[Music]
The following is a presentation of Wisconsin Public Television.
[Music]
It doesn't seem like they're really addressing the economy
so much, it's just kind of getting together and having,
you know, a little convention.
I think it's a fantastic idea, Michelle.
[Music]
I think anybody that had a relative or a friend or and
promoted them that quick, they would obviously question best.
I think they pretty much crucified the poor guy
and he's 70 years old, let him go in peace.
[Music]
Hello everybody, I'm Lynn Sprangers.
And I'm Dave Iverson, welcome to our holiday edition of Weekend.
We're glad to have you along.
We've got a full menu tonight.
No holiday off for us, a bag of very busy show, part politics,
part econ 101.
Well it seems like a little rock summit
made lots of news this week.
So tonight we've asked two business people who represented
Wisconsin there to join us.
Also tonight, Les Aspen appears to be Bill Clinton's choice
for Secretary of Defense.
We will talk about what Wisconsin to Washington
connection means and who's likely to succeed
aspen in Congress.
Later, rebuilding Milwaukee's schools, Superintendent
Howard Fuller's ambitious multi-million dollar plan will
soon go before the voters.
We'll hear from him in our second half hour.
And speaking of old schools, it's time to
demolish the Electoral College.
We'll have a debate and we'll take your phone calls.
Those discussions plus analysis of the controversy surrounding
just resigned insurance commissioner Robert Haas.
It's all coming up on our Friday night line.
Coming up, it was the week before Christmas and all through
the country most eyes were upon little rock cemetery.
Sorry about that little rendition, but after
all this is Weekend, the December 18th edition.
For two days this week, the country was invited to look
in on what amounted to a nationwide economic seminar.
Business leaders from all across the country,
economists and Clinton cabinet nominees debated the tough
choices that are before us.
And though the summit didn't identify any magic bullets,
there was widespread agreement on a number of matters.
The fundamental dilemma everyone agrees on is how
do you spark the economy and still reduce the deficit.
But the summit also produced an agreement on the need
to reduce the high cost of health care, to improve
lifelong worker training, and to provide incentives
for research and development.
Wisconsin's delegates to the conference included two
people from very different types of businesses.
Jan Eddie is the president of her own computer
software company in Madison and Richard Cheerlink is
president of Harley Davidson Motorcycles in Milwaukee,
where he joins us tonight.
Welcome to you both.
Let me begin first with you Jan Eddie,
because we sort of sat on the sidelines and watched this big
Econ 101 class as we alluded to at the beginning of the show.
One thing that just struck me and I wondered if it struck
you also is the enormity of the problem that Clinton faces.
Did you get a different perspective by having had
a front row seat like that?
It was definitely the enormity by the end of the first day felt
like a weight on my shoulders.
I could not have imagined having his job and having to sort
out the priorities that were being laid out and lobbied for
really in front of all of us.
For you, was that part of the value to just get a
sense that all of these are these huge problems
are ones that we all share?
Yes, and unfortunately not many of us are very well educated
and how one relates to the other.
I didn't realize that how closely tied the deficit
was to the healthcare issues, to the reinvesting in America
and you can't take from one without harming the other.
By the end of the first day, really, I have
to tell you it was an overwhelming burden, really.
Mr. Tureland, can you represent a very different kind of
company than Jen Addies?
Harley Davidson in Milwaukee.
Did you come away with the same feelings
or was your perspective as a big employer somewhat different?
I think it's difficult to make any difference between
what Jan found and what I found, the problems are
real. They're real to small business and big business.
It was mind-boggling to sit and hear the various
people talk about the problems and not necessarily
hear a lot of solutions.
Was there a sense that when you look at the range of solutions
that were being offered, Mr.
Tureland, was the sense that there's going to be a little bit
of pain in this for everybody regardless of what solutions
Bill Clinton decides to choose?
I think that's the only appropriate way to approach
it. We have to all suffer if suffering is needed to
segment the society and say this side will win and this
side will lose.
It's really not the way we should operate.
I'm curious about how what you came away from in terms
of your impressions of the Clinton, a team and the
president elect himself.
Did you come away as a fan of Mr.
Clinton as someone who thinks that this
is the right guy at the right time, Mr.
Tureland? I think he showed a level of
openness. He took risk by having such a session.
It's easy to be cynical about the
session and say he controlled it.
But the fact is he did it.
I think far more of him now than I did before I went in.
I voted for George Bush.
But today I might change that vote.
I feel very much the way that Mr.
Tureland does.
It was hard to sit there and listen to
the knowledge that Mr.
Clinton has and hear him talk about
the various issues that were raised in such detail and grasp
some of the very disparate pieces of information that
came up and tie them together.
I hope everyone noticed how he was very conscious of the
audience and always asking the economists and the
academic editions to explain terminology.
This was really a wonderful lesson for all of us.
I sort of got the sense to that.
It's interesting because I think Richard Tureland touched
us on the point that we've got a convert here in the group.
I think I suspect there may have been others who followed
suit. But I find it interesting that the candidate who really
campaigned a great deal on business removing regulation.
I heard George Bush make that speech over and over the
times he visited Wisconsin.
Do you think Bill Clinton got that message too that
you folks need less trouble from the government?
That message gets through.
It came through loud and clear.
Very loud and clear.
Both in the banking regulations and in
the bureaucracy that is forced to pounce particularly small
and medium sized businesses.
He spoke many, many times about the only new jobs that have
been created have been jobs to push paper around the handle
the bureaucratic issues that have been forced on business.
And yet Mr.
Tureland, someone would argue that your company
is one that's benefited to some extent by some regulation import
quotas. That kind of thing.
How do you come down on that?
