Real Politics; 106

[silence] [WHA theme music] [Tom Loftus] The other thing I brought along with my horoscope for today. [laughter] And it says rebellious attitude on the job would bring the wrong results. [laughter] Avoid a clash with boss so I would suggest that ah we go along [laughter] with this latest deal and I complement the leadership. [laughter] Without objection the clerk will call the roll. Senators Adelman, Bablitch, Baer Burger here, Bidwell here, Brown here.

Hello I'm John Powell. Politics is called the art of the possible. And this seems to be the essence of making compromises. In the art of compromising individuals will sacrifice some part of their pet idea for the hopes of getting the best possible budget bill passed. As Benjamin Franklin said about our national constitution it was based on three principles. Compromise, compromise and compromise. So too the state budget bill also reflects many compromises. How one arrives at a final agreement endorsed by all can be a rocky road in the real world. The budget agreement is a classic compromise. Few people will actually vote against it but a lot of people on both sides of the aisle are unhappy about it. Here are the terms. The Democrats agree to spend another 8 million dollars on new highway construction. Dreyfus in turn agrees not to veto the entire budget. He also agrees not to line veto three specific parts of the budget, an increase in school aides, an increase in aid for the aged, blind and disabled,

and a 20 million dollar tax cut. That still leaves everything else in the 12 billion dollar budget vulnerable to a line veto. A lot of Democrats are unhappy about that. The leadership anticipated their unhappiness. To win their reluctant colleagues over, they threw in some sweeteners. The leadership agreed to add one million dollars to acquire abandoned railroad rights of way. One million dollars for mass transit. One million dollars for transportation of the elderly and the handicapped and one million dollars to help poor people insulate their homes.[background noise] As a result, 55 out of the assembly 60 Democrats agreed to support the [background noise] compromise albeit reluctantly. [background speaking] The other thing I brought along with my horoscope for today. [laughter] At it said rebellious attitude on the job would bring the wrong results. [laughter] [laughter] Avoid a clash with boss. [laughter]

[laughter] So ah I would suggest that we ah go along with this latest deal and I complement the leadership. I would like to suggest that we go ahead and pass the budget we have agreed upon. That we have the four bills that our speaker talked about, has those prepared, get them through whatever committee action is necessary in case the Govenor does then veto the budget if we pass it and take immediate action on those four bills. And finally if I can paraphrase a page from a history book that I once had a passing acquaintance with millions for road repair, but not one penny more for new construction. [Gary Johnson] I think that this package is the best that we can come up with to support what we have got here. We now have agreement with the Governor, he won't veto the

entire bill thus throwing school districts in disarray when they have their annual meeting the fourth Monday in July. I have never been enthusiastic about the way he's funded this highway program through the GPR transfer. It seems to me to the extent this continues, it's going to cause the governor and the legislature further difficulties in future sessions. But that's the way it is this session and next session's another time to deal with it. So I would hope we would support the package and you know let's get outta here. [background speaking] [Gary Barczak] I don't think the governor is going to give up on pushing highways. I think the issue will be as politically hot and sensitive in 1980 whether or not he signs it with his red pen or not. Finally we have no guarantee from the areas of concern, that he would not use his red pen liberally on local aids which was I think really [?be made?] the budget possible last week.

I for one will not support it. The majority view was summed up by Majority Leader James Wahner. Well I have ah a fundamental philosophical disagreement with the governor on highways and I think he's out of step with the times. But I'm also a political pragmatist and I think this was the responsible thing to do. We'd spent three months building a budget and I think it's the responsible thing to do now, is to try to reach an accommodation between all interests rather than go through a veto and permit the Governor to have all the drama and excitement of of that we don't have to start over. It seemed to me like the like the responsible thing to do at this point in time. The Governor's Chief Aide William Kaus said that the threat to veto the entire budget or vetoing the entire budget was a bit like the atom bomb. It's a much better weapon if you don't use it. Do you think he really would have used it? I think he would have used it but I think that's a very that's very true. That the threat of a veto is is almost as as good a weapon and I've said this many times it's almost as good a weapon as the

veto itself. Just as the threat of four bills from us, I think was a acted in the same way as kind of a deterrent to the Governor's office. We each had our atom bomb ah and then we decided to lay our bombs aside and work something out which was the sensible approach. They weren't very happy on the Republican side either. Governor Dreyfus paid a personal visit to the GOP caucus and picked up the grudging support of most Republican state representatives. But not minority leader John Shabaz. The budget in its present form is going to is going to cause us a tremendous tax increase next time down the line. I know the Governor is optimistic and I am happy that he is optimistic but there are those of us who have been in this business for a long time and we see this tremendous level of spending, this high level of growth not being shut off. You know what the government gives, it can never take away. We had an opportunity to stop the growth in government. And unfortunately we didn't take advantage of it.

