Good afternoon, thank you very much for being here today.
We have a couple of hometown heroes that I'm going to represent in August to talk about
our floor period.
As soon as the folks in the back are a little quieter, excuse me, tell them that.
Thank you.
That would be great.
So thank you very much for being here.
It's going to be a good day in the State Assembly today, lots of things focusing on
making sure we have education and that we have a workforce ready to go.
So I'm going to turn it over to Representative August to talk about our calendar today.
Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'll keep things brief here.
We do have two hometown heroes to start off the day.
We have a resolution being offered by Representative Gundrum that will take off the Senate message.
And then we will get into the bulk of today's calendar dealing with some of our manufacturing
sector as well as freedom of speech in a higher ed.
So with that, I will turn things over to Representative Mahalski to discuss his Assembly
Bill 549.
Hi.
Thank you.
I'm here to talk about AB 549, which will expand and improve the technical college system's
ability to train Wisconsin's manufacturing workforce by utilizing a dollar to dollar
matching grant in two areas.
First it creates a $16 million grant, $1 million for each technical college school, so that
the technical colleges can improve and enhance each school's manufacturing facilities and
purchase advanced manufacturing equipment for training.
Second, to staff and improve the facilities with quality instructors, the bill will improve
the bill will provide a one-time grant of up to $5,000 as a sign-on bonus for advanced
manufacturing and CDL instructors.
Why is 549 important?
The National Association of Manufacturers reports that manufacturing contributes about
20% to the Wisconsin's gross domestic private.
Over half of a million manufacturing jobs in the state with an average annual compensation
of about $80,000.
Unfortunately, manufacturing workforce is aging.
Over 25% of the workforce is over the age of 55 and will likely be retiring within the
next 10 years.
It's essential to replace these individuals.
Additionally, the Department of Workforce Development estimates that by 2030 we will
need to increase our workforce by an additional 24,000 individuals.
This is about 150,000 new people that need to be trained by 2030.
In short, we must expand and improve the technical colleges' systems' ability to train Wisconsin's
manufacturing workforce, and AB 549 will begin that process.
With that, I will turn it over to the representative of Chaz Green.
Well, thank you all for being here today.
Manufacturing is a huge economic driver in the state of Wisconsin, supporting roughly
500,000 jobs across 92,000 companies.
It has an economic impact of about $68 billion a year.
However, this industry does not, it is not exempt from experiencing workforce shortages.
In 2017, the legislature established the technical education equipment grant program.
Demand continuing for this grant program, it needed adjusting.
So with Assembly Bill 550, we do a few things to keep this successful grant program going.
First off, it allows grant money to be used to enhance facilities as well as procure equipment
that is used in construction fields and the workplace.
Secondly, the bill promotes consortiums or teams of school to submit equipment requests
in order to pool their resources and serve more students.
Third, it expands the maximum grant award from 50,000 to 100,000.
It also requires DWD to award at least one third of the monies to school districts that
are eligible for sparsity.
And lastly, it, I apologize.
And lastly, it reduces the requirement from 200% to 100% for schools that
use private business funding to match for the grant.
It is important that we keep working to ensure our students are exposed to this crucial
industry in our state, and thank you for your time.
And I will now refer to Rob O'Connor.
Good afternoon.
I'm here to be excited about the fact that we're creating an automatic admissions bill
into the University of Wisconsin.
It's based on scholastic performance from any school graduating seniors in the state.
It includes homeschoolers, choice schools, charter schools, public schools.
So if you're graduating in the top 10% of your class, you're entitled to enter an automatic
admission into any of our state schools.
You're also entitled to get into the University of Wisconsin if you're in the top 5%.
We set together some ranking order for that, so this is a foundation.
It's a combination of GPA, ACT, and other considerations that the local school boards
can take into consideration.
So a result of that, we hope to expand the number of kids coming into our four year schools
and create the outcome where they remain here in Wisconsin once they leave.
So for AB 370, we're excited to see that get done today.
Next, please listen to Representative Nett-Weske.
Thank you, Representative O'Connor.
Good afternoon, everyone.
