With a problem as big as Wisconsin's financial deficit ? $1.5 billion in the first year of the next two-year budget ? we need practical solutions, not just campaign promises.
That goes the same for addressing job growth, tax cuts and other issues that will face the next governor.
Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, a Democrat, offers more practical solutions than his opponent, Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker, a Republican. That's why we endorse Barrett in Tuesday's election to replace Jim Doyle.
On the budget deficit, neither candidate paints a true picture of how deep cuts are going to have to be. As a study by the Wisconsin Research Policy Institute points out, "Even if spending for all state programs was absolutely frozen for two years and we had normal revenue growth, the budget gap would still be $778 million."
Barrett, however, has the more detailed and realistic plans. Along with both candidates' predictable calls for eliminating fraud and waste, Barrett wants to combine state and local government employees' purchasing powers and reduce contracting and regulation costs. He also insists the state can save money by offering incentives for BadgerCare clients to use cheaper health-insurance plans.
Walker's plans center around reducing state and local government employee benefit costs. But its dependence on unions agreeing to it makes it tremendously uncertain.
Both candidates say they're focused on creating a better environment for job growth. Barrett has pages and pages ? more than 50 of them, in normal-size type ? of ideas to do that.
He wants to start an Office of Job Creation, reporting directly to him; offer tax cuts and other incentives tied to jobs; and greatly increase the state's venture capital pool.
Walker has grand goals on job creation, promising he'll create 10,000 businesses and 250,000 jobs in four years. He has some similar ideas to Barrett, but also wants to repeal the new combined reporting corporate-tax law, cut small-business taxes by 20 percent and eliminate the corporate tax for two years on new businesses. But any tax cuts mean that further spending cuts will have to be made in the next budget, making that task even more daunting.
Tax cuts alone won't lead to job growth. Wisconsin doesn't exist in a vacuum. Other states have been hit by the economy, too, and will have similar plans. The most successful states will have plans for beyond the recovery. That gives Barrett's more detailed proposals an edge.
And Walker's opposition to the landmark embryonic stem cell research done through the University of Wisconsin-Madison could be truly harmful to a leading growth area in the state economy.
Barrett's approach to K-12 education funding is similarly realistic. He favors a return to the state funding two-thirds of it, but acknowledges it won't happen in the next budget. He sees the need to change the school funding formula that determines how much each district gets, but realizes it'll be difficult to achieve without more money in the overall pool.
Walker shares Barrett's view on two-thirds funding and the school funding formula, but is also proposing a statewide evaluation system for schools and teachers without much detail.
Both agree that transportation money shouldn't be transferred to the general fund, but they disagree on the high-speed train between Madison and Milwaukee. Barrett's for it; Walker's against it, though we're skeptical of Walker's suggestion that the state could use the $800 million in federal money on other transportation projects.
Both candidates will particularly struggle with how to control the costs of the state's medical assistance programs.
Ironically, given Milwaukee's enormous problems, both candidates are touting their experience in their current jobs as reasons to vote for them. Walker, in particular, says that he has faced the same economic challenges in Milwaukee County that the state is facing and has conquered them.
We would dispute that claim. It's easy to propose budgets with no tax hikes when you know your county board will overrule you.
While he's eager to take credit for the successes within county government, Walker deflects blame for the tragic situation at the county's Mental Health Complex and the fact that the state took over the county's public assistance program because of its problems.
While we're concerned about the toll the necessary budget cuts will take on our state's cherished quality of life, we're even more concerned by what kinds of cuts ? and what further cuts ? Walker would have to make.
We would be remiss if we didn't spend a moment on the candidate's running mates and suggest that should be a factor in Barrett's favor, too.
The lieutenant governor position has little power on its own, but given that two of the past five elected governors have been replaced by their lieutenant mid-term, the prospect of Walker's running mate, Rebecca Kleefisch, ever becoming governor is truly frightening. Beyond her lack of any qualifications, her statement that put gay marriage on a "slippery slope" that could lead to someone marrying a table, a clock or a dog is appalling.
One way or another, the next state budget will be balanced. Tom Barrett has the better plan for doing that, while growing the state's economy and ensuring that, when the economic times are better, our way of life will have been maintained.
0 comments:
Post a Comment