An Open Letter to Governor Scott Walker

Dear Governor Walker,

Shame on you. Shame on you for preventing the democratic process to proceed, by your efforts to block public access to the Capitol, limit food and relief supplies to protesters inside the Capitol, revoke access to office and technology equipment by Democratic Senators, prevent their salaries from being paid through direct deposit so as to require them to return to the Capitol to collect their paychecks, your callous disregard for the safety of the citizens of Wisconsin (by considering planting “troublemakers” in a crowd of PEACEFUL protesters- which my four year old son and two year old daughter were a part of), and most importantly, your blatant disregard for the people of Wisconsin and our input into the legislative process.

Since you won’t listen to us speak and have closed the doors of the Capitol building to protesters (both figuratively and literally), I am writing this letter to tell you how disappointed I am in your two months in office and the Budget Repair Bill you introduced two and a half weeks ago. I have sent this letter to your office as well, but since your administration has, to date, only acknowledged the letters of support you receive, I want to be very clear and very public about my strong dissent.

I oppose the entirety of SB 11/ AB 11, not just the collective bargaining aspects that have garnered so much opposition in recent weeks. The reoccurring theme that I have found throughout the bill is the categorical elimination of public oversight in the rules making process and the abdication of legislative authority to the Walker administration, from state owned power plant sales to the civil service to Medicaid to the power of labor unions. The four most egregious provisions are those that relate to the sale of state-owned power plants, converting civil service positions to political appointee positions, limits to collective bargaining and changes to how decisions are made regarding the state’s administration of Medicaid. The following are my objections to this bill:

Sale of State Owned Power Plants
This bill allows the Department of Administration (headed by your appointees) to sell any state owned heating, cooling, and power plant, or contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without the solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state. The bill exempts such sales and contracts from having to be approved by the Public Service Commission (PSC) which is currently the case now.

I oppose the ability to sell state owned power plants in no bid sales contracts. Competition in this process is healthy for guaranteeing the state receives the best offer. There is no reason to limit these sales by allowing them to be sold off in no bid contracts. Under this provision, your administration could feasibly hand these over for a song to any party you choose, without any public oversight or input. As a taxpayer, this troubles me. As someone who can do math, this concerns me. How does a no bid process benefit the taxpayers of Wisconsin?

Converting Current Civil Servant Positions into Political Appointee Positions
Under this bill, legal advisors, communications directors and legislative advisors would be moved from classified service to unclassified service, making them at will employees and appointed by the heads of state agencies, which are governor appointees.

Under current law, these positions, as classified positions, are part of the civil service. The civil service is set up to maintain constancy throughout administrations. This bill would provide the executive branch greater reach and power into administrative agencies by allowing you to appoint and dismiss legal advisors, communications directors and legislative advisors of state agencies, now part of the civil service. This bill would make these positions political appointees, meaning that you and future administrations would have purview over legal analysis, communications and legislative interaction with agencies. I ask this: Would we be guaranteed honest communications from a Walker appointed communications liaison from the Department of Natural Resources? From an administration that has shown us that lying to the public is not inherently problematic?

In addition to my concern regarding the level of honesty we could attain from Walker appointed communication, legal and legislative advisors, turnover of these positions would be increased and institutional memory would be diminished each time a new executive takes over the governor’s mansion. This was the whole point of a civil service- to protect employees and the general public against the ups and downs of elections. How does increased turnover in these positions save the state any money?

I am not sure how this provision would help repair the budget, but it certainly would provide you and your administration with increased latitude and power to control the message that reaches the public regarding your policies. This language is unacceptable and must be removed.