I think where we benefited was that we had to protect the
US industry but it was for a limited period of time and we
had to perform.
And I don't think there's anything wrong
with that.
The problem is when you protect industries forever
and you become uncompetitive.
Our big issue is are we going to be globally competitive?
Yeah, where did you both come away from that on this issue of
competition? What's going to be the key to that?
Is it worker training?
What did you come away from feeling is the perhaps
the single most important thing we can do to become
competitive in a global economy?
I don't think there is any one thing.
That's one of the problems everyone's looking
for this mysterious one answer.
I think you've got to have worker training.
I think you have to encourage investment.
I think an investment tax credit
would be very advantageous to businesses today.
I think the research and development
tax credit would help get the economy going and get us looking
at the right kinds of things to make us more productive because
the issue is productivity.
We've got the people.
We have to make more productive.
I agree with that one of the statistics was mentioned that
the United States is still the most productive country
in the world but we've been losing our margin on that.
And I think if we can also address the issues of quality
management and participative management and bring some of
the management styles of our corporations a little bit more
into the into the new century.
I think we'll see a lot increased in productivity
from our workforce.
We'll see a lot of things to do later in this program.
We're going to be hearing from Milwaukee School Superintendent
Howard Fuller who talks about we can pay now or pay later.
Let's ask both of you as we wrap out this discussion.
Let's talk about the kind of people who
are coming into the workforce and what preparations are
going to be needed if we are going to have that productive
workforce that you so want.
Well, I would really stress the maths and the sciences
at a younger age and build a more well-rounded curriculum.
And as was also mentioned, not every one of our young
people are geared to go on to a four year college.
I think that trade schools and different types of programs to
help people prepare for the new types of high technology skills
but also the life sciences are incredibly important as well.
Mr. Chair, link on that same plane.
What kinds of things is Harley Davidson doing to keep
their workers trained in terms of keeping them competitive,
keeping them educated throughout their time with your company?
Well, in conjunction with our labor union, we've established
lifelong learning centers where people can go 24 hours
a day to improve their skills.
We have a mini shop where they can test their skills on
numerically controlled machines.
But the fact is, as Jan says, we have to get people grounded
in the math and in the science in order for us to use a
lot of the new technologies.
We have to ask one more question as we've been talking
so much about the Wisconsin Washington connection.
Mr. Turling, we've heard that there
may be a Wisconsin connection in the inaugural parade.
Can you enlighten us on that?
We will have eight motorcycles with side cars in the parade
come January 20th and we're very proud to always be represented
in Washington in all government events with our products.
Give us Bill Clinton new meaning to the phrase "leader
of the pack."
Mr. Chair, link on Jan Eddie.
Thanks very much for joining us tonight.
[music]
It looks like Wisconsin's less-asspin will be the next
Secretary of Defense.
Up next, our political panel
talks about the Wisconsin Washington connection.
[music]
Well, it won't be official until perhaps Monday, but all
signs pointing to Wisconsin Congressman less-asspin
as Bill Clinton's choice for Secretary of Defense.
Aspin now chairs the prestigious House Armed Services
Committee and he has a leading congressional expert that
is on defense for many years.
We'll be seeing over the weekend how this one's going to play
out. Now we want to get our political panel's sense of
what less-asspin in the defense job will mean to our state
and who might take a stab at being his replacement in the
first congressional district.
We just thought elections were over, right?
Joining us now is Hannah Rosenfall, Bill
Krauss and in our Milwaukee studio, Charlie Sykes.
Pleasure to have you all here.
Bill, you have a bit of a historian's perspective on
all of this.
This will not be the first time Wisconsin has
a connection to the Pentagon.
There have been 11 Secretary of Defense and as of Saturday,
three of them will have been from Wisconsin.
That's 27% from a pacifist state,
which spawned Bob LaFalla who voted against World War I.
Now most of us remember, know that Mel Laird was Richard
Nixon Secretary of Defense, but who's the intermediate one?
Dick Cheney has Wisconsin connections.
He went to school here, he worked in
Governor Nolts office here.
So his political roots are in Wisconsin, although he came
out of Wyoming into defense.
Hannah Rosenfall, what does less-asspin bring to the job?
And in another framework of that question, does Bill Clinton
want to give him up on the House Armed Services Committee?
There was a real debate going on in the past few
weeks about whether that was an even trade, if he will.
In 1987, I had the opportunity to go to NATO and visit.
When the people in NATO heard that I was from Wisconsin
immediately, I had credibility because I might have rubbed
shoulders with less-asspin.
He has stature in that world.
And at a time when we need to be building very strong
bridges to the international community, particularly right
now, because Bill Clinton has spoken out on the need
for NATO involvement and all.
So I think that Aspen's reputation and his, I mean,
he's been there a long time in building those bridges,
he will do very well for Clinton in that capacity.
But Charlie, purely from a pork point of view, less-asspin
could do more for this state in Congress.
Could he not than actually being Secretary
of Defense in the Pentagon?
Well, I'm really not sure.
I'm not sure there's going to be
all that much defense pork over the next four years in any case.
It's clearly a good thing to have a friend in that position.
And I agree with the comments before, I don't think we're
putting a hometown spin on it to say that less-asspin
is undoubtedly the most qualified candidate for this.
And one of the most well-prepared Secretaries
of Defense we've had in several decades.
So I think it's a win-win scenario all around.
We have somebody that knows Wisconsin
in a crucial position.
And we have somebody in the position who I think is going
to do a fine job with the complexity of issues that
he's going to have to deal with that Hannah referred to.
What about the political part of this?
I hate to move on to another election as
Liz said quite so quickly.
But Charlie, what are you hearing in Milwaukee tonight
about who's lining up to become the next Congressman
from the first district?
