WCCF Launches Month-Long Series Examining Impact of Budget on Kids and Families

"31 Ways in 31 Days" Begins the Process of Rebalancing Wisconsin’s Priorities

Now that Wisconsin Act 32, the 2011-13 biennial budget, has been signed into law, the Wisconsin Council on Children and Families (WCCF) has turned its focus forward to promoting positive change for children and families in Wisconsin. Throughout the budget process, WCCF has expressed disappointment at policymakers’ unwillingness to employ a more balanced approach to the state’s fiscal challenges.

The newly enacted budget instead dug the hole deeper through tax breaks for big corporations and the state’s wealthiest residents, while making devastating cuts in such critical areas as education, health care, public transportation, and funding for an array of municipal and county services.

“The budget that was just signed by Gov. Walker is based on the false premise that Wisconsin has no choice but to balance the budget through deep, painful cuts to programs for children and families,” said WCCF Executive Director Ken Taylor. “But we know there were other, better choices. Our task now is to work toward a better vision for Wisconsin’s future—a future in which investments are made in our children and our families not only because it is the right thing to do, but also because it is the smart thing to do for economic development.”

To that end, on July 1 WCCF is launching a month-long series of blog posts examining the many ways this state budget will affect children and families. The series, “31 Ways in 31 Days” (timed to coincide with the first month of the new fiscal year) will also outline better options the state should consider moving forward.

Early Care and Education Budget Scorecard

WCCF early learning policy analyst Dave Edie has put out a scorecard examining what happened in the 2011-13 Wisconsin biennial budget, including analysis on YoungStar, Wisconsin Shares,home visiting, 4-year-old Kindergarten, and Head Start.

For more information, go to the Wisconsin Early Learning Coalition website.

Budget Project Updates Comparative Budget Summary

The Governor has signed the 2011-13 biennial budget after making some minor vetoes, and the Wisconsin Budget Project has updated – probably for the final time – the comparative budget summary in order to reflect those vetoes.

The comparison shows how selected provisions were modified in the budget process, as well as the fiscal effect of those changes. If you’re interested in seeing how a specific budget item changed as it moved through the legislative process, the comparative budget summary is a convenient way to do so.

A Child-friendly Veto Removes Change to Weight Based Taxation of Moist Snuff Tobacco Products

WCCF Commends the Governor on this Move to Help Discourage Kids’ Use of Harmful Tobacco Products

As we noted in a May 27th blog post, the Joint Finance Committee voted for a budget amendment to change the tax on moist snuff tobacco products to a weight-based tax. WCCF joined numerous other groups in opposing such a change, for the reasons outlined in a May 26th letter to Joint Finance. For those reasons, we applaud the Governor for vetoing this proposal in the final budget (Act 32).

Will the Party of the First Part Subrogate the Rights of the Party of the Second Part? (We’re Not Sure What That Means, but We Think the Answer Is Yes)

Republicans Renew Rule Rescinding Readability Requirements

As we noted in a May 3rd blog post, the WI Office of the Commissioner of Insurance (OCI) issued an emergency rule in February suspending improvements made in fall 2010 to the readability of private health insurance plans and electronic access to such plans. Last Thursday, the Legislature’s Joint Committee on Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR) voted 6-4 to extend the OCI change, which was going to run out on July 8th.

Enactment of Unemployment Benefit Changes Raises Questions about Future of Advisory Council

The Governor decided to sign into law the changes in the budget bill relating to unemployment insurance (UI) benefits, notwithstanding the unanimous recommendation of the UI Council to veto those changes. A Wisconsin Budget Project Blog post today examines the threat that poses to the future of the consensus process that has generally been used for the last 75 years to set UI policy in a nonpartisan way. Read more in that blog.

Advisory Council Unanimously Recommends Extending Jobless Benefits and Vetoing Budget Changes (What Comes Next?)

For anyone who worries about how partisan politics has become, there was some encouraging news Thursday when the state’s Unemployment Insurance Advisory Council voted unanimously for a couple of significant motions relating to Wisconsin’s unemployment insurance (UI) system. The Council, which is made up of half labor and half management representatives, strives to develop consensus recommendations to the Governor and Legislature for any changes to Wisconsin’s UI benefits and financing. The Council hadn’t met in several months, and it has been unclear whether it will continue to be the preferred means for developing the policies that shape Wisconsin’s UI system.

