Wisconsin's charter school hustle gets a hearing

Today featured a day-long public hearing in the Wisconsin Assembly's Committee on Urban Public Education, and it all had to do with Assembly Bill 549, a bill that would greatly expand the availability of charter schools, and allow many more groups to run these types of schools, which are frequently given the "freedom" to go around teacher's unions and install their own work conditions and credentials for teachers.

I'll let Andy at the Wisconsin Soapbox give you all of the gory details of this bill, but here's an example of just how this bill would subvert public schools in Wisconsin even more than they've already been messed with.

This bill effectively makes it so that a national operator can set up with any entity that will give them a charter. (I'm sure absolutely NOTHING political ever happens here...) It also means that, because the CESA's can authorize, every county in Wisconsin is eligible to be included. Even with the UW's and Technical Schools there would only be a handful of counties in the northern part of the state that would be excluded. Don't be fooled folks, this is to let people make a buck off of education. (Oh... hey voucher program. How are ya doing...)

... The bill creates a new process by which a person who has a proven track record of success for each charter school the person operates in this state may establish and operate additional independent charter schools. Under the bill, a person has a proven track record of success operating a charter school if during each of the two immediately preceding school years the total percentage of pupils attending the charter school who received a score of advanced or proficient on the state assessments for math and reading in all tested grades taught at the charter school is at least ten percentage points higher than the total percentage of pupils attending public schools in the school district where that charter school is located who received the same scores on the same assessments in the same grades. Under the bill, an independent authorizer who receives a letter of intent from a person with a proven track record of success with whom the independent authorizer has an existing contract must, at the person's request, contract with that person to operate up to two additional charter schools per school year. The bill specifies that a charter school established under this process is not a satellite or subsidiary campus of an existing charter school.

So in other words, if you are a big national group that comes in and can show that you do nothing more than improve scores in math and reading, you automatically can start opening additional schools with little to no questions asked. (Oh hey Rocketship...)

Andy also mentions the part that Cooperative Educational Service Agencies (CESAs) could also run charter schools, which is intriguing because guess what Senate Education Chair Luther Olsen's wife (ex-State Rep. Joan Wade) is an administrator of? A CESA! And it's not the first time this conflict of interest with Olsen and Wade has popped up, as I noted in July 2011 that Luther has tried to help out his old lady through this type of legislation before.

It's also worth noting that the Assembly sponsor speaking at length about the measure today was none other than State Rep. Dale (Koo-Koo) Kooyenga, who claimed that opening up more places to charter schools would "shake up the status quo." Obviously Koo-Koo doesn't care to speak to many teachers, as many of them would already say that education has been shaken up plenty the last few years in this state, and that his type isn't really helping the situation. But then you see that Koo-Koo was honored by the Koch's Tax Foundation as one of 6 who got their "Outstanding Achievement in State Tax Reform" and you can see who he's working for. It ain't the folks back in his Tosa/Brookfield district, that's for sure.

And in the testimony I saw, Koo-Koo was basically admitting that he wanted to remove the governance of charter schools from locally-elected school boards and put it in the hands of these other operators. It was these types of potential "other operators" and ALEC/Koch-type wingnut welfare folks that seemed to be the only people I saw in favor of this bill. Makes sense on it's face, as it'd give them a huge amount of taxpayer dollars that would allow them the chance to make money off of kids' schooling!

Fortunately, a lot of the education and reality-based community struck back. Some were nice about it, like John Forrester of the School Administrators Alliance, who pointed out that moving funding to charter schools takes it away from public ones, and would inevitably raise local property taxes along with lowering the quality of schooling for most in the state. Others were a bit more blunt, as reporters Erin Richards and Rebecca Kemble noted.

Kettle Moraine's @PDeklotz just GOT REAL at the #AB549 charter school hearing, telling lawmakers they're being more harmful than helpful.

— Erin Richards (@emrichards) January 9, 2014

Hicks on #AB549 and #PublicEd privatization in Milwaukee: "We call these new charter and voucher schools 'New Hustler Academies.'"

