Real Politics; 101

[WHA theme music] I feel that with this package that we put together we have gone a long way towards meeting the governor's initial demand. We are very close to him in dollars now. The only difference is in the emphasis on where those dollars will be spent. If I were him I declare victory and put the whole issue to bed. But I'm not him and he's he's got his own problems. I'm sure he's looking for some alternatives but I don't think he's going to find many. Obviously his 82 million dollar transfer was not that popular even with his own troops. [Governor Lee Dreyfus] And I put 82 million in there. They shouldn't have fool around with that. We needed that. That was intended to buy us the time to look at all the ways for raising the money to provide this. And if in fact they don't do it this time than in the next biennium we will get to add a responsible way of reducing the dollars to maintain an ongoing road program in this state. Without objection the clerk will call the roll. Senators Addleman, Bablich, Baer, Burger [roll call]

Hello I'm John Paul. During a recent session of the state legislature my colleagues and I had the opportunity to watch our elected representatives in Wisconsin put together our state budget. During the process we were able to get an insider's view of how politicians roll up their sleeves and get to work. This was no textbook exercise in civics but rather a day to day report on the way the politicians help run our government. We had a chance to meet many of the actors in this political drama and to become familiar with the sometimes strange language and rules of the game. In series of programs will share our experiences with you. In this program we're going to get a bird's eye view of how the government and the legislature work together sometimes to make up our state budget every two years. Consider the stakes in this game. Billions of dollars. Also consider the thousands and thousands of items to consider from highways and education to health, public welfare, and housing. Because the dollars in our state budget come from taxpayers and because taxpayers we elect politicians to office expect something

back for their money, you can see the potential for heated debate and the gentle art of arm twisting in the political game. Whether it's a matter of principle or party loyalty, love or money when elected officials start hammering out our state's budget bill the action can get hot and heavy and that's what this program and the others that follow it is all about: real politics. This is the most critical time to keep an eye on state government affairs. The legislature is considering the state budget and will have to live with its decision for the next two years and the stakes are high. Over 12 billion dollars. We'll be here every weeknight with a complete report until that budget is finally signed by the governor. Tonight we'd like you to meet the people who'll be keeping you informed. I'm Jeff Clark. This is the Senate chamber. It's been called a gentlemen's club by some in the past because its members were older more sedate in their debate. And for the most part men. But that's changing. There are a host of younger members today. The session includes a woman senator and the debate is not always sedate.

The Senate began deliberation on the 12 billion dollar state budget package yesterday. More than 30 amendments have been dealt with on the floor in the past 48 hours. And before the bill is passed on to the assembly more than 200 will see some action either on the Senate floor or in caucus. The Senate has a reputation for orderly and organized conducting of its business. Senators tell me they'll pass the budget on to the Assembly next week. I'll be here to keep you on top of action in the Senate and you'll be able to see if they can fulfill the prophecy. I'm Richard Wexler. After the Senate passes the budget it comes here to the state assembly where it will be revised by 97 state representatives. I'll be following the progress of the budget bill through the assembly and keeping track of Lower House debate on other major state issues. The lawmakers here often don't see eye to eye with their Senate colleagues even when they're members of the same party. That's partly because they represent smaller some would say more parochial constituencies and partly because state representatives are elected every two years instead of every four. When you watch your state

representatives debate the budget keep in mind that for each of them the next election is never very far away. As expected transportation and highways are the major issues confronting the state Senate as it grapples with the budget. Geoff Clark has a report. [Senator Clifford Krueger] But I think that there is all together too much on... from the both political parties in this house and also including the governor's office. And we're making a political game out of it to see who we can push in to a position to blame for a tax increase. Senate Minority Leader Clifford Krueger is addressing the major issue in the hands of his colleagues highways and transportation. He views them as more political and partisan than his Democratic counterparts might like. But his point may be valid. The Senate started debate on the budget yesterday. It approved the 16 million dollar additional proposal to provide a cost of living increase for supplemental security income

recipients. It also approved the 21 million dollar compromise highway package proposed by Senate Majority Leader William Bablitch. The proposal places the governor in a precarious position. He wants 82 million dollars in general revenue funds to improve Wisconsin roads. The legislature is saying no to this. Yesterday's vote means either acceptance of the compromise by the governor or a request from him for a gasoline tax increase to pay for his highways. Bablitch says the compromise has some real political realities for all concerned. Well I feel that with this package that we put together we have gone a long way towards meeting the governor's initial demand. We are very close to him in dollars now. The only difference is in the emphasis on where those dollars will be spent. He emphasizes more major new construction new concrete. We emphasize maintaining what we've got. I think given the attractiveness of the package that we've got now in the budget bill in the Senate the governor's either going to have to come up with some kind of a gasoline tax increase proposal to to fund

a permanent solution to this whole problem. Or he's simply going to have to take a look at my proposal either veto it or accept it. If I were him I declare victory and put the whole issue to bed. But I'm not him and he's he's got his own problems. I'm sure he's looking for some alternatives but I don't think he's going to find many. Obviously his 82 million dollar transfer is not that popular even with his own troops. The governor so far hasn't bitten the bullet. In fact he's saying the legislature must do that or face defeat in 1980 at the hands of voters who want better roads. The Democrats want the governor to request a gas tax increase something he says he won't do. Republican senator Walter John Chilsen has decided to give in however. He asked for a gas tax hike an amendment introduced yesterday. Chilsen says the increase is not political suicide for him or anyone looking for a permanent solution to the funding of highway improvements. Well I don't think it is political suicide. It is a user

fee [?] increase and it does provide a permanent solution that I would funding problem. The problem we have right now is that the present 7 cent a gallon tax with a gallon consumption really a leveling off is not providing about the same number of dollars going in to the transportation fund. And there are increasing demands because of inflation on the transportation fund not only for building new highways and reconstructing and maintaining the present highways and providing for the local highways but for mass transit purposes, for a revival preservation of railroads and river corridors, and senior citizen transportation handicapped transportation a lot of new things that are demands on the transportation fund. John Shabazz and the Republicans in the assembly say gas tax no gas tax. How do you react to that and what are you going to do to console Republicans in the assembly?

