The Republicans who control the Legislature are hell-bent on eradicating local control of decision-making in clear violation of the fundamental conservative position on smaller government. Wisconsin Senate Bill 147, which was considered by the state Senate after I wrote this but before you read it, makes that abundantly clear by proposing to preempt localities' minimum wage laws.
Since Milwaukee and Madison have raised their local minimum wages, with La Crosse following close behind, the business community has been fighting tooth and nail to keep wages down. Their efforts to defeat these minimum-wage laws have stalled in the courts, and thus they've turned to the Legislature. Unfortunately, the Legislature seems all too keen on accommodating them. Regardless of the wisdom of the underlying proposal, it is simply inconsistent with Republican principles to sacrifice local control. Overriding this basic principle-but only when politically convenient-is both unprincipled in the extreme and a very bad idea.
Local control tends to be a good idea, because elected officials are normally more responsive to constituents in a smaller community. They are directly accountable to the voters every election, unlike a body composed of representatives from many different districts. For example, I get no vote on Rep. John Gard, R-Peshtigo, because I don't live in Peshtigo. (As it happens, neither does Gard. Though his official residence is in the district he represents, he actually makes his home in Sun Prairie.) I get to vote only on Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Madison. So if the state assembly makes a rule that governs me here in Dane County, my ability to affect that rule is limited by the fact that I can influence only Pocan. Gard, an outsider, is unresponsive to my concerns.
Sometimes this is a good thing. The most salient example is the Civil Rights movement, when Southern conservatives incorrectly insisted that Congress ought not impose desegregation or anti-discrimination laws as they offended the states' rights. In the wake of the Jim Crow laws, it's questionable how democratic those racist state and local laws were, but in any case it's inimical to the cause of true democracy for the \tyranny of the majority"" to restrict the rights of the minority.
Another good example is taxes. Localities are well poised to tax property (since the actual real estate is right there) but not income, since income is more mobile. Thus, local income taxes would not work well, so it's better to collect income taxes at a higher level-either state or federal.
Speaking of tax, the other big Republican-led initiative against local control, the Tax Payers' Bill of Rights, is just as bad as minimum wage preemption. No one wants to pay high taxes, so it makes sense to hold them in check. But who would know better what the school or local taxes in Madison should be than actual Madison residents? If we want to keep school taxes down, we can use the excellent mechanism of participatory democracy. We can vote against the upcoming referendum. We can vote for iconoclastic School Board members like Ruth Robarts. In short, we, the citizens of Dane County, can decide for ourselves. We don't need outsiders to tell us. (To say nothing of the apparent faults of TABOR as an underlying policy. It can't be that great when even the Republican governor of TABOR-pioneer Colorado is campaigning to ease its restrictions.)
Traditionally, Republicans support local control of most decision-making, because they generally favor limited government. The less the jokers at the Capitol do, the argument goes, the less trouble we'll have. So leave it to the locals to create local rules if they need to. Otherwise, we'll get along just fine without governmental interference.Sadly, Senate Republicans appear ready to sacrifice this principle in the name of political expediency. SB 147 is nothing but special interest legislation.
Business organizations couldn't stop minimum wage laws at the local level or in the courts, so they were forced to beat a fighting retreat to the Legislature. There, they propose to raise the minimum wage for the whole state by a small amount-so long as municipalities are prevented from making their own any higher. Thus, business would sacrifice higher pay for a few folks in rural areas in exchange for lower pay for those in the cities. If they didn't have Gov. Doyle's veto to contend with, no doubt they wouldn't even offer that.
There's no particular reason cities shouldn't be able to have their own minimum wages-after all, it's not like the cost of living is the same in Rhinelander as it is in Milwaukee-but then SB 147 isn't about principle. It's about special interests. It's meant to help the business community at worker's expense. And, unfortunately, it's also at the expense of Republicans' traditional support for local control.
Josh Gildea is a third-year law student. Send comments to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
