The future distribution of Wisconsin's revenues will be debated today in the state Assembly as it takes up Gov. Scott McCallum's Budget Reform Act.
The question the Assembly needs to ask itself is how the state can go about solving a billion dollar deficit without raising taxes and without harming local communities, schoolchildren, the elderly and the disabled, according to Steve Baas, spokesperson for Assembly Speaker Scott Jensen, R-Waukesha.
\The Assembly Republicans have created a plan that does that,"" he said.
The Assembly Democrats plan to offer budget recommendations that will prioritize education, public health and safety and environmental protection, according to a statement by Assembly Minority Leader Spencer Black, D-Madison.
""We will fight to protect Wisconsin's strengths... [and] we will offer recommendations to make sure Wisconsin doesn't get into this fix again,"" he said in the statement.
To prevent a reoccurrence of the present dilemma, the Assembly Democrats' plan eliminates unnecessary patronage jobs and rejects new cabinet departments proposed by the governor, according to Black.
""To fund our balanced budget priorities without raising taxes, we start by cutting a whole new level of political bureaucracy that has taken root in Wisconsin,"" he said. ""These political patronage jobs, unlike hardworking civil servants, don't provide needed public services.""
The Assembly Republicans are very confident about their budget plan.
""There's an old adage in legislating,"" said Baas. ""The majority gets its way and the minority gets its say.""
In an effort to maintain public services and to ease the burden on local governments, included in the Republican budget plan are several measures that repeal state mandates and help lower costs.
""If we're asking [local governments] to lower costs, we want to be partners in that process and help them,"" Baas said.
Richard Eggleston, communications coordinator for the Wisconsin Alliance of Cities, said he expects the issue of shared revenue to be a hot topic in the state Assembly. The governor's original proposal cut all shared revenue to local governments in 2002. The Joint Finance Committee proposed no cuts in shared revenue for 2002, and smaller cuts for 2003, than the governors original proposal.
O'Keefe said the Joint Finance Committee's proposal is an improvement in the sense that if the cuts are delayed until 2003, it affords local officials more time to decide how to deal with cuts. However, O'Keefe said, it is still not something that local governments can, or will, support.
""Local governments are being asked to shoulder a disproportionate share of the state's budget problem,"" he said.
According to Eggleston, cutting shared revenue would severely restrict local governments because apart from state aid, property taxes are basically the only way to pay for essential public services.
""The shared revenue program was designed to equalize the ability to pay taxes in order to fund services people need,"" he said.
In order to provide for vital services, Madison is preparing to reduce its budget regardless the outcome of the debate, said O'Keefe.
""State payments are not a reliable source of revenue for city government,"" he said.