I'm here today to present AB 553, AB 553's legislation that is responsive to a series
of informational hearings that the Assembly Committee on Colleges and Universities held
earlier this year, addressing the lack of intellectual diversity on UW campuses and
how this affects outcomes and the Wisconsin workforce.
Its substance is informed with evidence delivered to us through the results of a UW system-wide
survey of over 10,000 students conducted last year that revealed serious concerns about
the support for freedom of speech and expression on campuses and on students' lack of knowledge
about the protections of the First Amendment.
AB 553 seeks to establish freedom of expression and academic freedom standards on University
of Wisconsin campuses and technical colleges across the state.
It also outlines due process standards and penalties for those who violate these standards.
This legislation enshrines the principles of University of Wisconsin's system Regent
Policy 4-21 into law for the purpose of clarifying and protecting the First Amendment
rights of students, staff, and visitors on UW campuses going forward.
If a UW institution or a Wisconsin Technical College violates this policy more than one
time in a five-year period, that institution's tuition will be frozen for a period of two
academic years.
And an abundance of testimony throughout this session we heard from many stakeholders
that Policy 4-21 has no teeth.
There are no penalties for violations.
AB 553 addresses this.
Enforcement of 4-21 is inconsistent, they say, and some administrations inequitably applying
these rules.
While the bias reporting thought police run around campuses threatening severe action
for merely expressing a thought that might offend someone, the UW student free speech
survey results tell us more and more that students, particularly those with conservative
viewpoints, choose to self-sensor rather than participate in meaningful discussion and debate.
Many are choosing not to attend UW schools at all.
Increased campus trends of using tactics such as the hecklers-bito, disinvitation, and
differences of fees for security for speakers threaten our commitment to the Wisconsin idea.
This is not education.
This is not what most students want.
Students choose post-secondary education to broaden their minds.
They don't want to invest small fortunes into echo chambers of narrow groupthink that will
not only keep them in the dark but will also not help them down a successful career path.
There is a direct correlation between the declining enrollment on UW campuses and the
perceived lack of support for free speech.
This is a crisis for our universities and a crisis for our workforce.
AB 553 by no means is a solution to the cultural attack on free speech, but it is an opportunity
for the legislature to lead and to unify behind the First Amendment and behind the
fearless, sifting, and winnuing by which alone the truth can be found.
And with that, I will turn it over to Representative Rettinger.
Thank you all very much, here to speak about AB 554, which is a very simple bill at its
core, but a critical one, that will move us from race-based criteria within our higher
ed's age programs to new criteria based on the Supreme Court decision that came out
earlier this year that found in college admissions that the use of race in those criteria violated
the Equal Protection Clause under the 14th Amendment.
So looking at that and now that that precedent has been established, we are looking to shift
criteria away from race, which is not only just morally wrong to continue to divide society
that way, and now it's been a great discussion, the legislature's been having.
But now that we have those principles as being founded as unconstitutional to a new disadvantaged
definition to ensure that those who are in true economic need are still able to receive
aid under these programs, they continue to be viable, and we as a state can turn the page
on using these outdated practices.
The polling has showed that nearly two-thirds of Americans are in support of ending the
use of race in this way, and now that the Supreme Court has spoken on this and has established
it just violates the 14th Amendment, it's time to move forward and progress in a new
direction.
Thank you.
So with that, we're happy to answer any questions.
Well, first of all, if it's not in the calendar, the caucus doesn't support it, right?
We go through a process with our rules.
I don't think there's really even a process to bring it forward.
Is there any more?
Yeah, I can handle that.
I mean, first of all, it's tough to discuss a hypothetical situation, but it's my understanding
from our caucus that there's not going to be an effort to do anything like that.
And so I don't see that there is going to be a vote today, and I'd be surprised if
there was a meeting.
Speaker Lass, can you provide some clarity?
Last week, Governor Evers found a lawsuit against State GOP.
Can you provide some clarity on whether or not JOCR has chosen to withhold funding for
UW system employees until DEI programs are eliminated?
Is that true?
Sure.
Well, first of all, the legislature's ability to allocate the funds is longstanding.
You know, Governor Evers has a typical tactic rather than reaching out, trying to find consensus,
maybe generate some kind of bipartisanship.
He is now resorted to just going to court.
