Sunday, June 23, 2024

August Constitutional amendment is more WisGOP scumbaggery. VOTE NO

In 51 days, Wisconsin voters are going to be faced with an important ballot question that was placed by the gerrymandered WisGOP Legislature, with the intent of not slipping it through without much attention. Which is a big reason why it should be given attention, and a resounding NO vote.

The ballot question seems to be tame on the surface.

Now you might think "doesn't the Legislature already do this?" And indeed, much of this is determined part of the state budget, and are OK'd by both parties without much concern, because it keeps these needed services going without having to use state tax dollars to do it. Many of these federal dollars are automatically allocated by formula through acts of Congress, and while WalletHub says Wisconsin's state government is 45th out of the 50 states when it comes to reliance on federal dollars, our most recent state budget still had over $28 billion coming from DC.

Not that the WisGOP Legislature hasn't been able to manipulate where these funds go. Sometimes this is done through budget deliberations, moving Federal block funds toward one direction and not another. The Legislature's Joint Finance Committee often has to sign off on increases in federal funding or other allocations as things change throughout the 2-year budget cycle.

For example, in 2022 the GOPs that control the Finance Committee stopped the Wisconsin DOT from using additional Infrastructure Act dollars for the unholy purpose of... improving air quality through more walking and biking trails?
For a statewide $283 million transit and infrastructure package, $4.3 million is not a lot of money.

But Republican legislators on the Joint Finance Committee (JFC), the Wisconsin Legislature’s committee in charge of overseeing the state budget, decided on April 27 to limit the use of those funds. Reversing an element of the state Department of Transportation’s spending plan, the JFC has barred the state from using these funds for bike or walking trails, public transit, basically anything other than highway right-of-way or signaling improvements, setting back initiatives to make communities more walkable, bikeable, and public transit-friendly.

The $283 million was from the federal Infrastructure Investments and Jobs Act, otherwise known as the bipartisan infrastructure bill. The $4.3 million was under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ), which allocates funding for states to improve air quality, either by investing in infrastructure to reduce congestion (reducing the amount of exhaust personal vehicles emit while on the road) or to improve alternative forms of transit, such as bikes, walking, or public transit.
So if fed funds are already able to be manipulated by the Legislature, why make it a Constitutional law, which makes it harder to do away with it? Marquette University Professor Philip Rocco does a great job in explaining the real reasons behind it, in an article in The Recombobulation Area.

Taken together, the amendments contained in Question 1 and 2 would eliminate virtually any power the governor has to allocate certain federal funds without approval from the legislature. This would represent a significant enhancement of the legislature’s power, overturning a law that has been in place since 1931, which says that: “whenever the United States government shall make available funds for the education, the promotion of health, the relief of indigency, the promotion of agriculture or for any other purpose other than the administration of the tribal or any individual funds of Wisconsin Indians, the governor on behalf of the state is authorized to accept the funds so made available.”

In other words: suppose Wisconsin experiences a natural disaster, an economic crisis, or — as happened in 2020 — both. The federal government rushes aid to the state. Under current law, the governor would be authorized to accept these unanticipated funds and allocate them to impacted businesses, communities, or individuals.

But if the amendments contained in Questions 1 and 2 pass, the state legislature would be able to insert itself into the process, preventing the governor from allocating the funds until the legislature approves.
And THAT'S the real reason the WisGOPs want to put in this constitutional change. Because Governor Evers was able to use billions COVID relief funds without interference from the gerrymandered Legislature (and especially the GOP-dominated Joint Finance Committee) as the state went through the COVID pandemic and its aftermath, it made for an efficient response that sent funds to people and sectors of the economy that were badly in need.

It is not in the GOP's interest to see the federal government and a Democratic governor actively working to get people and businesses back to work and back on their feet, and to have these programs work and have voters demand they continue in the future. So they want to be able to control every extra dollar that comes in after the budget is passed, and I would bet that the GOPs on JFC would use these new powers to do what they do best - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

You know, just like how they're holding up $125 million in funds to clean up PFAS in the state, and holding up $15 million in aid to hospitals in the Eau Claire area to maintain medical services in an area that had multiple hospitals and medical providers close earlier this year. Money that has ALREADY BEEN SIGNED INTO LAW, by the way.

This makes the WisGOP attempt to tie up funds scummy enough, but it is especially sleazy because they are trying to sneak through these permanent changes in an August election, as Professor Rocco points out that there will be many fewer voters at that time compared to what we'll see in November.
In 2022, just 27% of voters participated in the state’s August primaries, which was a 40-year high. Since 2000, turnout in November general elections has been, on average, three times higher than it is in partisan primaries.

In just a few months, Wisconsin voters will for the first time vote on whether to amend the constitution in an August primary election. Unlike 2022, there will be no big-ticket contests for governor or U.S. senator. Of Wisconsin’s eight congressional districts, only two (District 3 and District 7) will see a contested Democratic primary. There are three contested Republican primaries (in Congressional Districts 2, 4, and 8). Of the 99 State Assembly districts, only 21 will feature contested Democratic primaries. In the Republican column, there are 24 contested primaries. In short, August elections will likely see a turnout rate lower than in 2022.
If the WisGOPs in the Legislature believed that casual voters would go for this idea, they'd be glad to promote it as part of their re-election campaigns in November. They're not, and that should tell us a lot.

Plus, it is likely that WisGOP is trying to shove through this BS before the new legislative maps are in effect, with Dems finally having a legitimate chance to win the State Assembly, and are very likely to end the GOP supermajority in the State Senate. So the WisGOPs are trying to leave behind all of these barriers that make it even harder to reverse the garbage they put into law through their rigged maps and sketchy tactics, and keep Wisconsin from moving in a direction that their voters are asking for.

Which helps explain why they're so desperate to handcuff this state while they can. It's a sign of weakness. Needless to say, you should vote NO (HELL NO) to these amendments. And given that it's a lower-turnout election, the more that you can draw attention to this BS to casual voters, the more it has a chance of going down in flames, and further demoralizing a Wisconsin GOP that already seems to be in decline.

2 comments:

  1. It would seem to me that any amendments to our State Constitution should require passage by a majority of registered voters, not unlike the GOP requirement that any union reauthorization require passage by a majority of affected employees, not just a majority of voters

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very good point there. It is funny that union reauthorization has a much higher threshold than actual elections, doesn't it? Almost seems illegal or something.

      And yes, we at least need a law put in place that says Constitutional amendments require at least half of those voting in NOVEMBER elections to approve. For example, April's amendments (on BS related to Big Lie memes) only required 590,000 votes to become adopted. But in November 2022 we had more than 2.6 million total votes, and in November 2024, it was over 3.2 million.

      As mentioned, the fact that the gerrymandered Legislature is trying to sneak this through in a lower-turnout election is reason enough to vote NO.

      Delete