>> DUELING TAX AND SPEND
PRIORITIES OUT OF THE CAPITOL.
REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS WANT THE
USE NAERL THREE-QUARTERS OF THE
PROJECTED 4 BILLION SURPLUS TO
LOWER TAXES IN THE THIRD INCOME
BRACKET.
THE PROPOSAL WOULD REDUCE THE
TAX FROM 5.3% TO 4.4% FOR JOINT
FILERS EARNING BETWEEN 18,$420
AND $405,550 PER YEAR.
THE PLAN WOULD ALSO EXCLUDE THE
FIRST $150,000 OF A COUPLE'S
RETIREMENT INCOME FROM TAXES.
WHILE THE STATE ASSEMBLY MOVED
QUICKLY TO A PUBLIC HEARING ON
THE PLAN, SENATE LEADERSHIP SAYS
ONLY THAT THE PROPOSAL IS UNDER
DISCUSSION.
BUT SENATE CO-SPONSOR OF THE TAX
CUT, REPUBLICAN RACHEL CABRAL
GUEVARA SAYS CONSTITUENTS ARE
STRUGGLING TO MAKE ENDS MEET FOR
SCHOOL SUPPLIES AND EVERYDAY
PURCHASES.
>> ALL OF THESE LITTLE COSTS ARE
ADDING UP, ADDING UP, ADDING UP.
WE ARE SITTING ON ALL THIS MONEY
THAT THESE INDIVIDUALS HAVE
EARNED AND PAID IN.
IT NEEDS TO GO BACK.
>> GOVERNOR TONY EVERS SAYS HE
WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER THE PLAN
BUT HIS OFFICE HAS CONCERNS THAT
WOULD JEOPARDIZE MORE THAN 2
BILLION IN FEDERAL RELIEF FUNDS,
WHICH STATES ARE PROHIBITED FROM
USING TO OFFSET TAX REDUCTIONS.
HE ALSO WANTS REPUBLICANS TO
CONSIDER FUNDING HIS PRIORITIES
LIKE CHILDCARE AND THE
UNIVERSITY SYSTEM.
HERE TO UNPACK THIS PROPOSALAL,
JASON STEI N FROM THE WISCONSIN
POLICY FORUM.
THANKS FOR BEING HERE.
>> MY PLEASURE, THANKS FOR
HAVING ME.
>> THE RETIREMENT INCOME
EXCLUSION UP TO 150 THOUSANDED
IS NEW.
WHAT IS YOUR REACTION IN THIS
PACKAGE?
>> IT IS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING
THAT COULD BE A POPULAR
PROPOSALAL.
IT IS A GROUP THAT HAS MANY
VULNERABLE PEOPLE IN IT.
ALSO HAS MANY VOTERS IN IT.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS ALWAYS
IN LINE FOR POLITICIANS.
AT THE SAME TIME, WE ARE AN
AGING STATE.
THAT MEANS THIS IS A VERY
LARGE-TICKET ITEM.
ALSO WE ARE A STATE THAT IS
TRYING TO RECRUIT YOUNGER
WORKERS.
SO TO THE EXTENT WE PUT IN A BIG
TAX BREAK FOR PEOPLE AT THE
UPPER END OF THE AGE SCALE, THAT
IS GOING TO BRING TENSION WITH
TRYING TO RECRUIT WORKERS AT THE
YOUNGER END.
>> SO IS IT SOMETHING THAT YOU
THINK PIQUES THE GOVERNOR'S
INTEREST?
>> YOU KNOW, IT IS SOMETHING
THAT WOULD AFFECT PEOPLE ACROSS
THE INCOME SPAN OR AT LOWER OR
MIDDLE INCOMES, SO THAT MAY MAKE
IT SOMEWHAT MORE ATTRACTIVE TO
HIM.
AT THE SAME TIME I THINK THE
SIZE OF THE PACKAGE IS PROBABLY
BEYOND WHAT HE WOULD LIKE TO
SEE, GIVEN HE HAD OTHER
PRIORITIES FOR THE SURPLUS.
>> SO AS TO THE GOVERNOR, HIS
OFFICE SAYS THAT THIS INCOME TAX
REDUCTION PUTS IN JEOPARDY MORE
THAN $2 BILLION OF FEDERAL
RELIEF FUNDS BECAUSE THEY ARE
PROHIBITED BEING USED THIS WAY
AS TAX REDUCTION OFFSETS.
IS THAT STILL TRUE, TO YOUR
KNOWLEDGE?
>> YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S A
LEGITIMATE CONCERN THERE TO THE
LEVEL THAT THE STATE SHOULD LOOK
AT THAT CAREFULLY AND
POTENTIALLY CONSULT WITH THE
U.S. TREASURY ABOUT THAT.
AT THE SAME TIME WE DO HAVE A
SURPLUS, WE HAD A SURPLUS GOING
IN THIS BUDGET OF ROUGHLY 7
MILLION.
SO I THINK THE ARGUMENT COULD BE
MADE THAT THE STATE HAD FUNDS IN
ADDITION TO THE 2.5 BILLION WE
RECEIVED FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT IN EXCESS OF THAT TO
MAKE TAX CUTS.
