As reported earlier, the Wisconsin Global Warming Bill, dubbed the Clean Energy Jobs Act by its supporters, assumes that the price of carbon-based energy will increase due to the establishment of a ‘cap and trade’ system for carbon emissions. Our February 5th report included warnings, however, that a federal ‘cap and trade’ system was not certain to come about.
Three key senators are engaged in a radical behind-the-scenes overhaul of climate legislation, preparing to jettison the broad “cap-and-trade” approach that has defined the legislative debate for close to a decade.
The sharp change of direction demonstrates the extent to which the cap-and-trade strategy — allowing facilities to buy and sell pollution credits in order to meet a national limit on greenhouse gas emissions — has become political poison. In a private meeting with several environmental leaders on Wednesday, according to participants, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), declared, “Cap-and-trade is dead.”
Even if Cap and Trade were to die, however, the cost of carbon-based fuels could still increase due to other federal regulatory action. While the Wisconsin bill assumes a future cost at $20/ton and rises slowly with inflation, there are no firm numbers yet as Washington has not passed new federal regulations and the prospects for such action are unknown.
MacIver News Service will report on the impact Washington’s actions may have on the pending Wisconsin legislation in the days ahead.
I am one of the few thousand or so people on this planet to have had the ‘privilege’ of attending the quarterly meetings of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. The NAIC is a voluntary organization of the chief insurance regulatory officials of the 50 states, the District of Columbia and five U.S. territories. Every three months the commissioners get together and discuss model insurance regulations.
While these meetings are closely watched by industry and consumer representatives, they could hardly be described as riveting.
But contrary to Thursday’s White House Health Care Summit, those meetings are usually at least a bit productive. What a small slice of America witnessed take place at Blair House yesterday was stagecraft, not statesmanship. And while the President may think he accomplished the goal of attempting to look reasonable (so that he and his fellow Democrats could then pursue the nuclear option in the Senate) all yesterday did was expose their weaknesses and diminish the office of the President itself.
For years now, the Left has tried to portray the Republicans as the Party of No, particularly as it pertains to health care. Yesterday proved that this is not the case. One after the other, GOP lawmakers explained dozens of policy efforts they’ve attempted to advance. No one was more brilliant than our own Paul Ryan. Below, you can see what I believe to be the defining moment of the Summit.
To the contrary, Obama played the role of a petulant NAIC breakout session moderator. At times it seemed as if the GOP had a firmer grasp of what was in his plan than Obama himself did. When the Republicans pointed out what they disliked about the Democrats’ bloated plan, Obama curtly dismissed them (in the case of Senator McCain, outright mocked him) and then changed the subject and cut them off.
The Democrats’ idea of bipartisanship on this issue: Here is our health care regulation Christmas tree, all decked out with backroom deals for unions and states like Louisiana and Florida, and draped with massive new federal regulations that do not curb health care inflation. You Republicans are free to add a couple ornaments on it, if you can find room, as long as they do not offend the trial attorney or our other allies, but you absolutely can’t remove any of our items from the tree.
That’s not compromise, by even the widest interpretation.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, much to the chagrin of the status quo in Washington, D.C., yesterday’s Television Special did nothing to quell the passions of the growing tea party movement.
It was politics as usually, only televised.
Highlights of the Summit
Ryan’s first attempt was cut short.
But he eventually got his say, and this is an excellent recap of the day
MacIver News Service – [Madison, Wisc...] On Thursday, the Wisconsin Senate passed legislation to create a new health insurance program for more than 20,000 Wisconsin residents currently on a waiting list for a different, more lucrative aid program.
The bill, SB484, was originally on Tuesday’s calendar, but when Senator Kathleen Vinehout (D-Alma) and some of her fellow Democratic Senators began to ready amendments to the legislation, the Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker (D-Schofield) maneuvered the bill back to the Senate Organization Committee.
During the early afternoon debate Thursday, Republican Senator Ted Kanavas (R-Brookfield) was blunt in his assessment about what is wrong with the plan.
He argued the Wisconsin Commissioner of Insurance would never allow a company in the private sector to market a plan like BadgerCare Basic, which Kanavas said will not have enough reserves to cover the risk the State is assuming, “There are simply not enough funds to support the kind of claims you are going to see.”
