3.54% flat tax. This proposal resulted in enormous gains for the richest taxpayers, with a corresponding dramatic drop in state revenues. Under this tax shell game, state revenue would drop by $5.59 billion in the first year and $3.86 billion per year after the first.

Spending $5.59 billion of Wisconsin’s hard-earned $7 billion surplus on a big tax break for the rich doesn’t curb inflation. It doesn’t add more workers to Wisconsin businesses. It solves zero problems Wisconsin currently faces. We must maintain an equitable tax system and make the investments Wisconsin needs.

Thankfully, Governor Evers continues to advocate for a tax cut targeting the middle class. Wisconsinites want a middle class tax cut and problems solved, not handouts to the wealthy.

Accepting the $5.59 billion hit to state revenues means less funding available for roads, bridges, public education, higher education and healthcare. Rather than disinvesting in local communities, we should provide them with the resources they need. This means fully funding our public schools and making sure local governments have the money they need to run essential emergency services. We can do this – as long as we don’t give tax breaks to those who need them the least.

Using the surplus for targeted investments and putting the money in middle class pockets with progressive tax reform will keep our dollars here, not in some off-shore hedge fund for rich people. We must look to the future. If wealthy people weasel their way out of their fair share with a flat tax, that leaves the middle class picking up the pieces when revenues fall.

We haven’t seen specifics on this proposal as of the writing of this column. As details of this proposal are released, it’s my hope these issues are examined thoroughly. I look forward to working alongside my colleagues to fully vet this legislation and ensure taxpayers get fairness when they file their state taxes in coming years.

Senator Smith writes about the importance of the deliberative process of democracy and how vital it is that the public’s representatives keep the trust given to them by their constituents.

MADISON - This week those of us elected by voters to represent you in various offices, including the State Legislature, take the oath of office to begin our service. The oath I gave, as stated in our Wisconsin constitution, went like this: “I, Jeff Smith, swear that I will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of Wisconsin, and will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of the office of State Senate to the best of my ability. So help me God.”

Before the start of the first session day, all members elected this past November formally take that same oath in an honorable ceremony. On Inauguration Day, there is a lot of good feeling within the Capitol. It’s a time of celebration and fellowship, surrounded by family and well-wishers. It is my hope that this feeling of camaraderie can last beyond that single day.

There is often disagreement on how to deliver on the promise of moving “Forward,” as our state motto says. Disagreement can be constructive when it leads to compromise, yielding decisions that make us a stronger state and union. When elected officials betray your trust and ignore our purpose of service, we find ourselves locked in partisan bickering that gets us nowhere.

In times where the people’s elected representatives show little progress and voters don’t see any agreement or compromise, it can be easy to lose the trust you may have had when you cast your ballot in November. In fact, it seems that the common belief is that it is normal for our elected bodies to only squabble and point fingers rather than work toward accomplishing anything.

When elected officials lie to constituents it reflects on every one of us. Take the egregious example happening in New York, where the person who won a congressional seat from Long Island lied about his education, religion, family background and more to get elected. Too often the reaction is to shrug, scowl and accept his behavior as normal. It is easy to become discouraged, falling into the expectation that you can’t trust any legislator on the state or national level because they “all lie” anyway.

Of course it isn’t fair to judge every person in elected office based on one miscreant. Too often we highlight exceptions to the rule, even when those exceptions are not representative of the vast majority. We hear about those who commit fraud, when most of us are honest and straightforward. It is those who do not behave as expected that get outsize coverage and social media shares. We don’t get to know much about the people who just do what they were hired to do and stay out of trouble. It may even be the case in your workplace that one bad apple reflects badly on everyone else diligently doing their jobs.

I say all this so you might judge your elected officials from either side of the aisle with discretion and give us a chance to prove that most of us really do serve with good intent. At the same time, we have the opportunity at the start of a new session, right after we swore an oath to serve our state, to hold onto the trust you might have in our abilities to do the job expected of us.