Well, if it was a line, it would probably be around the block.
I think both the Republicans and the Democrats have
very, very strong candidates.
Obviously, I think the Republicans have in Mark Newman,
the businessman, who spent a great deal of money against
Aspen, a candidate who wants to run, who has some money,
who has some name recognition.
There are some other candidates.
I think Chuck Coleman is talking about
running, Senator Whedon, and there may be others in that.
And the Democrats, I think, have an all-star cast, possibly
people like Jeff Newbauer, the chairman of the State
Democratic Party, and others, called Collins from Kenosha.
Maybe Joe Stroll will rise from the dead and Tim Cullen,
another name that we haven't heard from in some time.
So this is going to be a very, very competitive
primary and a very, very competitive general election.
We're hearing tonight, though, by the way, that Joe Stroll
may not have an interest in doing this after all.
But, Hannah, build your thoughts on what's next
for the first district.
I think there's additional people that will probably
hear their names.
I think you'll hear Judy Rapson.
I think you'll hear Peter Barthoff.
State both state representatives.
Right. You heard a couple of night,
Doug LaFallet, Lynn Adelman, all of whom either have
roots there or a piece of that action in that district.
You're planning the most, though?
No, I'm staying here.
There was a hot rumor going on, but we should mention this,
that Ed Garvey, of weekend fame, was considering moving back to
his hometown of Burlington and running for the first district.
We just got this call in from Ed a couple of minutes ago
and he wants to be quoted on this.
Of course, I'm moving to Burlington, back
to Burlington.
It's the home of the National Liars.
Put it to rest.
Room for one line?
Yes. When you talked about pork, do
you realize that with the Wisconsin connection of Shaleila
and Aspen, Wisconsin people will control about two-thirds
of the federal budget?
And Bill Cross will that make any difference to our
lives here in Wisconsin?
To our lives because they're honorable people and they
won't favor the home count.
But what access and information will have?
Bill Kraus and Hannah Rosenthal and Charlie Sykes
will see you again at the end of the program.
Thanks. The Electoral College was back
in session this week, but should it be out of business?
A debate on the Electoral College next.
[Music]
Now, if you're reading the newspapers carefully this week,
you would have known that Bill Clinton was officially elected
president only on Monday.
That's of course because the Electoral
College got together in vote.
But does this system make sense anymore or is it
simply an example of artificial life support?
Supporters say that the Electoral College still plays
a role because it discourages third party candidates and
it encourages candidates to visit smaller states like ours.
Critics on the other hand say it's an
undemocratic waste of time.
We're going to ask you to call in on this subject
and tell us what you think about the Electoral College
in just a few moments.
But to set up the debate for you, we're going to have a
four-minute free-for-all on this topic.
Joining us to do that are John Seifert, who is
the Milwaukee County Treasurer and was an alternate to the
Electoral College this year.
But he thinks its time has passed.
And joining us as well is weekend commentator Ray
Tefora, who believes anything conceived in the 18th century
is basically a good idea.
Gentlemen, we're going to give you four uninterrupted
minutes now to debate this out.
So go to it, John.
Well, I tell you, unless we amend the Constitution
and abolish this Electoral College quickly, we
are courting disaster.
One of these elections, one of these years, we're going
to wake up and find that the person we thought we elected
president when we walked in the voting booth is not the
guy who's going to be moving into the White House on January
20th because the Electoral vote will differ from the
outcome of the popular vote.
And we can't afford to let that happen.
We just can't rate.
Well, John, nervous, nelly liberals like you don't know
when to leave well enough alone.
The fact of the matter is that the Electoral College has
served us well for 200 years.
It has produced, produced leaders like George
Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Ronald Reagan.
It's a good system in that it tends to magnify and legitimize
the popular vote winner in any presidential contest.
In this election, for instance, Bill Clinton, your favorite
candidate, got 43% of the popular vote, but a whopping
69% of the electoral vote.
He had instant legitimacy.
It helps when certain candidates win by a minority
or plurality.
So I think it's a good system.
Why change it?
Well, I take four years from now we may have another Ross Perot
candidacy or another third party candidate like Ross Perot.
And if this time Ross Perot, who won or did win, he came
in second rather, in three states actually wins some
electoral votes, he could play poker in the Electoral College.
He could say, well, you know, Bill, I could make you
president or he could say to say Jack Kemp if that's
your Republican nominee.
He could say, Jack, I could
make you president by giving you the electors that I won.
And the American people will not put up with that.
They will not allow their president to be
selected in a smoke filled room.
They want a say, and I think it's time we gave it to him.
John, the fact is the American people already have a say
by tradition and by practice of 200 years, the people
vote for the electors.
The electors have faithfully
followed the instructions from their electors.
Within the last 40 years, seven of the electors have violated
their oaths and decided to vote for somebody other than
the person they vote for.
That's what percentage of all of the electors, the cast ballots.
What happens if we get a difference of three votes in the
Electoral College and three of those electors decide, well,
you know, the Democratic nominee this year is too liberal.
One of our electors four years ago wouldn't vote for
Ducacas. He insisted on voting for Benson because he thought
Ducacas was too liberal.
John, again, a parade of horribles.
There's nothing wrong with this system.
This system has produced great
presidents for our country.
And when one talks about changing the Constitution, one
should have good ideas to do so.
You're talking about a series of events that have rarely
happened in American history.
The last time the popular vote winner lost in the Electoral
College, I believe, was 1888.
Well, actually, over 100 years.
Well, actually, President Hilden, you know, because
he got the majority of votes, but it was Hayes, but
moved in the White House.
And that was over 100 years ago.
There simply is no good reason to change this system.