An effort was made to once again send the bill back to the Senate Org Committee, this time put forward by Republican Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau).
Before the vote, Senator John Erpenbach (D-Waunakee) warned his fellow Democrats, ” If you vote to send this back to committee, you vote to kill this.”
After a lengthy debate of more than 90 minutes, Senator Fitzgerald’s motion failed 15-18, with all the Democrats voting no. Debate then began on a series of amendments.
A Vinehout amendment (SA3) to require an audit of the program passed with a bipartisan vote of 23-10 (with Democrats Carpenter, Jauch, Kreitlow, Plale, Robson, Sullivan and Taylor joining Vinehout and all the Republicans in support).
Before the final vote, Senate Fitzgerald made one last stand, arguing the plan would prove to be an expensive burden on Wisconsin taxpayers.
“This is the public option that we are voting on, just so we are clear,”said Fitzgerald. “This is Obamacare light.”
Senator Erpenbach defended his bill.
“This isn’t going to cost the state any money,” said Erpenbach. He argued it was not universal coverage and that eligible individuals could choose whether or not to enroll.
“Here is a choice, this is a choice they have, if they choose to do so,” he said. “Obamacare? No, not even close.”
Shortly after 3pm, the bill passed 17-16 with Vinehout the lone Democrat joining the Republicans in voting no.
The bill now awaits action in the State Assembly.
Under SB484, BadgerCare Plus Basic would accept customers with pre-existing conditions, would cost enrollees $130 per month and supporters argue it is designed to pay for itself without additional tax dollars. The plan covers low income, childless adults, the same population served by BadgerCare Plus Core. The Core Plan was only expected to serve about 40 thousand people during a two-year period, but that number was reached in only a few months.
The state had to cut off enrollment in October, leaving more than five thousand people on an initial waiting list. A list that quickly surged to more than 23,000. The proposed Basic plan offers leaner benefits, higher co-pays and deductibles, but opponents say the proposal is undercapitalized and ultimately will result in either the State picking up cost overruns, or ending the program due to lack of funds.
Wisconsin School District Justifies Unusual Stimulus Spending –
A $416,219.32 payment to WEA Trust for health insurance and $237,861.68 to utility companies from the New Holstein School District raises questions about how school districts across the country were allowed to spend federal stimulus money.
The MacIver Institute has been reviewing how stimulus funds have been spent in Wisconsin. The disbursement of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds to WEA Trust, the health insurance and financial services company operated by the state’s teachers’ union, piqued our interests and prompted us to do some further digging.
The only other school district to spend stimulus money for health insurance was Frederic, and that amount was $97,527. Other districts, including Green Bay and Madison, told the MacIver Institute that stimulus money could not be spent on employee benefits or utility costs.
The general guidance districts followed was stimulus money should “supplement, not supplant” funding for educational expenses. In other words, it couldn’t be spent on anything previously paid with other funds.
The logic behind that guidance is that the stimulus money won’t be flowing in forever. In April 2009, the U.S. Department of Education advised award recipients “The ARRA is expected to be a one-time infusion of substantial new resources. These funds should be invested in ways that do not result in unsustainable continuing commitments after the funding expires.”
The department warned again in September 2009, “Invest the one-time ARRA funds thoughtfully to minimize the ‘funding cliff.’”
However, despite the Department of Education’s general guidance, districts received stimulus funds in the form of various grants, and not all the grants were held to the same requirements.
“Title 1, Part A” grants were strictly intended to “Improve teaching and learning for students most at risk of failing to meet State academic achievement standards,” according to www.recovery.gov. Those grants were held to the “supplement, not supplant” standard.
However, New Holstein paid for its employee benefits and utilities out of the “State Stabilization Fund-Education Fund,” monies. That grant was meant to fill the gap in aid school districts would ordinarily receive from their states. The US Department of Education stated in June 2009, because school districts “may consider Education Stabilization funds to be available for any activity authorized under the Impact Aid program, the funds may be used to support both current expenditures and other expenses such as capital expenditures.”
In other words, school districts could spend it on practically anything, including benefits and utilities. In reality, school districts had already spent that money before they even realized it would be coming from the stimulus.
