Compromise is a word we don’t often hear in regard to the stubborn, partisan Wisconsin legislature. And even when it occurs, it seems most legislators are too proud to admit such maturity could ever breach the wall of juvenility that seems to surround our state Capitol. While the controversial bill to streamline Wisconsin’s mining permit process made large steps toward bipartisanship, division within the legislature brought us back to the same old story of ego before cooperation.
The mining bill, which state Senate and Assembly committees passed Feb. 7, has divided Wisconsin’s politicians and citizens since its conception. Republicans maintain easing the process for mining companies to obtain a permit would lead to 700-plus jobs by allowing a mine to be built in the state’s economically challenged northern region. But Democrats have argued the bill would loosen environmental regulations to the extent that mines would pollute the state without consequence.
Cooperation is not only necessary within the legislature. Perhaps most importantly, the government should cooperate with its citizens, whom, in case our politicians forgot, they represent. Being that the bill would mostly affect citizens from northern Wisconsin, it seems obvious to this editorial board that legislators should have focused their attention on garnering feedback from these people. That is why we we’re baffled that Republicans’ choice location for the only formal hearing to gain input from citizens was Madison. Why make concerned citizens drive hours to a hearing in a city the bill will not affect? In response to Republicans’ choice of location for the hearing, Democrats decided to hold an informal hearing last week in Ashland, a small northern Wisconsin town. Two hundred people attended along with 10 Democrat legislators, according to the Pioneer Press. One Republican, state Sen. Dale Schultz, R-Richland Center, attended, and he actually opposes the mining bill, meaning not one Republican in favor of the bill attended. This is not the way to achieve bipartisanship.
Nor is Republicans ignoring one of the other potentially most affected groups by the mining bill: the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. Members of this American Indian community depend on the Bad River to grow their rice. While the Bad River Band “stand to suffer the most from weaker environmental laws,” according to Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Chairman Mike Wiggins Jr., Republicans have not met with any of the Native American communities in spite of their requests. Again, it is shocking to us that Republicans would ignore this important constituency.
Despite the aforementioned partisanship, we were pleased to see Republicans appeal to some of Democrats’ environmental concerns with the bill. Republicans, who hold a clear majority in the legislature, did not have to appease any of Democrats’ concerns. Yet in the final version of the bill, Republicans included 11 amendments aiming to address Democrats’ and environmentalists’ concerns, such as one that prohibits a mine if the Department of Natural Resources finds it harms a body of water in any way. These amendments, in addition to already existing federal checks on environmental harm by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corp of Engineers, should have curbed Democrats’ concerns. “Should” being the operative word.
Democrats have utterly dismissed Republicans’ efforts to cooperate by including amendments the other party clearly will not support. We understand that Democrats disapprove of the Republican mining bill in any form. But turning their back as Republicans try to reach across the aisle is simply ridiculous. Democrats: You are not the majority. Hate it, but accept it and move on. Republicans are ready for at least some bipartisanship, so we hope Democrats can embrace this moving forward. When this happens, the legislature will be able to truly meet its full potential.
What do you think of the mining bill? Do you feel that environmental issues are being overlooked? Tell us your thoughts! Please send all feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