Right now, it can happen again.
Well, let's do what the people have to say on this.
Fair enough.
Ready to for it, John C.
For thanks for that rendition of Point
Counterpoint. Appreciate it.
But what we're going to do now is let you have a chance
to tune in on this and give us your calls and votes
on the Electoral College.
Here's the question we want you to ask.
Should we still have an Electoral College?
The number to call right now and Ray and John are going to go
take your calls.
1-800-348-9529. That's 1-800-348-9529.
Ray and John will take your calls and then
they'll report back to us at the end of the hour.
The phones are ringing, guys.
Get going.
That number again, 1-800-348-9529, to cast
your vote on the future of the Electoral College.
And up next, there was plenty of talk at the Economic Summit
about lifelong education.
We'll talk with Milwaukee School Superintendent
Howard Fuller about rebuilding Milwaukee Schools.
How to replace aging school buildings as an issue across
the state, but rebuilding old schools or constructing new
ones do cost lots of money.
And getting voter approval to borrow those
big dollars is tough.
Is Art Hackett reports?
That's the question voters in the
state's largest school district will soon have to decide.
Many Milwaukee Public School students are housed in
buildings like La Fawad Elementary that date back
to the turn of a century.
To bring the district's buildings up to standard,
voters are being asked to approve the largest school bond
referendum in state history.
The district wants to issue $366 million worth of bonds to
help finance a 10-year $474 million construction program.
But school bond issues have a spotty track record.
In the past year, five districts in the state have successfully
passed bond issues, but in four other districts, despite
what seemed to be compelling need, voters have said no.
In some districts, bond issues have been rejected as many
as four times in one year.
La Fawad Second Grade Teacher Lori Hale hopes Milwaukee's
proposal won't suffer that fate.
About a year ago Thanksgiving when I came back from
Thanksgiving break, the plaster and the paint were all down and
laying all over on the floor.
You can see the reason for the falling plaster from the rear
of the building.
The brick is deteriorated to the point water
is seeping through the wall.
Just fixing the plaster does no good.
None of us would stay at home and look at that in our
living room.
I don't think and have that kind of an
eye sore in our own homes.
And I don't think our children here should have
to come to school and look at that every day.
The school is also overloaded.
Several classes made in what used to be basement
storage rooms.
Some students wind up being bust out of
the neighborhood because there's no room at La Fawad.
The bonds would help build 15 new schools and expand 14
others. The district contains passage of the bond issue would
reduce busing by 9500 students.
The single most expensive item before the voters is a
$66 million replacement for Milwaukee Tech High School.
Here the district is trying to teach high
technology in a building that dates back to 1912.
Inside Milwaukee Tech welding students work just a few feet
apart in a dimly lit room.
In the plumbing shop and structure willison Claire says
conditions are downright unsafe.
All right, this is a lead pot.
This is a lead furnace.
Are we lead burning?
Okay. We have this door and this could
really smoke up in it because it's in added but it doesn't
suck it out.
Like you should.
In the machine shop, thousands of dollars worth
of computers intended to teach computer assisted
designs that unused because there's no place to put them.
The board did not approve the building modification aspect of
it, but the supply and equipment side was approved.
So we had the machines in the seats, but
you can't do anything with them.
We must support Dr.
Fuller's plan.
At the only public forum on the plan held so far,
sentiment seemed to run in favor of the bond issue.
The opposition thus far has come from the office of Mayor
John Norquist.
Norquist says the district is trying to
do too much and finance it through the most regressive
tax there is, property tax.
David Webster is Mayor Norquist's chief of staff.
It's the one that takes absolutely
no consideration of what how many miles you're trying to
feed, whether you're on a fixed income, whether you're small
business has had a bad year.
And we believe that while there are definite needs that
need to be met, that's the worst way to meet it as to
put it on the property tax.
Webster says Norquist doesn't dispute the need
for improvements, but there may be cheaper alternatives.
If the referendum fails, Norquist has said the city
council can authorize $184 million in bonding without
voter approval and get the work underway immediately.
Joining us now to talk more about this referendum in
Milwaukee and what's probably the most pressing educational
issue most would say in that city school system in
the coming decade is school superintendent Howard Fuller.
Thanks for joining us tonight.
Dr. Fuller, let me begin first because this is the
tape piece just indicated.
There is a bit of a debate between you and the mayor
of the city of Milwaukee over the financial or the
price tag of this plan.
Let me begin with that.
How much is that playing into your ability to convince
voters that your plan is the one that needs to be approved?
Well, first of all, I really, you know, land don't view
it as a debate with the mayor.
I mean, the mayor has his own view about a lot of
issues including that one.
I would prefer to concentrate on the comprehensive plan that we
have put together in some of the discussions that I've held with
a representative of the mayor.
He has indicated that the mayor really does not have a
plan. He just has a substitute number of things that he
would do that will cost less.
Our view is that we have a comprehensive plan to
deal with the issues that face our school district.
We have not gone out for a referendum in over 22 years.
And now is the time for this city to stand up for
its kids and to carry out a plan that will take
us into the 21st century.
Mr. Fuller, if your plan is passed and this ambitious
building plan does go forward, what can you assure, I guess,
the citizens of Milwaukee that will come from that?
Is there something measurable that you're willing to
say will happen as far as improving the education the
kids receive in your city?
Well, I think what I can assure people is that if we
don't put 6,000 kids in the kindergarten and they don't get
that early childhood education, then all of the benefits
that we know that accrue from that will not happen.
If we don't expose our young people to computers, then
they're not going to be prepared for jobs in the future.
If we don't lower class sizes, then we know that the
kind of education that our kids need will not happen.