The $416,219.32 New Holstein paid to WEA Trust was for cost incurred during the 2008-2009 school year. As usual, the district was expecting an aid check from the state in June, reimbursing it for the expense. However, this year the district’s aid from the state included $741,608 of stimulus money, which the state used to fill a gap in school aid funding.
It was up to the districts to go back and try to figure out what items that money could be attributed to and how it retroactively contributed to job creation/retention. Rebecca Hansen, New Holstein’s business manager, decided to attribute it to benefits and utilities.
“I decided to go this route, because this money was money that was guaranteed to us by the State through Equalized Aid payments.” Hansen said. “It was not the School District’s choice that our aid payment was supplemented by ARRA funds. Therefore, I could have put any expenditure that we would normally use state aid money for, which would be things like salaries, benefits, utilities, transportation, etc. We use both state aid money and money levied by our local municipalities under the revenue limit to pay all of these expenses. I just chose two of our larger expenses which are expenses that won’t go away to report as part of the survey that was sent.”
Under the requirements for all stimulus awards, recipients that spent more than $25 thousand in stimulus monies with one vendor had to file separate vendor reports. That’s what made New Holstein’s expenditures with WEA Trust, New Holstein Utilities, and Wisconsin Public Service stand out.
No other school district in the state spent more than half its stimulus funds on benefits and utilities. Although it was an unorthodox use of the funds, it was not illegal according to the patchwork of regulations governing the use of ARRA funds.
Senator Alberta Darling (R-River Hills) doesn’t blame New Holstein for how it spent its grants, but points out that was not what the stimulus was intended for.
“It appears we have here just the latest example of so-called ’stimulus’ funds being spent on something other than creating jobs,” said Darling. “Democrats in Wisconsin used this one-time federal funding to bail out their budget and vastly expand government spending.”
Hansen recognizes using ARRA funds in this way puts the district in danger of facing that “funding cliff,” the US Department of Education warned about.
“It is a constant battle to make ends meet when we are looking at cuts in funding from all areas,” said Hansen. “Unfortunately, benefits and utilities are two constants the school district often does not completely control as far as the increases in costs through the years, and we will need to find other ways to make ends meet unfortunately possibly through cutting programs or laying off staff. It will be an uphill battle in the years to come and the school district is working hard to cut costs without hurting the education of our children.”
That challenge will become all the more apparent after September 30, 2011, when school districts will no longer have stimulus funds to lean on.
“Their (Democrats’) irresponsibility has set up state and local governments, school districts and taxpayers for real disasters in the next budget,” said Darling.
MacIver News Service - [Madison, Wisc...] On Tuesday the Wisconsin Senate delayed action on a bill to create a new health insurance program for more than 20,000 Wisconsin residents currently on a waiting list for a different, more lucrative program.
As reported here earlier, Senator Kathleen Vinehout (D-Alma), expressed concerns about the new program in committee.
In a blog posting, Vinehout later wrote: “The new plan puts the risk on the state and taxpayers – who already can’t afford the recent expansions in Medicaid. According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, the state cost overruns for the BadgerCare program are estimated at least $120 million. This is on top of the $600 million budget deficit for the overall Medicaid program.”
When Vinehout and some of her fellow Democratic Senators began to ready amendments to the legislation Tuesday, Russ Decker (D-Schofield), the Senate Majority Leader, maneuvered the bill back to the Senate Organization Committee.
The move delays, rather than derails, Senate action on the legislation.
Senate Republican Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau) told the MacIver News Service the concept of BadgerCare Plus Basic, giving the State more flexibility than the private sector, is fundamentally flawed.
“This plan is exempt from the government health care mandates that are forced on the private sector,” said Fitzgerald. “If there was a level playing field, the private market could do a better job providing the same benefits for less money. Instead, the Senate Democrats are set on a government health care plan that will rely upon taxpayer support.”
As proposed, BadgerCare Plus Basic would cost enrollees $130 per month and supporters argue it is designed to pay for itself without additional tax dollars. The plan covers low income, childless adults, the same population served by BadgerCare Plus Core. The Core Plan was only expected to serve about 40 thousand people during a two-year period, but that number was reached in only a few months.
The state had to cut off enrollment in October, leaving more than five thousand people on an initial waiting list. A list that quickly surged to more than 23,000.