— Rebecca Kemble (@rebeccakemble) January 9, 2014

Why yes, this bill is a giant hustle with taxpayer dollars being the investment capital for these grifting corporations. Just like a lot of other things in Fitzwalkerstan these days, when you think about it. This bill is bad news and should be blasted out of the water as soon as possible, with a giant spotlight being shown on the puppetmasters behind the corrupt WisGOP politicians that stamp their name on this legislation.


We can run a school for less and score more.

WEDC pt. 2- Give em more money?

Here's my second WEDC story, and it's related to the organization being part of tomorrow's Joint Finance Committee meeting to discuss its funding for the next 18 months.

Gov. Walker originally wanted to give WEDC more than $128 million in the 2013-15 budget, with $73.6 million coming from general taxpayers. But that was shot down as Wisconsin's Legislative Audit Bureau revealed WEDC's shoddy bookkeeping, lack of accountability and questionable (at best) practices of handing out tax credits for job creation. Instead, what the legislature decided to do was to give WEDC $55.55 million for this fiscal year, and held back more than $63 million in the JFC's supplemental fund. The idea behind this was to buy time to see if WEDC could get its act together, and to then fund at an appropriate level at a later point in the two-year biennium. And now, 6 months into the 24-month budget, the JFC is deciding to make some decisions about these extra funds.

It includes $42.8 million in general taxpayer dollars, and $20.3 million from the state's Economic Development Fund. The Econ. Development Fund used to be known as a recycling surcharge, and is described by the LFB in their information paper for tomorrow's meeting as follows.

Prior to 2013 Act 20 [the state budget], the economic development surcharge was imposed on all farm and nonfarm businesses that had more than $4 million in gross receipts. Under Act 20, the economic development surcharge was eliminated for farms, partnerships, and individuals, beginning with tax year 2013. As a result, under current law, the economic development surcharge equals 3% of gross tax liability for corporations (including insurance companies and LLCs taxed as corporations). The minimum economic development surcharge is $25 and the maximum is $9,800. Economic development surcharge payments, including interest and penalties, are deposited into the segregated economic development fund. Economic development fund revenues are appropriated to WEDC and used to fund financial assistance for economic development projects. In addition, annual funding is appropriated to the Department of Revenue for administering the surcharge.

At the end of fiscal year 2012-13, the undesignated fund balance in the economic development fund was $16 million. If current trends continue, including the estimated effect of eliminating the surcharge on farms, partnerships and individuals, annual fund revenues would be an estimated $22.4 million.

The LFB goes on to say that the Economic Development Fund could have a surplus of $21.7 million by the end of this budget, and that gives the JFC a few options on how to fund WEDC. As a newspaper article from this weekend points out, between the projected surplus in the regular Economic Development Fund, and the funds in the Supplemental Fund that have yet to be released to WEDC, there's around $34 or $35 million in extra cash to play with in the Economic Development Fund.

Along with those funds, WEDC has some extra general taxpayer money lying around. Strangely, having these left-overs didn't cause the same amount of outrage that similar types of reserves in the UW System caused (I'm sure it's just coincidence).

During the 2012-13 fiscal year closing process, WEDC determined that the unassigned fund balance for the Corporation exceeded the maximum target balance amount (25% of revenues) by $18.4 million. WEDC indicates that the excess balance included the carryover of Department of Commerce funding, and also reflected lower than expected demand for Corporation loan programs. On October 25, 2013, the WEDC Board approved a resolution recommending that WEDC use a portion of the excess unassigned fund balance to offset state funds.

As noted above, a total of $3,750,000 GPR in 2013-14 and 2014-15 was placed in the JFC supplemental appropriation for potential increased marketing expenses. The Corporation is required to submit a report for Joint Finance approval, specifying the extent to which marketing expenses may be funded with existing funds, rather than requiring additional GPR funding. Also, 2014-15 funding of $35,274,700 GPR was placed in the JFC supplemental GPR appropriation and $20,276,000 SEG [the Economic Development Fund] was placed in the JFC supplemental SEG appropriation. WEDC is required to submit a report indicating compliance with the recommendations of the May, 2013, LAB audit of WEDC, and the CEO of the Corporation is required to testify at the second quarterly meeting of Joint Finance. The Committee is authorized to release the funding based on the CEO's testimony and the information in the report, if the Committee finds that WEDC is complying with the audit recommendations. WEDC submitted a copy of the compliance plan submitted to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee on October 1, 2013. In the plan, WEDC indicates the actions taken and policies modified or developed that respond to each of the audit recommendations. WEDC has submitted a proposal under which the Corporation would not request the $3,750,000 for marketing placed in the Committee's supplemental appropriation in 2013-14 and 2014-15, and would, instead, use $7,500,000 of the $18,400,000 excess unassigned fund balance to fund increased marketing costs. In addition, in its October 28, 2013, submission to Joint Finance the Corporation proposes using the remaining $10,900,000 of excess unassigned balance funds to offset 2013-15 operations and program costs. As a result, while not specified, the WEDC proposal effectively requests transfer of $24,374,700 GPR and $20,276,000 SEG in 2014-15 from the JFC supplemental appropriations to WEDC.