Journal Sentinel Editorial Calls for Transparency in Medicaid Policy Making

The June 20 Milwaukee Journal Sentinel had a very good article by Guy Boulton about the potential consequences of the Medicaid budget cuts and policymaking changes in the biennial budget bill. Unfortunately, the article doesn’t tell us anything concrete about what those consequences will be because that was not resolved by the bill; instead it will be decided in the months ahead by DHS.

A follow-up editorial in today’s Journal Sentinel urges DHS to hold hearings and says the policy decisions ahead “should include consultation with those who know the program best: advocates and patients.” The editorial goes on to say:

"The budget-repair bill, passed this spring, gave the Department of Health Services the authority to make changes in the programs without legislative approval. But the bill required public hearings. The new two-year budget bill, which passed both houses of the Legislature last week, dropped that requirement. It's a mistake that Walker should try to correct before signing the bill."  (emphsis added)

The Governor could accomplish that very easily by vetoing the portion of the budget bill repealing the Act 10 language that requires rulemaking for the Medicaid and BadgerCare policy changes.

The June 20th article also led to a pointed critique of the Medicaid power shift and the removal of hearings by blogger Rick Ungar.  In a nutshell, I think it would be fair to say that Ungar supports the call for a more democratic process for Medicaid decision making, while expressing a whole lot more skepticism about the prospects for seeing that during the three and one-half year duration of this consolidation of lawmaking power.

Jon Peacock

New WCCF Documents Explain Shift in Medicaid Policy-Making Power

For the next week or so, the Department of Health Services (DHS) will have the power to make changes in Medicaid and BadgerCare policy that conflict with state statutes, by adopting rules that may supersede the statutes. That power took effect after the State Supreme Court overturned the ruling that had blocked implementation of the budget repair bill (Act 10).

Sometime next week the Governor will sign the biennial budget bill, which will repeal the Medicaid provisions in Act 10 and will replace them with similar provisions that remove the requirement to adopt rules to change key elements of Medicaid and BadgerCare. That change removes the only assurance that there would be a public hearing before the DHS Secretary pronounces policy decisions changing state law. The rulemaking requirement is replaced with a requirement that before DHS seeks federal approval of a plan amendment or waiver that would lead to a change conflicting with state statutes, it must submit the proposal to the Joint Finance Committee for review. The sweeping new authority granted to DHS will expire in January 2015.

This week WCCF released a one-page comparison of the Medicaid policy-making changes in Act 10 with those in the biennial budget bill.  We also updated a comprehensive paper explaining the shift in authority for Medicaid policymaking, and some of the potential changes.

For further commentary on this issue see the next blog post.

Jon Peacock

The Budget's Effects on Public Workers

Changes in the state budget and budget repair legislation will make it harder for low-income workers in the public sector to make ends meet, according to a new analysis by the Wisconsin Council on Children and Families.

A two-page brief released today examines these changes and their impact on the families of people employed in public sector jobs. Beginning teachers, janitors, workers in school, and other working-class public employees could lose thousands of dollars per year, the equivalent of as much as six months of grocery costs.

Budget Project Urges Caution in Making Plans for Potential Surplus in 2013-15

The Legislative Fiscal Bureau issued a memo last week that has generated some confusion about the state’s fiscal situation, because some people incorrectly interpreted it to mean that the state would have a sizeable balance at the end of the 2011-13 biennium. Instead, the LFB analysis shows that the recently approved 2011-13 budget bill puts Wisconsin in a position to have a surplus of $306 million in the 2013-15 biennium. A new Budget Project blog post analyzes the Fiscal Bureau’s figures and assumptions and explains why the welcome news about the state’s fiscal condition isn’t as positive as some might infer from the June 13 LFB memo.

In addition to the fact that the slowing economy could quickly put the short- and long-term budget projections back into the red, a couple of other factors should be caution flags for people who think the state will be safely in the black in the 2013-15 biennium. First, the projected $306 million surplus would only be about $50 million if the budget bill didn't delay by two years the scheduled increase in the reserve requirement (to 2% of appropriations). Second, the projected surplus will almost certainly be reduced by $219 million when Congress makes a change that precludes resumption of the state estate tax law.

With those considerations in mind, legislators shouldn't be salivating at the prospect of passing bills this session that phase in additional tax breaks or spending in the 2013-15 biennium. Read more in today’s Budget Project Blog post.