That’s why I’ll do all I can to be open to legitimate and reasonable debate of ideas. Not all ideas are universally accepted as good ones. That is why ideas deserve a chance for public hearing and discussion. Once we start with that attitude, we may have a chance to hold onto the congeniality we felt on the first day we took our oath.

Thank you for your trust in me as your state senator. Throughout this year, I’ll continue to update you on legislative happenings, and my door is always open. Email me at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , call my office at 608-266-8546 or drop in to the Capitol if you’re in Madison. I hope to hear from you as we begin another year of working on behalf of you, the citizens of the great state of Wisconsin.

Senator Smith writes about priorities for the upcoming legislative session and looks forward to introducing legislation to improve the quality of life of Wisconsin families.

BRUNSWICK, WI - Another year has flown by. As we celebrate the holidays I hope you have a chance to relax and enjoy time with your family and friends. While there is much to reflect on from 2022, it’s also time to look forward to 2023.

Talking with constituents throughout the year, I know that Wisconsinites want to set the bar high. This year, we have a record-setting budget surplus that we can invest back into our communities to help them thrive. As I consider the upcoming legislative session and the many conversations I had this year, I have a wish list of what I’d like to see accomplished in 2023.

I hope that we can set politics aside to talk about the important issues, like what we can do to protect our citizens. A longstanding goal of mine is to ensure that we fully fund testing for PFAS in all of Wisconsin’s wells. At the very least, you should know what is in the water you cook with and drink. Testing our water will give us the data we need to identify next steps, so we can ensure safe water for all.

We must finally replace the 30-year-old failed school funding formula with one that is fair for every child in Wisconsin. When school districts fall short on funds, local taxpayers have to shoulder the increased cost. In the past three decades, school districts whose residents have voted to raise their property tax rates have done better than those who can’t afford to, leading to terrible inequity between districts. Channeling money from our budget surplus to meet shortfalls in schools is an investment in our children that will pay dividends down the road.

Local governments are encountering similar problems funding fire protection and law enforcement. The state provides tax dollars to local government through the shared revenue program to fund basic emergency services. Unfortunately, sometimes the share of revenue allocated to these purposes isn’t enough. We can help local governments meet the needs of their citizens by restoring local control, which allows local governments to make operational decisions that keep essential services adequately funded.

Some life-changing policies can even bring in revenue. Marijuana legalization will increase the quality of life for many. Legalizing marijuana will increase revenue from legal sales while ensuring a safer product. Wisconsin polling shows voters strongly support legalizing marijuana. Many municipalities passed advisory referenda this fall in favor of legalization. I believe the votes are there in the Legislature to pass a legalization bill, with only a few holdouts standing in the way.

When voters act via referendum and vote directly on the issues, we bypass the politics. Voting rights and reproductive rights are examples of where fears about political backlash have stalled efforts to follow the voters’ wishes. Support for referenda questions is bipartisan. I introduced legislation last session to allow Wisconsin citizens to pass binding referenda questions into law and I will continue pushing for this change next year.

Final Five Voting is an idea that resonated with citizens across the political spectrum. Final Five Voting takes power away from the political parties and puts it in your hands. There’s a great explanation about how Final Five Voting works online at democracyfound.org. I introduced this bill alongside Republican co-authors last session, and look forward to doing so again.

Even in a time when politics have become so polarized, there is much to be done and reason to feel optimistic. It’s very easy to fall into the narrative that we are too divided to get anything done. But the truth is that when we slow down, stay calm and listen to each other, we can learn a lot.

One thing we learn is that we care about many of the same things – our children, our safety, our quality of life and so much more. I hope you will join me in starting the coming year with a positive attitude and a love for our country, our fellow humans and our furry friends. Happy New Year, Wisconsin!

Senator Smith writes about the new broadband expansion maps recently released by the FCC showing levels of internet connectivity throughout the state.