The expanded marketing efforts mentioned by the LFB include the silly "open for business" ads that I mentioned yesterday, keeping with the failed, Confederate-state mentality that has landed Wisconsin 37th for job growth.

The left-over $18.4 million of general taxpayer funds is being proposed to be sent back to the state, to either be banked or used later to cover some other services. Of course, given that we know there is an estimated $136 million in state deficits for Medicaid and W-2 welfare, maybe the GOP-dominated JFC could use some of that excess money in WEDC to take care of some of those problems (along with taking the expanded Medicaid funding in Obamacare). Nah, why would I expect them to do a sensible thing like that, when they can continue to cling to the delusions that "It's Working" in the Age of Fitzwalkerstan?

Keep your eye on this meeting, and see if there is any hint of the WisGOP's learning anything as 2014 begin. Or do they go the other way, and much like another Dubya would, continue to "Stay the Course", regardless of the changing situation or failing results.

EDIT- Ed Heinzelmann at Blogging Blue comes up with a solid suggestion. Why not use the Economic Development Fund surplus to take care of the so-far unfunded financial aid for the new UW Flex Option? Helping students advance their skills would sure do a lot more for improving business in Wisconsin than anything WEDC's been doing.

WEDC pt. 1- Very silly commercials

A few recent developments are brewing involving our old friends at the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC). I wanted to deal with them in separate stories, so I could get into them in detail.

The first involves a new TV advertising blitz that WEDC will put out to try to encourage businesses to locate in Wisconsin.

The Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. will use close to 10 percent of its $5.75 million annual marketing budget — itself more than triple last year’s $1.5 million budget — for the two ads, which feature brief testimonials from business executives touting the state’s “pro-business climate” and “strong workforce.”

Featured leaders include Christopher Lofgren, CEO of Green Bay-based trucking giant Schneider National, and Louise Hemstead of Organic Valley, a cooperative of organic farmers in La Farge.

The 30-second spots will run for eight weeks in three television markets: Chicago; Rockford, Ill.; and the Minneapolis-St. Paul area. They will air on cable news channels CNN, CNBC and Fox News.

The ads will air during programs that target business leaders, including CNBC’s “Mad Money,” “The O’Reilly Factor” on Fox and CNN shows hosted by Anderson Cooper, Erin Burnett and Wolf Blitzer, at a total cost for production and airtime of $537,000, according to Kelly Lietz, WEDC’s vice president of marketing.

First of all, while it's not unusual or even wrong for the state to use some funds to try to pump themselves up (even if the whole "steal other states' companies" plan is generally a big fat FAIL), I gotta object to a couple of things here.

1. Why would you put ads on in states that Gov. Walker has constantly denigrated over the last 3 years, despite those states generally outperforming Wisconsin's economy (especially Minnesota)?

2. I love the idea of "shows that target business leaders" like "Mad Money", "O'Reilly" and "Erin Burnett". So we're not going to market to younger, start-up types that might bring vitality to an area. Nope, we'll try to impress self-important, old white male d-bags who judge themselves on social comparison, and fancy themselves as be far more interesting and intelligent than they probably are. Speaks volumes, doesn't it?