Jon Peacock

WI Budget Project Updates Summary of 2011-13 Budget

Now that the Legislature has completed its work on the 2011-13 budget, the Wisconsin Budget Project has updated its comprehensive (44 page) summary of the budget bill.  It primarily focuses on the issues relating to children and families, and it shows how each policy item evolved over the course of the budget process. Each section also includes links to the Fiscal Bureau documents and to other relevant material.

If you’re looking for a much more condensed summary of what the final budget bill means for Wisconsin families, there are a couple of other documents on the WCCF and Wiscosnin Budget Project  websites that will help.  Read more in today's Budget Project blog post.

We will produce further analyses of the budget in the coming weeks – beginning next week with an examination of how it will affect Medicaid policy-making in Wisconsin. Please give us your feedback on any of the documents we produce, so we can continue to try to improve our efforts to provide summaries and analysis that people find timely and useful.

Jon Peacock

The Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Ensuring Youthful Offenders Understand their Rights

In a US Supreme Court decision (J.D.B. v. North Carolina) released today, the Court ruled (5-4) that a youth’s age does need to be considered as a factor when giving Miranda warnings – particularly as it relates to a youth’s ability to understand whether or not they are “in custody” and can adequately exercise consent to be questioned. 

The case involved a 13-year-olds student in North Carolina who was questioned by police related to two home break-ins but was not given his Miranda warnings until after confessing.  That seems “backward” to say the least, but the decision revolves around the underlying issues of whether a youth really understands that they are “free to leave” when questioned by law enforcement – a critical factor in determining at what point in questioning/conversations by police actual warnings need to be given.

This case continues a trend toward reflecting an understanding that there are cognition and other developmental differences that need to be considered when applying “adult-like” procedures to youthful offenders and is a step in the right direction in preserving the rights of youth when dealing with much more sophisticated adults.

From Bad to Worse: New JFC Version of Medicaid Power Shift Compounds the Problems

Medicaid Provisions in JFC Budget Raise Constitutional Issues and Open Meetings Concern

The Joint Finance Committee (JFC) version of the budget bill incorporates provisions from the budget repair bill (Act 10) that shift the power over Medicaid and BadgerCare policymaking from the legislature to the Department of Health Services. However, it compounds the problems created by the concentration of so much lawmaking power in the executive branch because it removes requirements that the DHS policy changes – which would be allowed to supersede 24 parts of the statutes – have to be made by rule. The rulemaking process would have included public hearings and an opportunity for citizen participation in the process.

The transfer of Medicaid policymaking authority in the committee’s budget bill raises serious constitutional concerns, just as the similar provisions in the budget repair did. By giving so much authority to an unelected official, both versions of this unprecedented transfer of lawmaking authority limit the ability of Wisconsin citizens to have a role in the process. However, in contrast to Act 10, the new bill goes much further in eliminating public involvement since it allows the sweeping grant of authority to be exercised by the DHS Secretary without so much as a single public hearing.

The Budget's Effect on Wisconsin's Low-Income Families

How will the state budget impact low-income families? WCCF has updated two analyses to show how the budget -- as amended by the Joint Finance Committee -- will affect low-income families:

• Effects of the Biennial Budget and Budget Repair Bills for Working Families: This is a summary of the ways the proposed 2011-13 budget bill and the 2011 budget repair bill will affect working families, particularly low-wage workers. It examines the cuts to the Earned Income Tax Credit and Homestead Tax Credit, likely effects on health care programs, potential cuts to child care subsidies, diminished opportunities for education and training, and cuts to transit programs.

• The Budget's Real-Life Impact on Working Families: It's clear that this state budget hits the state's most vulnerable families the hardest. This analysis shows how the budget would affect working-class families. You can also view the related WCCF press release.

Ten-year Tax Cut Tally Tops Two Billion

According to a June 9th Legislative Fiscal Bureau memo prepared for Senator Mark Miller, the combined cost of the tax cuts in the biennial budget bill and in other bills already enacted this year will be $212 million in the 2011-13 budget period. The annual cost of many of those credits will grow significantly in future years, and the cumulative fiscal impact over the next ten years is projected to be $2.3 billion.

Read more in a new Wisconsin Budget Project Blog post.

Jon Peacock

Icing on the Cake for Corporations, Crumbs for Working Families

Late last week, the Joint Finance Committee approved a $129-million tax break for corporations that produce goods in the state. The Wisconsin Budget Project has a new post explaining the top ten reasons why this tax break is a bad idea.