MADISON - January 13^th is an important date for the growth of our state’s future. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is asking for consumer feedback on their new preliminary internet connectivity maps, and the second Friday in January is the deadline for the public to submit their input.

These maps will determine the amount Wisconsin is awarded in the next round of funding through Congress’s Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program. Depending on how we do in this survey, anywhere from $700 million to $1.1 billion may come our way to expand high-speed internet in Wisconsin.

It’s pivotal for the FCC to have accurate information. Mapping will determine where and when we invest money. The BEAD program prioritizes households and businesses that are completely “unserved” by high speed internet at a speed of at least 25 megabits per second (Mbps) while downloading and 3 Mbps while uploading. The project also prioritizes projects that lack high-speed internet, defined as speed of at least 100 Mbps while downloading and 20 Mbps while uploading. It should also be noted that latency speeds in excess of 100 milliseconds are also considered unserved – this is oftentimes the case with satellite internet users.

In the days when telephone and electricity lines were being strung throughout rural America, the saying was that nobody is connected until everyone is connected.

This holds true today when it comes to internet access. We are doing an increasing amount of our shopping online. Healthcare providers are using the Internet to reach patients through telehealth. Educators are finding new ways to engage students using online tools, and students are relying on internet access for their studies and conducting online research. Our world is becoming smaller thanks to the Internet, with family and friends never too far away.

Connecting every household and business with fiber is the goal, and will require a combination of public and private investment. However, maps showing areas of need in the past have been terribly flawed.

These maps group homes and businesses into census blocks, which are generally based on landmarks such as roads, rivers and sometimes property lines. If one property in that area could have access to high speed service, the map will show that everyone in that census block is covered.

This faulty information caused serious issues when money was allocated and distributed for broadband projects. Bringing connectivity to these internet deserts depends on our ability to know where they are.

By submitting a challenge to the preliminary internet maps, you can help the FCC better understand levels of internet connectivity. It’ll help them determine where infrastructure funding can be best utilized. The broadband maps are online at BroadbandMap.FCC.gov. There, you can look up your address and help the FCC know what type of internet is available at your location.

If your home or business is not listed or if there are other inaccuracies about the location, you can report this by clicking “Location Challenge” in the top right corner.

You can find more information about how to submit a location challenge here: https://help.bdc.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/10475216120475-How-to-Submit-a-Location-Challenge-

You also want to make sure that the speeds you are receiving match the speeds reported by your internet service provider. It is easy to check your internet speeds. If you do an internet search for “Run Speed Test,” the top result will be a 30-second speed test, where you will be able to click a button and test your upload and download speeds.

If they don’t match what is listed for your location, make sure you have your building selected on the map. To the right you will see the provider(s), the type of internet service provided to the location, and the reported upload and download speeds offered at that location. If they differ from the speeds you have measured, click “Availability Challenge” in the top right corner.

You can find more information about submitting an availability challenge here: https://help.bdc.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/10476040597787-How-to-Submit-an-Availability-Challenge

Check your internet speeds today, and if they differ from what is reported on these preliminary maps, send in a challenge. Better mapping will guide better distribution of funds and lead to increased access to high-speed internet for everyone.

Judicial races in Wisconsin are supposed to be nonpartisan, but over the last 15 years they have become increasingly partisan. Read how the Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce tilted the scales.

MADISON - Judicial races in Wisconsin are supposed to be nonpartisan. Technically, they still are. And ideally, that’s the way they should be.

Our judges and justices should be above partisanship. They should be impartial arbiters of the law, not beholden to one party or another -- or one ideology or another.

But over the last 15 years, this ideal has fallen by the wayside, as our judicial elections, especially for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, have become increasingly partisan.

This stems largely from a decision by Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce to start throwing huge amounts of money into the races for Wisconsin Supreme Court, and then for liberal groups to respond in kind.