MacIver Institute Opens Office on Capitol Square, Launches Redesigned Website
[Madison, Wisc...] The Free Market Voice for Wisconsin has a couple of new homes. The John K. MacIver Institute for Public Policy, a free market think tank, has opened a new office across from the State Capitol in Madison and has redesigned their interactive website.
“As we approach our one year anniversary, we are excited about our continued success and growth,” said MacIver Institute President Brett Healy. “With all that is being debated at the Capitol right now – so-called green jobs, MPS takeover, high-speed rail – the MacIver Institute’s new office is right in the middle of it all. From here, we will be able to produce more of the reporting, research and analysis that Wisconsinites have come to expect from us; and our new website will make it even easier for people to find the content they are looking for.”
Offering original news reporting and innovative policy analysis, the MacIver Institute publishes their work at www.MacIverInstitute.com.
Nearly a half million people have viewed MacIver’s online reports, which ranged from the intricate details of the Wisconsin State Budget to the international debate on global warming.
“We’re committed to bringing the people of Wisconsin full time coverage of the events and issues that impact their lives,” said Healy. “With our new website, The MacIver Institute will deliver traditional research, reports and commentary using the new, interactive and social media models that drive communication today.”
The MacIver Institute’s new offices are located on the Capitol Square in Madison at 44 East Mifflin, Suite 201.
Cory Liebmann, now widely recognized as liberal Wisconsin’s number one fisherman, is at it again. Fresh off his quest for dirt on State Representative Leah Vukmir, this ‘researcher’ has his eyes now set on…the Mayor of Tomah?
Perhaps it makes a bit more sense when you consider the Mayor of Tomah is Ed Thompson. Ed Thompson, brother of Tommy. More of a concern to Mr. Liebman, one suspects, is that he is Ed Thompson, candidate for Wisconsin State Senate.
Similar to the oddly-worded Vukmir request, Liebman has asked Thompson for:
“Copies of all email from any email account that you use for official city business from 11/5/08 through 2/5/10 that fit the following search words and names:
I know what you are thinking…and no, I did not make that up. That’s the (verbatim) heart of his recent request.
I surely hope Mayor Thompson remembers to hand over that email he got from WMC inviting us to what was promised to be a gay tea and marijuana, Harry Potter/Arthur double feature party at the Tee Pee last September. I’m not sure if Belling, Sykes or Walker made it, but rumor has it Phil Donahue and George Bush each made a surprise appearance.
As previously mentioned, Wisconsin’s Open Records Law is a strong tool for citizens and journalists who routinely use it to keep tabs on public officials in an effort to keep them honest. It appears Mr. Liebmann has perhaps also found it to be a useful tool to have others compile opposition research that he could then peddle to a willing bidder.
And it didn’t even take stimimuls dollars to create or save his job. Kudos to Liebmann for his ingenuity and resourcefulness.
The open enrollment period for Wisconsin’s public schools just ended. Thousands of parents across Wisconsin, when looking at the educational challenges facing their children, just made the choice to apply to send their children to public schools outside their local school district. Wisconsin’s charter school and open enrollment laws are powerful tools that empower parents to search for the best possible public education option for their kids.
One option for Wisconsin’s school children and parents is online public charter schools, otherwise known as virtual schools. These schools offer educational opportunities for children from all backgrounds who, for a variety of reasons, need a choice beyond the traditional brick and mortar schools. These charter schools are public schools with public school teachers, but the courses and instruction are online.
Two years ago, this educational option was in danger. A lawsuit by the Wisconsin Education Association Council to shut down the Wisconsin Virtual Academy in the Northern Ozaukee School District nearly succeeded, almost taking the rest of the state’s virtual schools with it. Fortunately the legislature intervened, a compromise was made, and virtual schools were allowed to remain open.
The compromise had one very unfortunate aspect. State-wide total enrollment in these online charter schools was capped at 5,250 students (out of the more than 850,000 public school students in Wisconsin) The cap was insisted upon by Governor Jim Doyle and was meant to serve as a speed bump for these schools, while a study was conducted to see if virtual schools were actually meeting the students’ needs.