Limits on Collective Bargaining
Your Budget Repair Bill would make sweeping changes to collective bargaining, a mainstay in the progressive movement, which was founded in the state of Wisconsin. I have several objections to the provisions in this bill that relate to collective bargaining.
· This bill limits collective bargaining to wages only. Under this provision, employees would not be allowed to collectively bargain for improvements to workplace conditions, benefits, or workplace safety. We need collective bargaining to be able to unify and respond collectively against a myriad of injustices from improper workplace treatment to terrible working conditions. I object to language in this bill that removes the ability of employees to collectively bargain.
· Under this bill, wages can only be bargained up to the percentage change in the consumer price index. Public sector employees have already been subjected to furloughs and wage freezes over the last two years. This provision will encourage current employees to find employment elsewhere and discourage future potential public sector employees from a career in the sector, since public sector wages are already below private sector wages. In short, I believe this provision will put us at a disadvantage for recruiting and maintaining a strong and vibrant public sector workforce.
· This bill requires an annual certification election of unions. At least 51 percent the actual employees in the collective bargaining unit must vote in favor of representation (not simply 51 percent of voters, but a full 51 percent of union members, an important nuance to note.) If the union fails to collect this percentage of yes votes, the members of the collective bargaining unit become non-represented and may not be represented for one year, in effect killing the union.
· This bill requires that unions hold an initial certification election for all represented state and municipal general employees in April 2011. Considering the timing of this bill, I have serious reservations that an election could be held in time to meet this requirement. I bet you knew that.
· I object to the elimination of collective bargaining for child care providers contracting with the Department of Children and Families as this bill does. Collective bargaining should not be eliminated wholesale for any segment of the workforce.
· This bill prohibits municipal employers from collectively bargaining with municipal general employees. While I believe all language regarding collective bargaining should be eliminated, at the very least, decisions whether or not to negotiate with unions should be left up to individual municipalities to decide.
· I vehemently object to the prohibitions this bill makes on salary deductions for labor organization dues. This provision above all else should be removed, as it has no relevance to Wisconsin’s economic recovery and only exists to weaken the power of unions. I see this as a direct attack on unions and the power and money they hold.
· This bill allows a general employee to refrain from paying dues and remain a member of a collective bargaining unit. Again, taking money from unions equates to taking power from unions. By stopping the flow of money into unions from dues, you are knowingly crippling unions’ ability to support candidates in electoral campaigns. Since unions tend to support Democratic candidates, you are effectively reducing campaign support for any future political opponents. I find the changes you are proposing to union dues structures to be the most blatant and abhorrent of power plays and beyond the pale.

Changes to Benefits for LTEs
This bill revokes the ability of Limited Term Employees of the state to receive health insurance or participate in the state retirement system. Since Wisconsin has increased LTEs positions over full time permanent employees as a result of the recent economic downturn, many people in this state would be affected by this provision. I strongly disagree with this bill’s provision that targets LTEs for benefits elimination.

Authority to Fire Public Employees for Participating in Work Stoppages
This bill authorizes your administration to fire any state employee who participates in a strike, work stoppage, sit−down, stay−in, slowdown, or other concerted activities to interrupt the operations or services of state government, including specifically purported mass resignations or sick calls.

While I understand that the public sector must continue to function, this provision grants authority to fire employees who protest against the very provisions in this bill or provisions in future bills that cut even deeper. How is this acceptable?

Changes to the Medical Assistance Program
This provision allows your administration, under the authority of the Department of Health Services (DHS), to make changes to Medicaid by deeming them necessary under an emergency rule. Under this provision, DHS does not have to provide evidence of an actual emergency; they simply must deem it so.

This provision gives unprecedented power to your administration to make changes to Medicaid without legislative oversight, so long as the Department of Health deems these changes necessary under an emergency rule. Under emergency rules, no public input would be attained before making these changes, which include making certain requirements, modifying benefits, revising provider reimbursement models, developing standards and methodologies for eligibility, and determining eligibility. I oppose this provision because it circumvents the separation of powers that was created in the constitution.

Public oversight in matters such as these, that concern a large segment of the population, must be allowed. As a taxpayer, I object to the idea of moving the authority to make changes from the state legislature to an unelected bureaucracy because it removes my ability to provide input on any of the changes which will affect my family and fellow Wisconsin residents.

This bill does little to repair the state’s budget but does a lot to increase the power of your administration. Were it not for the Democratic senators’ decision to prevent a quorum, we would not have known about all of the little discussed provisions included in this bill that bear no relation to our fiscal situation, since you have done little to inform us on all of these intricacies. I am deeply disappointed, Governor.

What you are doing in the name of the economy is a slap in the face of democracy. As of this afternoon, the public is being denied entry into the state Capitol where we have gathered for two weeks to show our opposition to this bill. This is our house, Governor. We pay for the lights, the building repairs, the employees who clean the floors, and your salary, to name a few. We deserve access and input in this process, not a closed door and a deaf ear.

And you? You deserve nothing less than a recall.

Thanks for your time.