When people say, "How are, what is it that you're going to
guarantee?" My response is, those are the things that I can
guarantee that won't happen.
I know that we have to make changes other
than just buildings.
But as Vice said many times, we don't ask the brewers to
guarantee that they're going to win before we build a stadium.
We don't ask the deep tunnel to guarantee that
it's going to work before we put $2 billion into it.
And so I'm not going to go out making promises about
I guarantee that this will happen if we have schools.
I can simply guarantee that you can't get kids off
of buses if we don't have schools in the neighborhoods
in which they live.
We are going to continue to do things to change
the curriculum, to change teaching practices so that
we can better educate kids.
That's all that I will guarantee.
To what extent also, then, are you, it sounds to an
extent, you're echoing some of the themes we heard
come out of the Little Rock economics summit this week.
That education, lifelong training, we saw something
about the needs at Milwaukee Tech in that previous report.
All of this echoes in a sense of that as well, does it not?
Not only that, but it echoes what they've said
about the infrastructure needs in our society.
And educational institutions, particularly in urban
areas, have to be very high on the agenda for
rebuilding our infrastructure.
And while we are better off in Milwaukee than most
places, we also suffer from the same problems.
If you haven't gone out for referendum in 22 years,
if you've got an age and building structure, which we
do, 57 of our buildings were built before World War II,
we have eight buildings that are over 100 years old, we
have a $54 million deferred maintenance backlog by virtue
of over the last 12 years, not doing what we should have
done to maintain our buildings.
When you have those types of infrastructure needs,
plus the lack of space for the 6,000 kindergarten kids,
we have to address that.
The Clinton summit talked about the infrastructure
needs of educational institutions in our country.
Who are the people you must reach, Dr.
Fuller? I know you folks are
planning to launch a public relations campaign.
You've got a series of town hall meetings between
now and February 16th.
Who must you reach to help this get through?
Lynn, we have to reach the people who normally vote in
February, and we have to reach a number of people who normally
would not vote in February.
Obviously, we're hoping that our teachers, our aides,
our parents, people who have children in the system, as well
as those people who understand that in order for a city to
survive, you have to deal with the education of the young.
If we can reach those people and get them out to vote,
then we stand a chance.
This has always been an uphill battle.
I said that from the very beginning.
Obviously, the question you asked me earlier, the mayor's
opposition does not help us, but in the end, this is not
something that's going to be decided by the mayor or me.
Whether or not we're able to get our case out to the people
and convince them that this is something that's necessary
to do for our children going into the 21st century.
How do you make the case, Dr.
Fuller, economically?
In other words, if the average increase of property
taxpayers in the city is going to be around $200 as
I understand it, how do you convince them that that as
an investment is worthwhile?
Okay, first of all, the average increase is about $191
over a 10-year period, and that's including inflation.
It's also including operations costs.
You will start in the first year for a family
who has a $54,900 house.
The taxes, the first year, will be $13 a year.
It would go up and reach a peak at something like about
289, about 10 years out, and then it will start to go down.
We're talking about an 8% increase average over
the life of the program.
The only thing I can tell people is this, is that if you have
6,000 kids in kindergarten, we stand a better chance of
educating those kids later on.
If we educate kids on the front end, then we won't have to
build jails and costly social programs on the back end.
If we don't, in fact, develop an effective school of work
transition program that will enable our kids to be able
to go out and compete in this worldwide job market,
then those same kids are going to be on welfare and
the costs are infinitely greater again on the back end.
So the issue still is, do you invest on the front
end to prevent costly items on the back end?
There is, however, another economic issue, and that is, I
believe that a school building program can be an effective
jobs program if we are creative in terms of how we go about
giving our contracts, who gets those contracts, whether or not
our partnerships are developed so that kids in our school
system can become involved, so that it has an economic reality
tied to it in terms of jobs.
Plus what it does is it gets us involved in rebuilding
and reclaiming neighborhoods where schools become not
just educational centers, but community centers for the
rebirth of communities and neighborhoods in our city.
Dr. Foller, let me get one more question before we wrap up here.
I know you're convinced that you're going to be successful.
I sense that just from what you're saying, and
you really are plotting ahead in that fashion, but
you're a pragmatic man also.
You have to ask you, what if, what if on the
morning of February 17th, the folks say no to this.
Then what you do is you accept what people say
and you have two options.
You can come back out again as this happened in a
number of referendums around this country where people
have lost the first time.
They've come out with exactly the same program again, or
they may revise it in some way.
The second option is that we continue doing what we're
doing, which is peace, meal, and our infrastructure needs.
And what's going to happen, Lynn, is that five years
from now, ten years from now, the problem will still be
there, but it'll be much more expensive to deal with as
long, the longer we wait to address what is an obvious need.
And can Howard Foller still keep up the energy and the
fight on behalf of MPS, if in fact you are not giving
this tool to work with?
Well, yes, Lynn, because people have to understand that while
I'm focusing a lot of attention right now on facilities,
there are other issues.
There's security and safety and discipline in our schools.
There's the importance of revising our entire curriculum.
There's the key to developing the School of Work transition
efforts so that our young people can leave high
school and go directly into jobs, or go to college,
or go to a apprenticeship, or go to tech prep.
There's the importance of, in my view, restructuring
the way that we go about teaching in high schools.
There's plenty of foundation and reform things
that have to be done.
The facilities plan is one aspect of that, but where
it to fail, the other things that we're working on,
we're going to continue as enthusiastically as ever.
Super-tender Foller sounds like it'll be a busy 93 for you.
Thanks for joining us tonight and happy holidays.
Right, thanks for having me and the same to you.
Meanwhile, Ray and John are still taking calls on the
future of the Electoral College.
You can still catch your book by calling 1-800-348-9529.
