By the time you read this, Gov. Jim Doyle may already have signed the 2009-11 biennial state budget. Doyle's office said the governor planned to sign the budget, approved late last week by the Senate and Assembly, at the executive residence late this morning.
What isn't clear is whether Doyle plans to use his wide-ranging partial veto powers to alter portions of the budget. He's done so in the past. And the changes aren't insignificant.
Doyle has a lesser veto power on this budget than he's had in past ones. The Wisconsin governor used to have what was referred to as the "Frankenstein veto" because the allowed for the rewriting and combining of sentences to change laws approved by the Legislature. Doyle used this most notoriously in 2005 to reduce a 752-word section of the state budget to 20 words that moved $427 million in the roads fund to the state's general fund.
Voters last April killed the Frankenstein veto. But they left the governor with powers that we like to refer to as the "Son of Frankenstein veto." The governor still can rewrite numbers or strike words to change meanings.
If Doyle chooses to use those powers, he can dramatically change decisions made in the past few weeks by the Legislature. Doing so would do an even greater injustice to Wisconsin citizens, who have not been well-served at all during the budget process.
Nearly all of the controversial budget decisions made by the Democratic-controlled Legislature have been made in closed-door sessions. There has been little meaningful debate on the Senate or Assembly floor. Most of the public's business has been done in private.
Even so, the state's senators and representatives are the public's liaisons in state government. Each represents a local district and, in general and in theory, represents the majority views of their constituents. The governor also is elected and representative, and it is right as a check and balance for the governor to have veto powers on budgetary matters. But to still have partial veto power that allows the governor to change the meaning of laws approved by the people's representatives doesn't serve the public.
Hopefully, the governor will refrain from wielding that power today. Whether Doyle does or he doesn't, lawmakers should work in the future to further reduce those partial veto powers.
Lawmakers also should do something else that would serve the public interest in the budgeting process. Assembly Bill 143 would require partisan caucuses - where most of the budget decisions were made behind closed doors this year - to be subject to the state's open meetings laws. The public would have to be notified and invited to attend the meetings.
The arguments against the bill are predictable. Requiring lawmakers to have their party meetings in public would inhibit debate.
"There are occasions when legislators need some private time to debate issues that might otherwise not be addressed or would be addressed in a less frank manner," Rep. Marlin Schneider, D-Wisconsin Rapids, told the Wisconsin Rapids Tribune last week.
Nonsense. Lawmakers who are afraid to say something, or take a particular stand, because the public might be watching shouldn't be public servants. Period.
"I think we need to open them up and let a little sunshine in," the bill's co-sponsor, Rep. Dean Kaufert, R-Neenah, told the Tribune.
He's right. It's awfully cloudy right now in Madison.
What isn't clear is whether Doyle plans to use his wide-ranging partial veto powers to alter portions of the budget. He's done so in the past. And the changes aren't insignificant.
Doyle has a lesser veto power on this budget than he's had in past ones. The Wisconsin governor used to have what was referred to as the "Frankenstein veto" because the allowed for the rewriting and combining of sentences to change laws approved by the Legislature. Doyle used this most notoriously in 2005 to reduce a 752-word section of the state budget to 20 words that moved $427 million in the roads fund to the state's general fund.
Voters last April killed the Frankenstein veto. But they left the governor with powers that we like to refer to as the "Son of Frankenstein veto." The governor still can rewrite numbers or strike words to change meanings.
If Doyle chooses to use those powers, he can dramatically change decisions made in the past few weeks by the Legislature. Doing so would do an even greater injustice to Wisconsin citizens, who have not been well-served at all during the budget process.
Nearly all of the controversial budget decisions made by the Democratic-controlled Legislature have been made in closed-door sessions. There has been little meaningful debate on the Senate or Assembly floor. Most of the public's business has been done in private.
Even so, the state's senators and representatives are the public's liaisons in state government. Each represents a local district and, in general and in theory, represents the majority views of their constituents. The governor also is elected and representative, and it is right as a check and balance for the governor to have veto powers on budgetary matters. But to still have partial veto power that allows the governor to change the meaning of laws approved by the people's representatives doesn't serve the public.
Hopefully, the governor will refrain from wielding that power today. Whether Doyle does or he doesn't, lawmakers should work in the future to further reduce those partial veto powers.
Lawmakers also should do something else that would serve the public interest in the budgeting process. Assembly Bill 143 would require partisan caucuses - where most of the budget decisions were made behind closed doors this year - to be subject to the state's open meetings laws. The public would have to be notified and invited to attend the meetings.
The arguments against the bill are predictable. Requiring lawmakers to have their party meetings in public would inhibit debate.
"There are occasions when legislators need some private time to debate issues that might otherwise not be addressed or would be addressed in a less frank manner," Rep. Marlin Schneider, D-Wisconsin Rapids, told the Wisconsin Rapids Tribune last week.
Nonsense. Lawmakers who are afraid to say something, or take a particular stand, because the public might be watching shouldn't be public servants. Period.
"I think we need to open them up and let a little sunshine in," the bill's co-sponsor, Rep. Dean Kaufert, R-Neenah, told the Tribune.
He's right. It's awfully cloudy right now in Madison.