Dreyfus asked the Republicans to stop debating the hundreds of remaining amendments to the budget. But the Republicans decided to demand votes on numerous amendments with wide popular appeal in the hope of embarrassing Democrats who voted against them. On one Republican amendment which would restore some tax deductions, too many Democrats gave in to temptation and voted to keep the amendment alive. So the leadership called a caucus in order to twist some arms, something they don't like to do in public. The caucus on partisan political strategy was held behind closed doors. When the lawmakers returned to the Assembly floor, the sponsor of the amendment appealed to the 13 Democrats who voted with him before, to vote with him again. [John Merkt] I'm really terribly disappointed at this maneuver that I've just seen taken place and that's what it is, is, a maneuver to kill this amendment to keep the people from having that chance in this coming year. And the 13, at least the 13 people that voted

with me last time from the other side of the aisle, Andrea Barry, Benkey, Duren, Hasadal, Holkey, Hefner, Kencaid, Pabst, Rogers, Schneider, Vandeperin, Ward You might not be next time if you don't vote for this amendment. [laughter] [laughter] [James Wahner] We have not gentlemen from the 12th let me assure you ah engaged in any harsh party discipline. We've just come from a very harmonious gathering in our caucus where we shared some philosophical viewpoints and. We ah generally ah came out of there. I think there were a couple of items related to the budget that we wanted to talk about. We had a moment of silent prayer and I want ah to assure you that there is no harsh discipline. It was apparent from both Senate caucuses that the deal probably will go through. But Senate Majority Leader William Bablitch of Stevens Point says the deal isn't really a

deal at all. It's barely the best of a number of legislative alternatives. Well first of all no deal was really struck, all that was forthcoming from the Governor was that he indicated for the first time that he was willing to recognize that the legislature's budget is a legitimate function of the legislature and that he was willing to move. I think is the first time that we've really seen the Governor come off of this intransigence and and recognize the willingness to compromise. I think that's a good sign not only for now but for the future dealings with the governor. But all he is saying essentially is that the bill in its present form is unacceptable. But if we add an additional 8 million dollars to it for transportation that the bill will be acceptable in terms that he would not veto the entire bill. He reserves to himself of course, the right to line veto any portions of the bill that he thinks is desirable public policy. The question now is whether or not the assembly will accept that and put in the 8 million dollars and if they do, will the Senate do it. And right now there is no way of telling what how the Senate is going to react to that, each senator has to make their own decisions whether or not

this alternative which is admittedly somewhat of an unacceptable alternative is better than all of the other unacceptable alternatives including a veto of the entire budget. Bablitch also sees this compromise as the last waltz in the dance of the budget. We're at that point now in that budget stage the the the dance is almost at an end where we are reaching a crescendo and at this crescendo point, I think both sides are going to recognize that the risks of failing to agree are are so dangerous that compromise must be reached. Not all senators agree with the budget compromise. Two of the most vocal are Senators Fred Risser of Madison and Roger Murphy of Waukesha. Well I don't understand why the legislature's afraid a gubernatorial veto. The Governor just last week was criticizing what he called legislative log rolling but now he's guilty of the same thing. He's saying, you go my way give me 8 million dollars more in concrete and I won't veto the whole bill. [?Drop] the Governor has joint responsibility with the

legislature. He's not going to veto the entire budget bill hastily. And if he does he's going to have to come back with another one and if he comes back with another bill we will continue as the majority in the legislature to put in the same measures we want now. I say that we should not worry about a gubernatorial veto and certainly we shouldn't sell out on the fear of it by adding another 8 million dollars in concrete. I just don't buy it. I've been opposed to that type of budget. I thought of the governor went out to campaign last year in the state of Wisconsin. It seemed to me the people of Wisconsin responded saying that they did did not want high budgets in Wisconsin. They wanted a cut in the cost of government, they want to cut in the number of employees in the state of Wisconsin and a cut in taxes. And I don't think that this budget now responds to that at all. If you had a message for the Governor right now. What would that message be? I would suggest he veto it entirely. I think is it would take a great

bit of backbone on his part to do it. But I really think from the very beginning I've been saying in our conferences I've been saying Governor, it's your opportunity, it's your ball. You can cut the budget and we can undercut the Democrat spending program Wisconsin. We can go out the campaign in two years and say yes, we've lived up to our campaign promises that we are going to cut cost of government Wisconsin. This budget is not a cut in government. The Senate is expected to get the budget back from the Assembly tonight or tomorrow. If that's the case, Senate leadership predicts it will be out of the Senate by Friday on the Governor's desk by July 1st. The Governor was in the Capitol briefly today. He urged bipartisan support for the deal that he struck and he urged both houses to vote for the budget. He also explained why he made the deal. [Governor Lee Dreyfus] All I know is that in trying to make the process work as I see the two sides coming in together and the original 21 million out of the Senate, now 27 more out of the assembly means that the road program is beginning. I didn't want that to

falter and ah. But it is not exactly the entire package. No we had put in 82 of which 22 is going to be deficit. So we knew we had about 60 million dollars major projects and as I see it now, we get about 48 million. On that basis that will get started. We're back to where we started from. We need the time in this biennium to get together with both sides to decide how we're going to handle the long range problem critical to me. I also have a commitment out of leadership in the opposition party to join me in not having these automatic costs to continue things. Their going to drive us into a tax increase because I'm committed not to do that. And I think they understand that. They're going to give us a genuine hand as we start modifying now and moving toward the use of line vetoes to make sure that budget does not create two years from now a serious problem for the people in this state. The majority view was summed up by Majority Leader James Wahner. Well I have a fundamental philosophical disagreement with the Governor on

highways and I think he's out of step with the times. But I'm also a political pragmatist and I think this was the responsible thing to do. We'd spent three months building a budget. And I think it's the responsible thing to do now is to try to reach an accommodation between all interests rather than go through a veto and permit the Governor to have all the drama and excitement of that we don't have to start over. It seemed to me like the like the responsible thing to do at this point in time.