And up next, to look at what else made news this week, and
to look at tomorrow's headlines.
[Music]
Our news on a real tonight takes us from the Supreme Court
to the state legislature to Jamesville and to the editorial
page of a Milwaukee newspaper.
A little more than a week after Madison Attorney Peter
Peshick was tapped to head the Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources.
The Milwaukee Sentinel is asking him to step down.
The paper's editorial board cites the possible conflict of
interest Peshick faces because he has represented mining, solid
waste and industrial firms.
State Republicans are wagering their bets that there will be
a special session on gambling.
14 GOP senators are asking Governor Thompson to
call a special session if lawmakers fail to approve
a crucial constitutional amendment that defines
the parameters of gaming.
Wisconsin is getting the attention of the nation's
highest court.
Attorney General Jim Doyle will personally
argue the constitutionality of the state's hate crimes law
before the U.S.
Supreme Court.
Now, you may recall earlier this year the Wisconsin
Supreme Court threw out the hate crimes law which
adds prison time for crimes committed because of race.
In Madison this week, insurance commissioner Robert
Haas stepped down amid allegations that he hired
and promoted his housemate.
The resignation was accepted by the governor and lauded
by legislative leaders.
And finally another sign of these global economic time
surfacing here in Wisconsin where Japanese Izusu this
week signed a preliminary agreement with General Motors to
assemble trucks in Jane's Hill.
And by the way, those phones are still ringing back there
on the electoral college.
We understand the rate of four
side of this is being pummeled.
So if you're a supporter of the electoral college,
you better get your call in quick to 1-800-348-9529.
It was a busy week for Wisconsin reporters and next
week promises to be more of the same.
So we want to focus now on what's going to be
making tomorrow's headlines and look at how some of these
stories will continue to make news in the weeks ahead.
And what will happen next with new DNR Secretary Peter Peshach
and that conflict of interest story joining us for a look
at what we'll be making news tomorrow in the weeks ahead.
John Powell of Wisconsin Public Radio.
John, how quickly will this haze controversy fade
from the news?
Are we going to keep reading about it?
I think we will continue to see something about it Dave.
Certainly a lot of the Democrats don't want to see it die.
It's certainly an embarrassment for
Governor Thompson and it goes along with the idea they've been
pushing for many years now that the Thompson administration is
guilty of cronyism, patronage and its political appointments.
The House business is not the first appointment that has
embarrassed Governor Thompson.
How can they keep it alive?
One way is to try and investigate
to see if there was any law breaking.
So far no one's proved that there was any law breaking
per se because apparently this use of project positions and
the LTE limited term appointment at first was legal within
the bounds of the state hiring practices for his roommate.
First is an LTE than as a project position.
One of the legislative leaders, Dave
Travis, is called for an investigation by the state
auditor looking into things like that.
That's one way to keep it alive as an investigation.
The other way is there will undoubtedly be Democratic
sponsored legislation to try to tighten up the use of LTE's
project positions and these things which the Democrats
have charged for a long time.
The Thompson administration was using to get around civil
service rules to make patronage appointments and so forth.
The Democrats will try to knit this as part of a larger context
that Republicans have been doing this for a while to get
around state civil service by putting the Gary Sullivan into
these sort of plum positions.
There have been other charges of patronage and cronyism
going back to Dick Matty for instance the governor's old
friend from his days as a legislator who was appointed
as the head of the tourism division had to resign under
charges of sexual harassment.
There have been the lottery for instance the million and a half
dollars of fee money that the lottery apparently spent without
authorization. Bill Flynn the former lottery director now
gaming commission member of course is a direct appointment
of governor Tommy Thompson.
So all of this ties together and the Democrats have charged for
a long time this patronage idea.
John what about how much of this will stick to the
popularity of the governor himself who continues to be
as best we know an extremely popular figure in this.
Well that's the problem the Democrats have personal
popularity it's always been my thesis has a great deal
to do with it if a politician has personal popularity
that is people believe they know and like the person.
And I think they do with Tommy Thompson partly because he's
just campaign tirelessly around the state he travels around
the state he meets people he's cheerleading for the state
that's part of the office people like that he's personally very
popular when you have that it's difficult to be heard anything
short of an economic collapse.
Now will there be a cumulative effect I don't know Tom loft
is the Democratic candidate in 1990 tried to play on
this theme of patronage and special interest influence and
cronyism and that kind of thing didn't make a dent at all.
There may be a cumulative effect but for now I
certainly wouldn't say it's a big problem for Thompson.
Let's move over to the Peter Peshach story now this is an
appointee that the governor does not directly control because
it's appointed of course by the DNR board though the word all
along has been that this is a choice the governor is happy
with because he's of course.
The assumption most people are making is that the governor
Thompson pre-approved it as you say it's the DNR board that
actually makes the appointment but all the DNR board members
are in turn appointees of the governor and it's been
alleged anyway that the governor pre-approved Peter Peshach
for this particular position.
But Mr.
Peshach was on our program last week and he gave
a rather eloquent defense of why he'll be able to function
well in the DNR but now we have this business that the EPA
says he can't deal with a pretty big laundry in this issue.
So I mean that limits his effect.
Yeah that's what the Milwaukee Sentinel editorialized in
the about in the Capitol Times too which is that under
federal EPA rules anybody that's lobbied for interrest
as Peter Peshach did is not supposed to be able to have
anything to do with decision making for air pollution or
water pollution for two years.
There are after well those are the two biggest items and
many people's view that the DNR handles air pollution
and water pollution if you have a secretary who can't
have anything to do with those for two years why bother.