Here's an excerpt:

Governor Walker’s budget bill was already very generous for corporations. While demanding sacrifice of nearly everyone else, his budget bill and special session bills contained $200 million in tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy.

The Finance Committee’s additional $129 million per year tax break for manufacturers is indeed the icing on the cake for those corporations; yet while they enjoy some very pricey icing, working families and their children are going to be under the table fighting for the crumbs.

You can read more at the newest Wisconsin Budget Project blog post.

Questions About School Choice Expansion

The school choice program got a big boost in the biennial budget. First, Governor Walker proposed repealing enrollment caps, income eligibility restrictions, and specific testing requirements for the Milwaukee school choice program.

Although the Joint Finance Committee restored income eligibility and testing requirements, it also expanded school choice to the City of Racine and left the door open for school choice in Green Bay as well. Rep. Robin Vos said that the program has proved popular with parents and has improved public education.

The Joint Finance Committee also approved the Governor’s recommendations to protect the per-student voucher payment to choice schools from reductions – at the same time that it cut state aid to public schools, and reduced the amount of revenue public schools can raise at the local level.

This expansion of the school choice program came despite the vociferous objection of State Superintendent Tony Evers, who said: “To spend hundreds of millions to expand a 20-year-old program that has not improved overall student achievement, while defunding public education, is morally wrong.”

Adding to the Deficit -- Through Subtraction

According to the newest Wisconsin Budget Project blog post, the Joint Finance Committee seemed geniunely committed to addressing the structural deficit (at least on the spending side), until it created a last-minute tax break for manufacturers. This move will nearly eliminates the income tax for many corporations that produce goods in the state.

Here's an excerpt:

Some politicians and pundits seem to think that structural deficits can always be attributed to phased-in spending increases or short-term budget-balancing measures (such as “raiding” other funds or restructuring bonds). They overlook the fact that delayed or phased in tax cuts can also produce or add to structural deficits.

The short-term political expediency that sometimes leads lawmakers to approve deferred spending increases that they cannot currently afford can also induce them to approve tax cuts that are now unaffordable, and the effects on the structural deficit can be the same.

Read the newest Budget Project blog post for more.

Compromises Result in Improved Income Maintenance Proposal

Late Friday night the Joint Finance Committee (JFC) unanimously passed a motion that greatly improves the Governor’s proposal to centralize and privatize income maintenance (IM) administration. The IM program includes Medical Assistance, the FoodShare program, and the WI funeral and cemetery aids program. WCCF and other groups expressed many serious concerns about the Governor’s recommendations. (See, for example, our June 1 memo to the Joint Finance Committee.)

Though we still have concerns, the revised motion passed by Joint Finance addresses many of the problems that advocates and the counties raised – including a local presence for call/change centers, application processing and eligibility determinations, case management and lobby services. Thanks to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), the majority of IM functions will remain in the care of public employees, both at the county and state level. To read more about the original proposals to privatize workers, and the USDA response, see the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel articles here and here.

Questions to Ask Before Privatizing Government Functions

The Wisconsin Budget Project has a blog post with a checklist of questions we should ask ourselves before we move to privatize government functions.

Here's an excerpt from the post:

Governor Walker has proposed a number of initiatives to privatize government functions or to make it easier to do so. One of those proposals, privatization of much of the “income maintenance” system for handling BadgerCare and Food Share applications and renewals, has suffered a couple of significant setbacks in recent weeks -- most recently in a June 2nd Legislative Audit Bureau report.

However, those obstacles may only be small speed bumps in the Walker Administration’s efforts to downsize government by turning over more government functions to the private sector.

You can read more at the Wisconsin Budget Project's full blog post.

Rock County Making Progress Toward Reducing DMC

Rock County is highlighted in the latest issue of the DMC Action Network e-Newsletter, reviewing some of the progress made over the past couple of years in creating alternatives to detention, implementing sound screening and assessment practices, and reducing reoffending.  Much of this progress began under the leadership of Jason Witt, who is now the Human Services Director in La Crosse County, and the delinquency team is now being led by Lance Horozewski. Congratulations for the progress made and hopes for more to come.                               Post by Jim Moeser

Increasing Taxes on the Working Poor

The Wisconsin Budget Project has this to say about the prospect of increasing taxes on the working poor:

The Joint Finance Committee (JFC) voted Tuesday evening for a package of state policy changes that cut taxes for multistate corporations and the wealthy, while raising taxes on working poor families with two or more children.