YOU KNOW, AT THE END OF THE DAY
I THINK THE MAIN QUESTION HERE
FOR THE PUBLIC AND FOR ELECTED
OFFICIALS IS, WHAT IS THE BEST
AND HIGHEST USE OF THAT MONEY.
THEN WE CAN WORRY ABOUT, YOU
KNOW, MORE MINOR TECHNICAL
ISSUES LIKE THAT.
>> WELL, SPEAKING OF THE BEST
USE OF THAT MONEY, THE GOVERNOR,
OF COURSE, THINKS ONE OF THE
BEST USES WOULD BE HIS BILLION
DOLLAR CHILD CARE PACKAGE AND
GIVING MORE TO THE U PACKAGE BUT
THE GOP HAS ITS OWN PACKAGE,
WHICH DOESN'T ADDRESS WITH
MONEY; IT IS MORE LIKE --
>> REGULATIONS.
>> YEAH, THAT KIND OF THING.
THAT IS KIND OF STAND-OFF HERE.
>> SURE.
>> HOW DO YOU THINK THAT MIGHT
RESOLVE?
>> AGAIN, I THINK THERE ARE ALL
THE ELEMENTS HERE FOR THE TWO
SIDES TO REACH SOME SORT OF
DEAL.
THEY HAVE, QUITE FRANKLY, BEEN
MORE ADEPT AT DOING THAT THAN
SOME OF US THOUGHT THEY WOULD
BE.
SO BOTH IN TERMS OF DIALLING
DOWN THE TAX CUT, MAYBE DIALLING
DOWN WHAT THE GOVERNOR WANTS
FROM THE CHILD CARE FUNDING AND
PERHAPS THE REGULATION SIDE FOR
CHILD CARE.
THERE COULD BE A PACKAGE THAT
COULD BRING THE SIDES TOGETHER
AND LEAVE THE STATE WITH A
HEALTHY BALANCE TO WEATHER ANY
UNFORSEEN CHALLENGES THAT COME
UP.
I THINK IT IS REALLY A MATTER OF
POLITICAL WILL HERE.
I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY.
THERE IS NO IDEALOGICAL BRIDGE
THAT CAN'T BE BOUND.
>> THAF IS WHAT WE SAY BUT IN
TERMS OF THE PACKAGE THE SPONSOR
SAYS IT WOULD SAVE THE AVERAGE
TAXPAYER OVER $750 A YEAR.
WHAT ABOUT THOSE AT THE TOP OF
THAT BRACKET .
TABQ.
>> AGAIN, THIS IS GOING TO BE A
PACKAGE THAT IS GOING TO BE
PRETTY FAVORABLE TO THOSE AT THE
UPPER END.
IT WILL HAVE ITS BIGGEST EFFECT
FOR THOSE THAT HAVE THE MOST
INCOME SUBJECT TO IT.
OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN HAVE INCOME
FOR MARRIED COUPLES ABOVE
$$400,000.
THAT BEING SAID THIS IS STILL
PROVIDING INCOME FOR LOWER OR
MID TAXPAYER, PARTICULARLY IF
THEY ARE RETIRED.
THIS IS MOVEMENT I WOULD SAY ON
SIDE OF REPUBLICANS WHERE
GOVERNOR EVERS HAD WANTED.
JUST NOT AS MUCH AS HE WOULD
LIKE TO SEE.
>> IS IT YOUR SENSE THE SENATE
LEADERSHIP IS NOT MOVING AS
QUICKLY BECAUSE THEY WOULD LIKE
TO SEE EVEN MORE TAX CUT S?
>> THAT IS POTENTIALLY TRUE.
I THINK THE ASSEMBLY HAS ALWAYS
BEEN A MORE TOP-DOWN DRIVEN
HOUSE THAT. MAKES IT EASIER FOR
LEADER SHIP TO PROPOSE THINGS.
IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THE PRACTICE OF
SENATE LEADERS TO KIND OF SIT
BACK AND WAIT AND SEE IF
EVERYONE CAN GET ON THE SAME
PAGE.
THEN THEY JUST MOVE TO THE HEAD
OF THE PARADE AND START LEADING
IT.
BUT WE WILL SEE.
>> WHAT KIND OF POSITION DOES
THIS PUT GOVERNOR EVERS IN?
EVERYBODY LIKES A TAX CUT.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
THIS IS POTENTIALLY VERY, YOU
KNOW, ATTRACTIVE TO A BIG VOTING
BLOCK.
AT THE SAME TIME, HE'S HAD SOME
MOVEMENT IN HIS DIRECTION, SO I
THINK THERE'S POTENTIALLY AN
OPENING FOR HIM TO COME TO THE
OTHER SIDE AND SAY, WELL, YOU
KNOW, THIS ISN'T WHAT I WANT BUT
HERE IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE
CLOSER TO SEE IF THE TWO SIDES
-- THEY ALSO HAVE NOAH PARK OR
AMERICAN FAMILY FIELD, BREWER
STADIUM, WHERE THEY WILL NEED TO
COME UP WITH A DEAL.
THAT POTENTIALLY WILL COST AS
WELL.
I THINK HE'S GOT TO THINK ABOUT
THE BIG PICTURE ABOUT WHAT HE
NEEDS TO DO OVER THE NEXT YEAR
AND COME UP WITH A COMPROMISE
THAT FITS.
>> ALL RIGHT.