Is Lame Duck Deal Lame?

It’s hard to get a read on the reaction to the deal on the state surplus announced yesterday.

After months of negotiations, Gov. Tony Evers, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu announced an agreement on how to spend most of the projected $2.4 billion in the bank. It would go to three things: $850 million for direct tax rebates, $300 million more for public school special education and another $300 million for general school aids. There’s also another $50 million for technical schools, but that, like the general school aids, will pass through to property taxpayers.

So, essentially, taxpayers will get a $300 or $600 check, depending on filing status, sometime between now and election day, they’ll get some property tax relief which they should see in December and public schools will get a lot more money for special ed, which then frees up that same amount for whatever else they want to spend it on.

There’s nothing surprising here. Evers’ entire political career has been about shoveling more money into public schools and Vos has long said he wants money returned to taxpayers. And yet the deal is taking fire from both sides.

Conservative Republican Sen. Steve Nass, points out correctly that this is still more dollars going into public schools with no requirement for better results. But Madison senator and gubernatorial candidate Kelda Roys also blasted the deal as irresponsible and she has been endorsed by the state’s largest teachers union. She wouldn’t have made that statement if WEAC disagreed. Two other Democratic hopefuls, David Crowley and Joel Brennan, were also critical of the deal as was Senate Democratic leader Dianne Hesselbein.

Given the very blandness of the compromise, it’s not clear what’s going on. Does WEAC want even more?

Things are complicated by the fact that Evers, Vos and LeMahieu have all announced that they’re retiring. So, they have no leverage. They won’t be around to punish the opponents to their grand deal.

Also curious is the absence of any money for the Stewardship land conservation program. Democrats, including Evers, turned down $28.5 million on offer from Republicans in the budget, meaning that the program will go dark at the end of June. But none of the critics mentioned that, suggesting that it’s not an item of political leverage. Those environmentalists who thought that they’d win a game of brinksmanship here have, it appears, been proven wrong once again.

As a matter of politics, this doesn’t look like it will have much impact on the fall elections. The refund checks aren’t big enough to get noticed much and what property tax relief might occur won’t show up until December.

As a matter of public policy, I’d give it a C. Nass is right about the lack of accountability for the education money. The refund checks are nice, but not that significant. There should have been something for land conservation. And Roys is right when she says that there’s no long term property tax relief or school funding reform.

It looks like three guys on their way out wanted to exercise one last use of power. It was not egregious by any means. But it sure wasn’t visionary either. The public might have been better served if they had just left it to be decided by the next governor and legislature after a spirited debate during their campaigns.