Republican members of the committee argued that the cut to the state Earned Income Tax Credit is necessary to help close the $3 billion state deficit. However, the Legislature has a number of viable alternatives for balancing the budget while preserving the credits.

You can read more at the Wisconsin Budget Project's newest blog post.

Congresswoman Baldwin Stood Up for Wisconsin Children, Again, By Opposing the State Flexibility (Child Fragility) Act

Representative Tammy Baldwin stood up for children, people with disabilities and the elderly by opposing the “State Flexibility Act” (or perhaps more appropriately, the Child Fragility Act) a bill that would eliminate the Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program stability protections.  Representative Baldwin and other Members of the House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee did a commendable job in explaining that the legislation would trade off the health and well-being of children for phantom cost savings that would really only serve to shift costs to local communities, hospitals, doctors and children and families who could least afford it.  Despite their best efforts, the bill was approved on a party-line vote and now moves to the full committee.

In Wisconsin, the stability protections have helped preserve the successful BadgerCare Plus program and have maintained a crucial lifeline to children and families during tough economic times. If this legislation were to be enacted into law and the stability protections were eliminated, the health care coverage of over 465,000 Wisconsin children would be put in immediate risk. The Walker Administration is already looking for “flexibility” by working on a state-specific waiver of the stability protections. This bill would take away the federal Department of Health and Human Services check on state changes to BadgerCare Plus.

Budget Repair Bill Gives Unions Disincentive to Make Concessions

The Wisconsin Budget Project has a new blog post describing how the budget adjustment bill provides a disincentive -- at least in the short term -- for public employee unions willing to make concessions.

Here's an excerpt:

"A number of local public employee unions have indicated their willingness to re-open their contracts to make concessions that would prevent staff layoffs and service reductions. If so, they better do it quickly, because once Act 10 provisions go into effect, unions that voluntarily work with local governments to reopen their contracts and make concessions will be subject to all the provisions in Act 10.

That means that if unions make a good-faith effort to make financial concessions through a modification of their contract, the result will be that they will be immediately limited in their rights regarding arbitration, union dues, fringe benefits, and other areas."

You can read the entire post here, at the Wisconsin Budget Project blog.

What’s WCCF Up To?

We have recently added some ways you can keep abreast of the work WCCF is doing on issues related to health care, early care and education, juvenile justice, child welfare, and other topics. Here are some possibilities:

• Subscribe to the Wisconsin Council on Children and Families blog to get updates via email or feed reader;
• “Like” WCCF on Facebook;
• Check out our website at http://www.wccf.org/;
• Sign up to receive newsletters on various topics; and
• Follow us on Twitter: @wiskids.

To keep up to date with the Wisconsin Budget Project, which is an initiative of WCCF, you can watch these same spots or like the Budget Project’s Facebook page, follow the Budget Project on Twitter (WiBudgetProject), or read the Budget Project blog.


Tamarine Cornelius

Joint Finance Committee (JFC) Approves Governor’s Juvenile Corrections Proposals… and More

In action yesterday, the Joint Finance Committee approved Governor Walker’s recommendations related to two key issues for juvenile corrections: (1) Approving the daily rates for services provide by the Division of Juvenile Corrections, and (2) Approving the consolidation of three juvenile correctional institutions (JCIs) – closing Ethan Allen for boys and moving girls to the soon-to-be-opened Copper Lake School on the grounds at Lincoln Hills School.

A WCCF Comparative Analysis of the 2011-13 Budget Bill includes information about juvenile corrections as well as other key issues impacting children and families, and you can track the progress of proposals by linking to that summary. WCCF did submit a memo to JFC expressing support for a lower daily rate for JCI placements, since the rate includes $17/day to make up for the deficit that has resulted from decreased placements in recent years.

The Omnibus Corrections motion, passed 12-4 by JFC, also included a provision extending the length of time, from 30 days to 180 days, a juvenile may be placed, as a disposition under ss.938.34(3) in a juvenile detention facility, juvenile portion of a county jail, or a non-secure facility – effectively creating a new dispositional option but with minimal criteria for what kind of programming may be required for those longer placements. Watch for more from WCCF on this particular issue, as this option has the potential for promoting both positive and negative outcomes.                              

by Jim Moeser