Now Peter Peshach is personally very well liked and respected
by legislators they know him very well he was the state's
public intervener on behalf of environmental concerns in
the Attorney General's office before he became a lobbyist.
He's remained well known to the legislators since then there
are many legislators including Democrats who were quite pleased
at his appointment because he does have their respect
personally Peter Peshach does.
So he may be I can't see the legislature trying to take
action against him there is a legislative way to remove
people called interpolation something like impeachment
that's way beyond the possible scope right now.
The big problem is this business of can he really function
for the coming two years.
John there is as you say there may not be a lot of
legislature can do but there was a high degree of
unhappiness at least among some legislative Democrats.
Will they just as with the haas story continue
to try to keep this in the news this controversy
surrounding Peter Peshach?
Well this one is I think this one is going to be kept up
anyway because we still have yet to see the report of this
commission or committee that's setting up these Chinese walls.
It may turn out that it is just too difficult I'm not
an attorney but to set up a situation where Peshach does
not have to do with anything that has to do with his former
clients for instance and that sort of thing setting up all
these Chinese walls I think may be turning out to be more
difficult than people suspected and especially with this EPA.
A problem until we are going to get a report from this group
that's looking into this at some point that will keep it in
the news that long in any case.
All right John Pough thanks very much for bringing us up
to date on what's going to be making news tomorrow on
Wisconsin Public Radio and the rest of our news media
sources around the state.
John thank you.
Up next the results of our totally unscientific
telephone survey on the future of the Electoral College.
We have heard the phones ringing throughout the show
and we're going to find out right now what you had to say
we want to get the unofficial weekend tally on how people
feel about the Electoral College rejoining us with their
report on that phone feedback.
Let me begin first by getting a sense of the tone of the phone
calls now Dave Iverson may have tipped your hand a little bit
earlier because we got a sense that perhaps you were getting
beat up a bit with that be fair.
Well I can still hear the rumblings of a landslide that
came down upon me when I was taking the phone calls I guess
all I can say is that this program doesn't reach for many
torries if there are any of them out there in Wisconsin.
I tell you roughly five to one in favor of abolishing
the Electoral College which disappointed me a little bit
but I mean I'm illustrating the beauty of the Electoral
College system in that in essence the people called for
me and I'm faithfully reporting folks out there what you said.
Most people indicated that to me that they simply should vote
directly for the nation's top top officer rather than through
electors that they don't know.
Ray it's pretty plain that people want to pick
their own president.
So what we're hearing is really kind of in the same
scheme is what we've heard all year as far as wanting to
throw out some of the old and have the full participation
in the process of people perceive a direct vote to be.
Let's talk a little bit about some of the phone calls that
you got I think we've got something we're going to put up
on the screen here so we can share it with the folks at home.
Oh no graphics okay let's talk a little bit about some of
what were the more enjoyable calls that you took among those.
I understand that the word fraud that one surfaced somewhere
in there and some of my voters said you know yeah they said
well gee you know I thought when I walked into vote for
president in November I thought I was picking the president
and now I hear from you folks that I was voting for some
electors instead of for Bill Clinton and he said that's a
fraud that's consumer fraud.
Well somebody who does need to do a little history a little
little look at history because I think we've all studied that
somewhere in a civics class but that's interesting and I'm
supposed that some of the other comments the people are smart
enough to pick the president.
Don't need the electorate.
Yeah a fair number of them told
me told me that now of course in defense of the electoral
college system I mean most times virtually all times in
our history the popular vote winner has turned out to be
the electoral college winner so this is this might be
much a do about not very much but at least the people that
call me were indicating that they wanted to vote directly
for the for the president.
We thank both of you for taking time out on your Friday
night to help us in this experiment and we'll see what
happens in four years again.
Thank you both.
Thanks. And finally tonight our
political panel returns to wrap up the week's news.
All right our political panel rejoins us now to wrap up the
week for us and put all of these interesting news stories
from the week and some kind of perspective Charlie Sykes
Hannah Rosenthal built cross.
Charlie you're two cents on this high controversy that had
the capital and such a dither this past week.
What are your thoughts on this controversy?
Well I think in general it wasn't a very good week
for governor Thompson and obviously the insurance
commissioner lost his ethical and moral compass somewhere
along the line but it is interesting that the Democrats
are trying to capitalize on this and as much as they
confirm this guy twice and appear to have some indication
that he was a problem.
Candidate at the time they voted just a year or so ago 30 to
two in his favor so this is this is sort of like the condos
for looking for a virgin in a boardelow for who's not guilty
in the haze case everybody involved dropped the ball on it.
Now I can recall Mr.
Krauss to my right here making an
eloquent argument for the value of cabinet government.
It seems to me Mr.
Bill the two weeks ago and you said
that that's this you know we need to have cabinet governor
we need to have the governor be able to pick his people.
This is not exactly an advertisement for the value
of cabinet government.
And to unpick him when it went as if and when they go
bad I think it's mostly a very sad thing here's a man
who's almost 70 years old has been speaker assembly.
He's been served with distinction in the insurance
department twice he's a tenured professor at the
university Wisconsin and he's having a terrible third
act and I'm just sort of sad and by the whole story.
It is sad to see an esteemed career in this way but it
provides an opportunity if we can remove it from the
partisan stuff that's clearly going to play out in the
next several days or weeks.
So what is that really governor Thompson has an opportunity
similar to what Bill Clinton is trying to do in working
out what is conflict of interest what is inappropriate
what is the relationship.
Define it give guidelines because there are a lot
of gray areas and there's a lot of question when
you serve government what are you bringing and where
are potential conflicts.
And good that might come out of this kind of thing and there
are several things on the table that might be questionable
is take the high ground and have the governor try to
develop some guidelines and you know take control of the
situation and see if he can produce some guidelines that
will help us in the future.