3. If you're going to talk up a "pro-business climate" and "strong workforce", wouldn't you want to have policies which reinforce that? You know, like improving the quality of education instead of cutting it to the bone and lowering teacher pay? Or by not being in the lower half of the country for job creation or having the lowest manufacturing wage in the Midwest? Now making people dumb and destitute might impress scumbag owners who think the pathway to success in business is by reducing things to the lowest common denominator, but that doesn't get the job done with true creators and leaders in the business world, who value places with a high quality of life that attract talent (including marriage equality, which both Minnesota and Illinois have approved of) and are open to new ideas. WEDC's strategy is a very 20th Century mentality in a 21st Century world.

4. While the Organic Valley folks have a history of low-dollar campaign donations to Dem candidates over the years (like you'd imagine organic farmers might), it's noteworthy that Chris Lofgren at Schneider National is one of the other spokesmodels for WEDC. A quick check of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign's website shows that Lofgren has given Scott Walker $2,000 in the last 2 years, and thrown thousands more to other Republicans. And Schneider employees have given nearly $30,000 to Walker's campaigns since he took office as governor in 2011. It's not hard to figure that there might be some kind of payback involved in Lofgren's appearances in these WEDC ads, and you have to wonder if the favor will be returned in more WEDC tax breaks in the future.

Lastly, I noticed that one of the main people quoted in the article on the new WEDC ads is it's 2nd-highest official, Ryan Murray. Isthmus's Marc Eisen went over the then-30-year-old Murray's background when he was hired in July, 2012 after WEDC's first round of screw-ups was coming to light, and its original leadership was being shoved out the door resigning.

Murray's resume shows him to be conspicuously devoid of any private-sector experience, but well schooled in the political arts.

Murray studied political science at UW-Superior and Macalester College (no degree is noted), and then blazed like a meteorite from the 2004 Bush-Cheney presidential campaign through multiple Republican legislative offices to a series of senior positions for Walker, culminating as director of policy and legislative affairs.

I tried and failed to contact Murray to see how his immersion in politics made this young man so knowledgeable about business and economic development. Knowing his type, I'll bet that Murray is exceedingly smart, highly political, a razor-sharp tactician (indeed, a reputed author of Act 10), and a tireless toiler on behalf of his benefactor. Of course, an ordinary person might ask how the backrooms of the Capitol prepared him to master the difficult chemistry of job creation. But that would be a dumb question!

I'm sure with guys like this heading up the business development strategy, WEDC's new ads are going to be a smashing success! Meh, probably not. In fact, it'll probably continue the pattern of underperformance, incompetence and pay-for-play corruption that has been synonymous with WEDC since it started 30 months ago.

Maddow smacks down the Kochs- and reveals media intimidation

Rachel Maddow ended her show Friday with an epic smackdown of the Koch Brothers and the way they launder money through their fake "think tanks" to try to influence GOP policy. Give it a look, and feel free to pass it ahead to others.



In between this awesome takedown is a bigger point that Rachel refers to. Not only do the Kochs have the gall to demand an apology for broadcasting a true story because it hurts their precious fee-wings, but they ask that SHE READ FROM A SCRIPT THEY WROTE FOR HER. Maddow tells them to stuff it, but she also brings up that it's far from the first time that the Kochs have tried to bully her.

So we cover the Conservative movement a lot on this show, and in so doing we occasionally find people who have been mentioned in our coverage who are absolutely outraged that they have been mentioned in our coverage; people who are not used to being talked about by someone who does not take their instructions. And so what happens is they tend to try to instruct me as to how I ought to talk about them. And the Conservative political figures who you can most count on to threaten to sue you and call your boss and scream about their victimization as loud as they can whenever they get mentioned by name in a way they do not control are of course, the Koch brothers.

It also brought to mind one of my favorite scenes in TV in the last few years, which came from Aaron Sorkin's HBO show The Newsroom. In this scene, Sam Waterston's character is the news director of a CNN-style station, and he's meeting with the station's corporate owner, played by Jane Fonda, in light of the Tea Party's victories in the 2010 elections. And two different times in this scene, Fonda reminds Waterston "I have business before this Congress!"



Now think about these two clips, and ask yourself how many news organizations haven't stood up to right-wing, big-money bullies like the Koch Brothers, and allowed their coverage to be biased and/or misleading as a result? Maddow points out that this week is far from the first time the Kochs have tried directly tried to influence what she is broadcasting. And how often does this type of intimidation happen in Wisconsin, especially in the halls of Journal Communications, Gannett, and Lee Enterprises? I fear it is more than a lot of us want to believe.