Well those who say that there is some potential political liability to voting for fee increases tax increases if you will. That's a valid argument but I really think it's important to bite the bullet at this time and we in the minority have to recognize that we aren't going to get the 82 million dollar transfer of what the governor says is the best idea. I think it is. On our very first program in this series from the Capitol we're happy to have with us a very distinguished visitor the governor of the state of Wisconsin Les Dreyfus. And we we might as well get right into the controversy over the budget so far. The big thing thus far has been the transportation budget. You wanted 82 million from general revenue. Now with the Bill Bablitch proposal we stand at something like 60 million grand total but he's going to apportion a little bit differently. We also have the gas tax proposal. Now where do we stand? Well, it's only part of the issue the transportation issue. I didn't want the 82 million. I was 82 million dollars in surplus and if it wasn't put into that program then it should have been given

back to the people. We have a moratorium longer than we have. So it is something I'm very upset about. And I think these people have been down here Madison too long and they don't know what's happening out state. As I watched the road program including Bill's program because in effect his program means in his own area 51 will not be completed. They've been waiting 15 years. I think these people are going to find out they are not election proof. And roads are an issue out state. They aren't down here in Madison that's the problem. The Bablitch plan isn't enough then in your opinion. Well, it's simply pandering to the local needs while at the same time saying we're not going to complete what are our main thoroughfare. When you watch a situation like that I think it is not good for the communities of the North. It's tru on 53 it's true on 18 151. It's true on 16. What about a gas tax increase? Isn't that ultimately going to be the way these have to be funded? No not necessarily.

I had proposed in fact that we take a portion of the sales tax as applied to automotive vehicles. I don't see any reason why that still can't be considered. The notion that we're going to increase taxes I have a real concern about doing anything that's going to add more to the price of gasoline. We are pricing gasoline out. I understand that's a good deterrent for excessive use but it's also a very impactive on the aged. It's very impactive on the poor. And anything that affects the cost of gasoline for road salesmen and trucks and so on is just going to be inflationary in the economy. Some people think there's a sort of paranoia here about being the first to offer something like gas tax increase. Senator Chilsen finally did introduce an amendment. I guess he's the first one to step forward. It's been mentioned a lot. Are people right to be that paranoid about being the first to come out for it? I can't judge that. I don't know. The real issue is do people just remember when they have roads being improved? Or do they remember that somebody increased the tax. I do know that the roads in this state are deteriorating. We've let our railroads deteriorate in this country and if we pursue this policy for another decade and let our roads go we're going to find yourself in

tough economic shape. I know what your answer is going to be but I'll ask you anyway. If the Bablitch proposal comes to your desk will you veto the budget or veto that portions? You know my answer. I never indicate vetoes before they come to my desk. The evil is sufficient on to the day. But I think there they question they know where I stand. I put 82 million in there. They shouldn't fooled around with it. We needed that. That was intended to bias the time to look at all the ways for raising the money to provide this. And if in fact they don't do it this time then in the next biennium we will get to at a responsible way of producing the dollars to maintain an ongoing road program in this state. You said people are out of touch with what the people want. I think so. You've also threatened to out to the districts where there are incumbent democrats in 1980. You will do that? I will do that. I've been told why should I risk that when I'm not in an election year. To me it's a matter of getting the voices down here that are close enough to what people want. When I watch them cutting 15 million

dollars in tax relief for farmers out and moving that out toward the cities that's simply pandering to the shift of population in this state and it's wrong. We need those farmers. Everybody eats. That kind of thing. I'm willing to go out and go on the stump for them. What do you realistically hope to come out of the budget process. Oh I think this budget is not going to get carried through the summer. I really think you're going to see a budget as I put it in. It's been fairly well kicked around that. I agree with that. And I think the transfers from one time money to ongoing indebtedness I think I will expect to see a budget. And I think within 30 days I should have a budget. I really believe that. And then I will get my kick at the cat. Which is what the veto pen is all about. Are you looking forward to the line item veto power? Of course. Maybe I can take a good Republican budget that I submitted which has been changed into a Democratic budget and I may re-Republicanize it a little bit.

OK thank you very much. Governor Lee Dreyfus and we're happy that you can join us on our first program. So there you have it. Real politics, real people hard at work doing their best to make our state government work better for you and me. Quite often as we've seen the players in this game don't agree with one another on the best way to get things done. Party squares off against rival party, the governor is ready to go out and campaign against legislators who don't agree with his major policies, and sometimes members of the same political party get into heated debates over how they should work as a group.Next time on real politics we're going to take a closer look at how the Republican and Democratic parties work as individual groups in a process called the party caucus. And I put 82 million in there. They shouldn't've fooled around with it. We needed that. That was intended to buy us the time to look at all the ways for raising the money to provide this. And if in fact they don't do it this time than in the next biennium we will get at a responsible way of producing the dollars to maintain an ongoing road program in this state.