It has been said that politics is the only game for adults. The recent budget stalemate at the state Capitol - a highly partisan standoff resulting in Wisconsin's largest ever budget four months overdue - begs the questions, Where are the adults? Where have all the statesmen gone?
The gleaming, white granite dome up State Street more closely resembled a P. T. Barnum big top these past few months and in the minds of many Wisconsinites, the credibility of our three-ring legislature is inching along a very tight rope. The time for reform is now, before we forget how inefficient and politicized the budget process has become and the lamest-show-on-Earth! rolls back into town in 2009.
To this end, state Reps. Gordon Hintz, D-Oshkosh, and Tom Nelson, D-Kaukauna, have proposed a reform package that includes a ban on campaign fundraising while the budget is being written and measures requiring budget conference committee members to actually do their jobs by attending committee meetings.
The Hintz-Nelson proposal would also motivate legislators by threatening to stop their pay after Aug. 1 until a compromise is reached. These reforms are worthy of enactment.
However, Hintz-Nelson does nothing to address the underlying problems that plague our legislature: seemingly bottomless partisanship and isolation from the state's citizens.
Greater participation in state government is the best solution. Perhaps we should consider returning to a part-time legislature.
In the 1950s, the Wisconsin legislature was a place for citizens - statesmen - to represent their neighbors in Madison on a limited basis. Lawmakers were small-businessmen, lawyers, farmers and others who sacrificed a bit of time each year in service to their community. They brought real-life experience from the sales floors, factories, forests and farmlands of Wisconsin to Madison and their only special interests were neighbors and friends from back home.
Wisconsin implemented a full-time legislature in the 1970s, transforming lawmaking from a public service to a vocation, and by 2000, more than a third of state legislators had spent almost their entire working life in the state Capitol.
We are one of only 10 states with full-time legislative branches. The other nine include some of the most populous states in the Union and eight of the 10 largest state economies: California, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Does America's Dairyland really fit in with the rest of the full-time legislature crowd? Is it in our best interest to have a full-time legislature?
Well, a full-time legislature means full-time salaries for lawmakers - $47,000-plus each year - and per diem payments for time spent in Madison, in addition to the salaries and benefits for the Senate and Assembly's combined 520 employees.
A full-time legislature encourages constant campaigning and fundraising among its members because re-election is not only a political test but also a requirement for job security.
A full-time legislature requires senators and representatives spend more of their time amidst lobbyists, party officials and special interests in Madison, rather than the folks of their hometowns and districts.
If the past few years' of scandal and standoff are any indication, Wisconsin's full-time legislature harbors increasing levels of waste, corruption and partisanship. But, if lawmakers were not attached to state paychecks and had real jobs for which to return home, the legislative process would be more efficient, more accountable and more representative of the state's citizens.
Besides Wisconsin's latest-in-the-nation state budget, the second and third most-overdue budgets this year were in two of our compatriot full-time legislatures, California and Illinois.
Can someone please explain what is so professional"" about that?
Adam Schmidt is a senior majoring in geography and political science. Please send responses to opinion@dailycardinal.com