Jan. 4, 1997- A great day to be a Wisconsin sports fan

Today being January 4, it's always a memorable day to me, based on a great sports afternoon in Madison 17 years ago.

In early 1997, I had gotten my bachelor's from the UW the previous May, and had plenty of connections to Indiana University, having gone to high school there for 2 years and having lots of friends that had either just graduated from IU, or were in their 5th year there. When I saw the UW basketball schedule come out and have the Hoosiers come to Madison on Saturday, January 4, I got in contact with 3 friends from IU, and asked if they wanted to make the roadie. They said yes, I got 4 tickets, and we planned from there. One of my first posts on this site mentioned how much IU-UW basketball games mean to me, and you could probably multiply that intensity by 5 in 1997, given that "adult" things like politics and taxes and paying bills weren't nearly as important to me back then.

The NFL playoff schedule came out, and the 13-3 Packers were scheduled to play the 12-4 San Francisco 49ers that Saturday at 11:30 (they used to have NFL playoff games at 11:30 and 3 for both Saturday and Sunday, kids), 2 hours before the Badgers-Hoosiers tipoff. I immediately called my IU buddies and said "We need to meet at the Regent Street Retreat no earlier than 10:30 or 11." I knew the place would be jammed for the Packer game, and wasn't in the mood to miss it.

Sure enough, in the pre-cell phone times of 1997 I got to the Retreat early, but my IU friends hadn't shown up by 11 and then 11:15. I'm getting the dirty looks from holding down the tables, and I let others take the other 3 seats there. The 3 IU guys walk in 5 minutes before kickoff, and the place is a raucous zoo. Given that their experience with the NFL was the pre-Peyton Manning Colts (meaning no one gave much of a care), the atmosphere was stunning to them, to say the least.

Unlike what it'll be for Packers-Niners tomorrow, this Jan. 4 was relatively warm. Upper 30s and a downpour of rain, turning the Frozen Tundra into a sloppy mess, and causing the game to be known as the Mud Bowl. But the mud wasn't stopping certain Packers from breaking loose, as Desmond Howard took a first-quarter punt to the House, and took another into the red zone, leading to another quick Packer TD.

Not only was the Pack winning with special teams, they were physically dominating the 49ers, outrushing the Niners 139-68, with pictures like this being common.



With the Pack in reasonably good shape, we took off around halftime to walk 10 minutes to the UW Fieldhouse to watch Badgers-Hoosiers basketball. This may be odd for younger fans to recall, but UW basketball was a joke for decades, while Indiana was a national power under Bob Knight. The General was still in Bloomington 1997, and had won every game against the Badgers since 1980- 31 in a row, which I believe was the longest streak in Big Ten history at the time. I had graduated from UW the previous May, and my alma mater hadn't beaten the Hoosiers since I was in KINDERGARTEN. Dick Bennett had been hired in Madison in 1995 and took the team to the NIT the year before, but the program still had only been to one NCAA tournament in the previous 50 years, and certainly wasn't expected to win this game, even with IU being relatively mediocre in '97.

I tried to catch some of the Packer game on a TV set up under the Fieldhouse stands. As I was looking out to the court, I could see the Badgers keep scoring, and the Hoosiers keep turning the ball over, eventually stretching out to a 17-0 Wisconsin lead! After Antonio Freeman fell on a fumble in the end zone for another Packer TD in the 3rd quarter to put GB up 28-14, I felt comfortable enough with the Packer lead to head back up to the stands and watch the rest of the basketball game. After a second-half IU run cut the Badger lead to 5, Bucky pulled away again, and rolled to a 71-58 win over Indiana.

Interestingly, the game was not broadcast live on local Madison TV that day. There was no Big Ten network at the time, but there was a number of over-the-air affiliates for Big Ten games on weekends. Unfortunately in Madison, that station was NBC 15, and they had the late game of the NFL playoffs to show between Denver and Jacksonville (in one of the largest playoff upsets in NFL history, the Jags shocked the Broncos in Denver, despite being 14 1/2 point underdogs). So as we headed back to the Regent Street Retreat, we came upon a guy shooting darts with his girlfriend. Noticing the Indiana sweatshirts on my friends, he asked, "So, how'd the basketball game go?"