Last year enrollment applications exceeded the cap and the state department of instruction conducted a lottery to determine which new applicants could be accepted at the virtual schools. Those students that didn’t win the lottery were put on a waiting list by DPI. As a result, many parents had some children accepted while others were put on the list, dividing families. Many parents who found their children on the list then had to make the decision to cross their fingers and hope for the best or to find other school arrangements for the fall. While the total enrollment in these schools did not reach the cap (many parents decided not to enroll after applying, a common practice in traditional open enrollment across Wisconsin), the cap still impacted hundreds of families throughout the state.
The results of the study, conducted by the non-partisan Legislative Audit Bureau, are now in; and they are indisputable: Wisconsin’s virtual schools are successful.
Students enrolled in virtual schools exceeded their brick and mortar counterparts in reading at every grade level and exceeded the math scores for four out of the seven levels tested. Over 94 percent of parents are satisfied with their child’s virtual charter school. A number that should make WEAC happy, 93 percent of virtual school teachers are satisfied with teaching online courses. Students are also satisfied with the contact with their teachers, with 97 percent of high school students saying they were satisfied or very satisfied. Contrary to the fears expressed by the schools’ detractors the children in these public charter schools are well socialized and the teachers express a high degree of satisfaction with their ability to interact with their students.
Moreover, Virtual schools have proved to be a good bargain for the taxpayers. Virtual schools receive $6,077 per pupil compared to the average expense of $11,397 per pupil in traditional schools.
Yet, WEAC complained in a press release that charter virtual schools, because of their success, result in different school districts competing for students to get the state funding. What WEAC does not say is that for each student leaving their district under open enrollment, the district still receives over $3,000. WEAC complained about the amount of money spent on private contractors by the virtual schools. What they don’t mention is that 93 percent of the funding is spent on teachers and curriculum, and that traditional brick and mortar schools also spend money on private companies (book publishers, transportation companies, utility companies, etc.)
WEAC complained only 3 percent of virtual charter school students are special needs students. (They artifically hinder enrollment in these schools and then they complain about who enrolls in these schools?) However, WEAC ignores the fact that when it comes to children with special needs, 77 percent of parents were more satisfied with the services in virtual schools and 20 percent were equally satisfied.
Clearly the way to better serve even more students, including those with special needs, is to lift the enrollment caps on virtual charter schools.
What is interesting is what WEAC did not say. They could not say that virtual charter schools are being taught by unqualified teachers because the teachers are union teachers. They could not say virtual schools are not teaching the children because the test results speak for themselves.
We know the worth of offering the option of virtual public charter schools, and we have the legislative audit results to back it up.
Maintaining the caps will only result in parents facing uncertainty about their children’s educational futures and ultimately prevent some parents from choosing an educational option that could truly benefit their children.
The questions have been answered. The doubters demanded an official audit before these schools would be allowed to grow. The results of that nonpartisan audit are in.
The debate has been settled. These schools work.
It’s time to lift the enrollment cap.
By James Wigderson Special Perspective for the MacIver Institute
Each week, the website WisOpinion.com asks two veterans of Wisconsin policy and politics, Scot Ross of One Wisconsin Now and our own Brian Fraley (a Director at the John K. MacIver Institute for Public Policy) to engage in exchanges on a topic of their choosing.
From Fraley’s entry, this week:
[J]ust days before the well-orchestrated and disingenuous attacks against Paul Ryan started recently, President Obama praised him for (again) offering his Roadmap for America’s Future, calling it a “serious proposal.” Of course then Obama’s budget director smacked the olive branch that he extended across Ryan’s face, and liberal hacks throughout Congress and the press followed suit. While the president mentions the need for “eventual” fiscal restraint, he and his party are spending this country to the point of fiscal collapse. I know it is very Alinskian of the left to take Ryan and demonize him, but don’t you think we should have a serious discussion about the out-of-control government spending that, if left to continue, will overwhelm not just the budget, but our nation’s entire economy?
Within the next five years, Wisconsin must double its use of energy from renewable sources to reach a level of 10 percent of all eelctrity sold in Wisconsin.
Right now, Wisconsin lawmakers are considering increasing that mandate to 25 percent by the year 2025. Supporters of the proposal say the required increase would create 15,000 jobs over the next 15 years. But where?