So we don't have this kind of tragedy make a brilliant
appointment with no conflicts.
One of the arguments that Mr.
House made in all of this was that this guy albeit maybe
he was as as John Powell was pointing out before and out
of civil servant he was still a real expert in his field
knew a lot about malpractice insurance so forth and so on.
Len you did some checking on that though this evening and
what if you what were you able to find out well I spoke to a
gentleman in Chicago who served on a study group that was
looking into claims insurance claims and served for about a
period of two and a half years on a panel with Gary Sullivan
and who told me that as much as Gary Sullivan was the project
director on all of this that he spent a very minimal amount of
time participating in this that he had very little expertise
and virtually no questions.
And so that he had no expertise and virtually no training
as it applies to medical malpractice and as a result I
think it certainly puts into some question the point by Mr.
House that Gary Sullivan brought something of an expertise
to this to this office.
Well it is in the end I think we would all agree with
bills observation it's a sad sad end but clearly an
instance of some considerable misjudgment perhaps.
So let's move on and talk some about the special elections that
are coming up because there's an interesting thing that's
going to happen here in the next month or two which is the
possibility that the Republicans could win control of the state
Senate couple special elections Tom Barrett goes to Congress,
Russ Fine Gold goes to the United States Senate first on
the Barrett race in Milwaukee is there a real possibility
that Peggy Rosenzwe could win that seat can a Republican
win that particular district.
Well it's not easy but the Republicans are really acting
like it's like it's a definite possibility there's a real
sense among the Republicans that I've talked to that
they feel they can take control the state Senate.
Then in April they think there will be not two but three
special elections the seat for the election for Tom Barrett
seat for Russ Fine Gold seat and for Marv Rochelle seat Marv
Rochelle who is very likely to get an appointment by Governor
Thompson before the first of the year creating another opening.
If the Republicans win those three seats obviously they
will take control and there's a real sense for the first
time in a long time among Republicans that they have
a real genuine shot at it.
Hannah what about Russ Fine Gold seat because that was
ever a bid well seat for years and years and Russ
wrestled that away by just a few votes as I recall.
How about that is there a chance for John Berry who's already
announced for that to take that seat and say Joe Winnicki
who seems to be interested?
I think it's a competitive district and I think it
will be a competitive race.
There are two names and I don't know if that's the whole field
yet I don't think anybody knows that won't for a while I don't
think it's even clear when the election is going to be.
But I think that these districts are more competitive
they've been redistricted.
I would assume because of the issue of control of
the Senate there will be considerable resources poured
into them and the governor has shown that he has great
ability to develop those and create those resources.
I think in that district the one you're talking about Russ
is seat Russ gained national fame for running such a
clean campaign and devoid of negative campaigning and I
think that because of all the races that have been named
that is the one that will be the most partisan in nature.
And perhaps the hottest when it comes to rhetoric and the
one that's the easiest to spiral out of control and get
negative and who knows how that will play out I would
hope it would be rejected.
This is just in by the way we just got another call
from Edgar be he's not going to move to Middleton and I
just want to make that clear.
Do the Republicans really want the state Senate and do you
want Mike Ellis to be majority of the governor I would not
want to control the state Senate I think I love Mike
Ellis and he's a wonderful man but he's a bomb thrower.
And if I had to deal in moving legislation through the state
legislature I'd a lot rather deal with David Helbach but
that's not that's heresy and I will be banned and banned.
I've heard Republicans make that comment that Thompson would
would just is not rather not have Mike Ellis as the majority
leader in the Senate but I think that the bottom line is
that it's better to be in power in the majority than in the
minority and the Republicans have been in the minority for so
long Thompson has found himself so hamstrung I mean he's been a
leader on so many issues and he really runs the risk of having
other states take his ideas take his thunder away from him
while he sits here in Wisconsin and watches the Democrats just
put roll block after roll block after roll block but I
think he needs a house of the legislature on the other hand
couldn't you not make the argument that it's wonderful
for a Republican governor to have democratic control of the
legislature because you've got the line item veto you've got
great power you can do what you want anyway because of the
line item veto and you have your foil in the democratic
legislature who you can pin all the blame on so I mean
couldn't you make an argument that if you're a Republican
the last thing you want is to have control of one of the
houses of the legislature.
You ought to ask George Bush about that.
He doesn't have the line item veto but but
also about how ineffective it is to blame Congress or blame
the legislature ultimately the governor is held responsible
for what happens ultimately the governor is held responsible
for the budget yes he has tremendous power with the
line item veto but I don't think that it really gives
him the the cloud and the creativity to move forward in
the way that he needs to if he wants to keep burnishing
his national reputation.
You mentioned earlier about the fact that there's going
to be money coming into some of these races where is this
money going to come from after we just closed off a very busy
election year not to mention spring elections where will
you see the money coming from people who have interest and
what laws are going to be passed and the same people who
have who deliver the money for all the other elections.
It's remarkable how much money can be raised but to pick up
on what Charlie just said the governor just lost his life
line to getting his stuff accomplished he didn't have the
okay of the legislature and some of his initiatives he always
went around them and went for federal waivers and Bill Clinton
made it very clear not just in the appointment of Donna Shalala
but in addressing specific welfare reform proposals the
time he gains his national reputation and will be over.
I think you got the best of both worlds now he's got
a very nervous legislature because they've lost ground
the Democrats have lost ground they're in great
danger now so they can be a lot less aggressive on his
proposals than they could.
Bill Kraus and Hannah Rosenthal Charlie Saxony Milwaukee
pleasure to have you back well have you back again
soon thanks for joining us.
That's it for tonight tonight.
[Music]