I grinned, "Wisconsin won."

The guy's eyes got huge "The Badgers won??!!"

I nodded, and the guy high-fived me. My IU buddies shook their heads in embarrassment. At least 2 or 3 times that night, one of them would moan out of nowhere "I can't believe we lost to Wisconsin!" It's quite a contrast to what we have today, where Bucky hasn't lost to IU in the last 12 meetings on the hardwood, and it's the Badgers that are often thought of as the consistent winning program that IU would like to become (yes, the Hoosiers won the Big Ten title last year, but they look to be middle-of-the-pack this year after Tan Tommy Crean lost all of his best players to the NBA and graduation).

That night, we headed out to a new downtown brewpub called the Great Dane (yes, it was a long time ago), and randomly ran into some old college friends of mine, as will happen when you're 22 and just out of school. I introduced the IU guys to Madison nightlife, and even with the students gone for Winter Break, the town was in a borderline manic, "Can you believe this?" mood that seems innocent compared to what we have today, now that the Packers and Badger basketball have been good for such a long time.

It's still one of my favorite days as a sports fan in Wisconsin, and with the Packers playing the Niners again in the playoffs this weekend, followed by the 14-0 Badger basketball having a big game with nationally ranked Iowa, I can't help but think back to it.

P.S. Today's also the 10th anniversary of another great Packer playoff moment.

Lt. Gov to oligarchs - "How Can We Love You More"?

If you needed any more evidence that this administration policies are geared for a select few, let me direct you to this story in Madison.com today.

A recently released video of the Dec. 9 session at Beloit College shows Kleefisch and state Revenue Department Secretary Rick Chandler extolling state efforts to reduce taxes since Republicans took over state government in 2011, and saying they wanted private-sector ideas for another round of cuts.

“We want to know how we can love you more,” Kleefisch told the group of about 30 executives, managers, accountants and others during the 1-hour, 40-minute session.

And the response from these oligarchs is telling.

They said the state should do more to attract new businesses and help existing companies, loosen restrictions on tax credits, simplify the tax code, cut commercial property taxes, consider lowering income and property taxes while increasing the sales tax, and issue more business loans that don’t need to be paid back in some circumstances.

Four of the 29 at the meeting are employed by Hendricks Holding Co. and its subsidiaries, including ABC Supply Inc. HHC’s owner is billionaire Diane Hendricks, who has been among Walker’s top campaign donors.

ABC’s tax director, Scott Bianchini, said the state should stop disclosing how much residents pay in taxes, saying the information is used for “sabotage.” Contacted Thursday, he wouldn’t say if he was referring to 2012 newspaper reports indicating Hendricks paid no taxes in 2010 because of a change in her company’s structure.

Nothing about improving services or the quality of workers. Just cut my taxes, and the hell with the effect on anyone else (which is why they don't care about raising the sales tax, even though trading income tax cuts for sales tax hikes would increase taxes for 80% of Wisconsinites).

Oh, and they definitely want this administration to kiss their asses and give away the store.

Kory Stoehr, of the McGladrey accounting and consulting company, said his clients complain that state auditors disallow research tax credits, and they tell him what other states are doing to recruit new investment.

“(Company executives) are being flown around in helicopters, just luxurious stuff, and they were given millions in tax incentives,” Stoehr said.

Nothing but GIMME, GIMME, GIMME.

This is how these folks roll. It's also telling that they're the only ones who get access to this administration for input on policy. The next unscripted meeting the Walker folks have with everyday people that make middle and lower-class wages will be their first. And you wonder why they keep failing.

George Carlin said this several years ago, and this farce of a "tax reform talk" shows he's more correct now than ever.



"It's a big club, and you ain't in it." Time to turn those tables in 2014.

Wisconsin low-income programs face increasing deficits

If you're still buying the fallacy that we have a huge budget surplus from our "balanced budget", three bits of news that came out this week from state human service agencies should put that notion to rest.