The push by Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce was part of a coordinated move by big business groups around the country to throw themselves into state court races. It also reflected the decades-long strategy by the Koch Brothers and other rightwing forces to take over every lever of political power.

“State Supreme Court elections attracted record sums from business interests,” noted a 2007 report from the Brennan Institute and two other groups.

Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor put it bluntly that year:

“In too many states, judicial elections are becoming political prizefights where partisans and special interests seek to install judges who will answer to them instead of the law and the constitution.”

It wasn’t always this way in Wisconsin. For many years, the Wisconsin Supreme Court had a tremendous national reputation, and outside money played little, if any, role in who got on the court.

For instance, in 2003, in the race between Pat Roggensack and Ed Brunner, outside groups spent all of $27,200 on independent expenditures.

But look what happened in 2007, when Linda Clifford challenged Annette Ziegler. In this one, outside groups spent $3.1 million – more than 100 times what they spent in 2003. Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce itself shelled out $2.2 million for Ziegler, and the rightwing Club for Growth spent $400,000 for her. The liberal Greater Wisconsin Committee spent $400,000 for Clifford.

Then in 2008, outside groups spent $4.8 million when a guy named Michael Gableman challenged Louis Butler, the first African American ever to serve on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The Gableman campaign ran hideously racist ads against Butler and was aided by $1.8 million in expenditures by Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce. The Greater Wisconsin Committee countered with $1.5 million, and Club for Growth poured in $500,000.

The 2009 race between Shirley Abrahamson and Randy Koschnick was an anomaly, with outside groups spending only $577,000. (Abrahamson had raised a lot of money on her own and seemed unbeatable, so the outside groups stayed away, by and large.)

In 2011, in the throes of the anti-Walker protests, the outside groups jumped back in, spending $4.5 million in the race between David Prosser and challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg. Here, the Greater Wisconsin Committee spent $1.7 million for Kloppenburg, with Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce spending $1.1 million for Prosser.

In 2013, things calmed down a bit, with outside groups spending $1.2 million in the race between Pat Roggensack and Ed Fallone. Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce spent $500,000 in this one for Roggensack. Club for Growth spent $350,000 for her. And the Wisconsin Realtors Association spent $207,000 for her.

The 2015 race between Ann Walsh Bradley and James Daley was another anomaly, with only $171,000 in outside spending, with all but $2,000 of that was from the Greater Wisconsin Committee in favor of Ann Walsh Bradley. (Like Abrahamson in 2009, Bradley had raised a lot of money on her own and most outside groups held their fire.)

In 2016, JoAnne Kloppenburg challenged Rebecca Bradley, and outside groups spent $3.43 million. Here, the leading rightwing spender was the Wisconsin Alliance for Reform, which spent $2.6 million on behalf of Rebecca Bradley. The Greater Wisconsin Committee spent $710,000 for Kloppenburg.

In 2018, outside groups spent $2.8 million in the race between Rebecca Dallet and challenger Michael Screnock. Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce spent $1.2 million on behalf of Screnock. The Greater Wisconsin Committee spent $940,000 on behalf of Dallet.

In 2019, outside groups spent $4.5 million in the race between Brian Hagedorn and challenger Lisa Neubauer. In this one, the Greater Wisconsin Committee spent $2.3 million, with the Republican State Leadership Committee spending $1.25 million.

Then in 2020, outside spending reached a record high of $5 million in the race between Jill Karofsky and incumbent Dan Kelly. The liberal group A Better Wisconsin Together spent $1.9 million. Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce spent $1.1 million. The Republican State Leadership Committee spent $897,000. And the Koch Brothers’ group, Americans for Prosperity, spent $479,000.

We can expect the April 2023 race to once again break a record, as Pat Roggensack is retiring, leaving three liberals on the court and three conservatives. So whoever replaces her in that race will determine the ideological balance on the court.

That noise you hear is the avalanche of outside money that is about to pour down on Wisconsin.

Audio Commentary