That's really what we are seeing, that he has an ally in the Attorney General, and
they are committed to spending tens of millions of dollars suing state government to try to
get their way because they can persuade us through the effectiveness of their arguments.
So I think that we look at the law and standing practices of how the legislature's operated.
I can't see any reason why even a liberal Supreme Court, which would change that, considering
the fact that this is operated this way when Democrats were in charge and a Republican
governor, when Republicans were in charge, with the Republican governor, and now when
the reverse is true.
So hopefully the lawsuit won't be successful, and we'll continue the practice that we've
already had.
So to get to the clear alignment of the Brewers bill came out today as the changes that were
discussed, but overall reduced the state's contribution as a $2 ticket tax, the non-brewer
events.
And the Brewers are paid $10 million more.
Are you the support of that, of the amendments that the states have put over?
I haven't had a chance to talk to my Senate colleagues, but certainly anything that helps
to get the bill through.
It seems to me we have been talking about a non-brewer event ticket fee.
So that's something that we discussed at this house as well.
The opportunity for the Brewers, hopefully they're willing to commit more.
I know they have been already good partners with us, so hopefully this is what gets it
over to the finish line.
If you can get through the Senate, I'm sure we'll support it in the assembly.
Do you have your support with those changes?
Once again, I have to talk to the authors to really understand it.
I just read a quick news report before I got here, but if it's a small ticket fee, I don't
think that's unreasonable.
I think if it's allocated toward reducing the state's share, that's a win for everybody.
So it seems reasonable until I see the details.
Speaker, what do you make of these new ads targeting the new pressure you need to move
forward with them?
Do you need to be able for a friend to recall a primary challenge?
Sure.
Well, the first thing I would say is there is one person in the state of Wisconsin that
has stood in the way of election reform since the year 2019 when he was sworn into office.
That's not Robin Boss.
That's not even the legislators who are here.
That's Tony Evers.
We have passed dozens of election reform bills.
We will have more on the calendar before the end of this floor, period.
The only person who's really had a problem with actually having us have elections that
are better run is Tony Evers because they benefit from it.
So the fact that you have a small disgruntled group who are frustrated because we don't
have the votes to override Governor Evers there is nobody who's more frustrated and
our inability to have Governor Evers who is ineffective, inarticulate, and standing in
the way to reform than me.
So I would suggest to them that they should redirect their efforts toward convincing
Tony Evers and the voters of Wisconsin that he is the one standing in the way of reform,
not any legislator in the school.
Thanks everybody.
Speaker, why are you withholding funds from just UW system staff?
What do you work for?
I work for TMJ4.
Why are you withholding raises for specifically UW system staff and not the rest of state employees?
We've been asking this question for the last week.
I understand you're on a time.
So can we just get some clarification on that, please?
Yeah.
It's very easy.
We need to have a university system that represents the entire state.
Right now we have a system that does not.
We have one that is focused on, you know, since the year 2017, I think the university
system has hired almost 1,700 employees with declining enrollment.
So it seems to me that if they have the resources to be able to hire 1,700 additional people,
they don't necessarily have the need for some of these things.
So I'm certainly open to looking at what the possibilities are, but we've been working
with the administration, the university system.
I think that in the end, we will hopefully find a way to get to a yes, but the legislature
is not going to stand behind the idea that we can have a system that focuses on division,
indoctrination, and exclusion at the expense of the rest of the state.
So hopefully we'll find an answer.
I'm an optimist.
I think we will.
We've had good discussions, but we are not going to move forward until we have a consensus
that generates all the way through.
The resolution will never be voted on.
We just made a brief discussion about it today in caucus.
I think that we are nowhere near a consensus, but I can't predict what's going to happen
in the future, but I think it is unlikely that it's going to come up any time soon.
Do you think the claims in it have merit?
I think that there are problems that if people look back that I think we have in some ways
already addressed.
Look, we need to move on.
The election in 2024 should not be about what occurred in 2020.
We had an election in 2022 that went fairly well, that weren't a lot of issues that were
brought up.
We had Ron Johnson get reelected of the United States Senate.
So I think we need to move forward and talk about the issues that matter to most Wisconsin
ites, and that is not for most Wisconsinites, which I think is about making it worse.
Thank you.