1. The first bit of news is follow-up from something I mentioned 2 months ago. Wisconsin had an increasing amount of people fall into the poverty-related Wisconsin Works (W-2) program in 2013, and it looks like there will be a meeting of the Joint Finance Commission next Wednesday to discuss how to pay for this, as well as go over several other fiscal issues.

To understand why there's a deficit, take a look at the numbers mentioned in the LFB paper showing the increase in W-2 cases and expenses. The numbers go up through last November, and let's use that month as the comparison.

W-2 caseload, Nov. 2012 - 13,626
W-2 caseload, Nov. 2013 - 16,222 (+19.1%)

W-2 expenses, Nov. 2012 $7,007,418
W-2 expenses, Nov, 2013 $8,253,087 (+17.8%)

And the LFB notes that this has been a consistent increase throughout much of 2013, with average caseloads up 15.7% for the year, and average monthly expenses up by 18.2%, and the deficit has opened up as a result.

Caseloads and expenditures did decrease by 1.1% and 2.1%, respectively, in November, 2013. Assuming W-2 paid caseloads and expenditures decline by 1% per month, beginning in December, 2013, an additional $14.7 million would be needed to fully fund W-2 benefits in 2013-14. Additional funding of approximately $13.8 million would be needed to fully fund W-2 benefits in 2014-15, which is not addressed in the 2013 income augmentation plan.

....[C]aseloads and expenditures have increased through most of CY 2013. Although November, 2013, shows a reduction in both caseload and expenditures, it may be premature to assume caseloads and expenditures would continue to decline at the rate of 1% per
month throughout the remainder of 2013-15 biennium. If, for example, it is assumed that monthly expenditures remained flat at the November, 2013, monthly expenditure level ($8,253,087) for the remainder of the biennium, an additional $17.0 million in 2013-14 and $26.3 million in 2014-15 would be needed.

So that's $43.3 million that may be needed to fully fund the increases amount of poverty cases in Fitzwalkerstan over the next 18 months, or there are going to have to be benefit cuts or some other kind of money transfer to make up for it. It's worth keeping an eye on the GOP-dominated JFC to see what they do here- do they do the right thing, set the money aside, and reduce the alleged budget surplus. Or do they cut benefits to the growing number of people in need, continuing the bubble-world austerity policies, and possibly banking the money for later, so they can blow it on more tax cuts?

2. There's another human services deficit that has to be dealt with in Wisconsin, as the Walker Administration revealed there is a $93 million Medicaid deficit. In typical Walker fashion, they dropped this news right before the new year, and the Journal-Sentinel dutifully spun the news as some kind of Obamacare glitch. But a closer look at what has caused the deficit lays the cause of the deficit right at the State Capitol's doorstep.

The first reason for the deficit is something the Wisconsin Budget Project predicted 3 months ago- the state will get a lower match rate from the feds on Badgercare, which means state taxpayers have to make up the difference.

First, as the Fiscal Bureau informed you in an October 7th memo, the most consequential development since September is that the federal medical assistance participation (FMAP) rate for FFY 15 will drop to 58.27%, a decrease of 0.92% compared to what was budgeted in Act 20, the 2013-15 biennial budget. As a result, the Medicaid program will have $52.0 million less revenue this biennium than assumed under Act 20.

The FMAP formula is based on each state’s per capita income compared to the national average over the prior three years. The drop in FFY 15 is partly the result of methodology changes by the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis that resulted in upward revisions to prior year income data for Wisconsin. The FFY 15 decrease is in addition to FMAP decreases in FFY 13 and FFY 14 for the state, as well as recent increases in federal charges for individuals dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid. These developments provide a cautionary note about placing too much confidence on the long term stability of federal Medicaid funding.

That last sentence is hilarious. The state might not be able to count on federal matching rates for Medicaid staying the same in the conventional program, but if the Walker Administration had taken the expanded Medicaid funding in Obamacare, they'd be GUARANTEED to have 100% of costs covered for the first 3 years, and 90% after that. Well, unless TeaBag Congressmen lowered the match rate, IF they got that change through Congress in the next 3 years and had Obama sign it (HAH!). Last I checked, both the 100% and 90% figures in Obamacare are a helluva lot more than 58.27%, and a lot more stable, so why aren't we taking it again?

