Tensions and passions may have run high among Republican and Democratic state legislators and their supporters in Madison earlier this year, leading to dramatic confrontations that made national news.
Indeed, Rep. Sandy Pasch (D) joked on April 8 that perhaps the legislature needed something like the “Civility Pledge” created by the Jewish Community Relations Council of the Milwaukee Jewish Federation. (See April issue.)
Nevertheless, civility in fact prevailed at the Legislative Breakfast held that day at the Jewish Home and Care Center and attended by some 60 people.
Pasch of the 22nd District, plus Reps. Jim Ott (R) of the 23rd and Tamara Grigsby (D) of the 18th, formed a panel to discuss primarily the coming state budget. But all three also emphasized the need for, and the value of, civility in the political process.
“Civil discussion is what we should be doing,” said Ott. “We can disagree on things, but I do think we can make our case and do so respectfully.”
“Democracy does not end at the ballot box,” said Pasch. “We continue to have dialogue and discussion even after elections are done.”
And Grigsby said, “I have some great Republican friends and we all are able to find areas where there are common grounds.”
But while civility existed, common grounds appeared more difficult to find at this event.
The two Democrats contended that the coming two-year state budget of some $60 billion with a projected $3.6 billion deficit will make cuts in programs that “will have the most impact on the most vulnerable” people of the state.”
Ott, however, insisted, “We can’t spend money we don’t have… We’re looking at a limited pot of money, and we’re looking at how to distribute that and how to spend it the most effectively and the most wisely.”
Moderator David R. Riemer, director of policy and planning at Community Advocates, posed questions first about general priorities in the budget vis a vis expenditures and revenues, and then about some specific areas, like health care and education.
Pasch said that “shared sacrifice” has been one of the “buzz words we use” in regard to the budget, but the sacrifices appear to be falling more on some people than upon others, and “we cannot try to balance the budget on the backs of people who can least afford it.”
Grigsby outright contended, “The budget is about priorities, and clearly some people’s priorities are to go after the most vulnerable.”
Ott pointed out that the budget is a very long and complicated document, and that the provisions in it now are “not necessarily what the final product is going to look like.”
In response to a question about how the proposed budget may help with state economic growth and creation of jobs, Grigsby said the budget gives “tax credits to corporations – tax credits that have not been shown in other state to necessarily create job development.”
“If we really want to create jobs,” then the state government has to invest in technical colleges that help create a skilled workforce, and invest in job training programs “and those things that help people be able to work,” said Grigsby.
Ott, however, insisted that “it’s taxes, regulations, and litigation” that “make it difficult for businesses to operate in the United States” and that lead them to move operations overseas to such countries as China.
Ott said he wants to work on “simplifying regulations” in order to “make it easier for business to operate and to cut down on the red tape.” If the state government does this, Ott believes, businesses will “want to hire people and expand their output.”
Pasch in response focused on “what kind of jobs we can develop in our state… We don’t want jobs where people have to work two full-time jobs just to make the rent, and then we yell at those same parents because they’re not at home with their kids. So I don’t think a job is a job is a job.”
In reply to a question about finding new sources of revenue, Pasch acknowledged that for a political office holder to propose tax increases is a “kiss of death” to reelection chances.
“I think it is incredibly difficult to talk about raising revenues because people don’t want to spend more money on taxes, yet they want continued services,” Pasch said. “But you can’t just cut and expect services to remain the same, to expect the quality of education to remain the same, or your health care to remain the same.”
Ott said, “I like the idea of user fees whenever possible” for people using a service. He also said, “There is a lot of waste in state spending” that can be reduced — for example, “we shouldn’t be sending hardbound copies of the state statutes to every municipal person in the state.”
Grigsby advocated increasing taxes on the wealthiest. “That would bring in significant revenue,” she said.
Loading ...