There are a couple of other adjustments to the Medicaid budget, including the recently passed bill that slightly lowers costs due to delaying Medicaid changes by 3 months (and delaying tens of thousands of Wisconsinites from being eligible). But the state also has to make up extra costs as a result of higher-than-expected payments to contractors, and 2013-15 budget scenarios that proved far too rosy.

...the Department is in the process of developing BadgerCare Plus and SSI Managed Care HMO rates and Family Care MCO rates for CY 14. These rates reflect projected changes in service utilization among enrollees for the coming year, based on current fee for service rates. As the result of detailed work by the state’s actuaries and discussions with participating HMOs, the Department estimates the fiscal effect of BadgerCare Plus and SSI Managed Care HMO rates, offset by delaying eligibility changes until April 1, is a $14 million GPR increase.

[T]he budget agreement recently passed by Congress provides a temporary extension through March 2014 to provide eligible individuals 12 months of transitional medical assistance. These are individuals who initially qualified for Medicaid at incomes below 100% FPL, but whose income has subsequently increased above eligibility limits. Permanent federal law allows these individuals an additional four months of eligibility, but in recent years Congress has temporarily provided 12 months of coverage. Act 20 had assumed Congress would not extend this 12 month eligibility, given the implementation of insurance marketplaces. However, the recent federal budget agreement continues the 12 month eligibility extension through March 2014; this projection assumes Congress will act again to extend it through the 2013-15 biennium. (D'oh!)

Finally, this estimate reflects higher projected expenditures for fee for service hospital, personal care, and prescription drugs, as well as smaller savings from audit recoveries, verification of state residency for Medicaid applicants, and federal claiming for certain county services. It also modestly reduces projected Medicaid estate recovery collections as the result of 2013 Act 92.

So expect some more cutbacks in services and higher premiums for Medicaid and related health services, much like we have seen in the last 3 years. Despite the fact that taking Obamacare's expanded Medicaid would more than make up for that $93 million deficit by saving Wisconsinites $119 million, you can bet this administration won't do that common-sense move.

3. And there might be even more Medicaid costs to make up in the state, as the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel mentioned that the rush to beat the year-end deadline to sign up for the Affordable Care Act has led to an estimated 32,000 Wisconsinites finding out that they are eligible for Badgercare, and don't need to get insurance through the federal exchanges. This is known as the "woodwork effect", and it results in people getting benefits that they always could have received, but never got because they never thought about getting them, or didn't want to take the time or effort it took to sign up, but now have been driven into action since they know Obamacare exists.

This is a good thing from a societal standpoint, as people are getting the medical care they are entitled to, and it'll make for a more stable economy as fewer people fall into financial despair due to medical issues. But it also can cause that $93 million Medicaid deficit to go higher, because the state didn't count on the additional Medicaid recipients when it made its 2015-17 budget.

The latest numbers on federal referrals to BadgerCare raise at least the possibility the net increase in enrollments through Obamacare could be greater than the Walker administration has estimated, [Citizen Action of Wisconsin Executive Director Robert] Kraig said. That's an issue for state taxpayers to watch, especially since the Walker administration reported Monday that state Medicaid programs are already being projected to run over budget by $93 million, or 1.9%, through June 2015.

Jon Peacock, research director of the Wisconsin Council on Children and Families, said it was still too early to say whether BadgerCare Plus enrollments will exceed expectations.

"Whether the enrollment exceeds (projections) isn't something I'm comfortable speculating about," he said.

Kraig said costs from any unexpected BadgerCare enrollees would fall harder on taxpayers in Wisconsin because of a decision by Walker and GOP lawmakers to reject extra federal money available for Medicaid under the health care law.

Yes, you heard that right. Because the Walker Administration decided to TeaBag Obamacare, it becomes likely even more taxpayer funds will be needed for Medicaid if we DON'T take Obamacare's Medicaid expansion. This decision looks dumber by the day, and why Mary Burke, Kathleen Vinehout and the Democratic Party of Wisconsin aren't running ads screaming these facts is beyond me.

God knows I'll keep tracking it, because much like Walker's equally foolish decision not to build the high-speed rail line between Milwaukee, Madison and the Twin Cities, it's a decision whose failure keeps compounding as the years go on.