OPINION & EDITORIAL
Frankenstein veto slashes, terrorizes
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Mike Hahn:
- Recent polls reveal... absolutely nothing (December 4, 2007)
- 'Right to bear arms' stands up to scrutiny (November 27, 2007)
- Democrats play dangerous game (November 20, 2007)
- The pitfalls of holistic admissions (November 13, 2007)
Related Stories:
- It's still alive... (October 15, 2007)
- Reviving the monster (October 30, 2007)
- Governor abuses line-item vetoes (February 8, 2007)
- Frankenstein veto lives on (February 28, 2007)
- Wisconsin, we have a budget (October 25, 2007)
by Mike Hahn
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Just in time for Halloween, the Frankenstein Veto is alive and well. Yes, that maniacal laughter, "It’s alive! It’s alive!" we have all heard coming from the Capitol is courtesy of none other than our own version of Dr. Frankenstein: Gov. Jim Doyle.
After nearly four months of waiting, the governor, the Assembly and the Senate all agreed to a compromise budget. The governor had hailed the compromise as a victory for taxpayers, yet when it came time for Mr. Doyle to actually sign the budget into law — in a wonderful dog and pony show at the Memorial Union — he decided that the compromise just wasn’t good enough.
Instead of sticking to the compromise he had already applauded, the governor wielded his veto pen — the most powerful of any governor in the nation — to destroy the taxpayer protections he had agreed to. Rather than keeping a 2-percent property tax limit, Mr. Doyle saw fit to raise the limit to 3.86 percent. While this may not sound like that big of a deal, it isn’t just the fact that the governor negotiated in bad faith and lied to the Legislature and the people of Wisconsin about keeping the property tax bills in check — it is the way he did it that is so unforgivable.
In order to raise the property tax limit to the 3.86-percent figure, Mr. Doyle first had to veto the 2-percent limit for 2008; then he carefully vetoed 62 words and numbers to get his increase. The actual numbers for 3.86 were taken from statute numbers. Mr. Doyle had to be so precise in using his veto that he took the number "3" out of the parentheses that surrounded it in the text. The number originally appeared as part of statute number s. 59.57 (3)(a).
If you’re thinking that this sounds absurd, you’re right — it is. But believe it or not, this is exactly what Mr. Doyle did, and it all could have been avoided.
Earlier this year, a story broke about the governor’s Frankenstein Veto of the last budget that eliminated hundreds of words over two entire pages of the budget to leave only twenty words and numbers that stole $427 million from the transportation fund.
The gross abuse of power prompted the state Assembly to pass a bill that would eliminate the governor’s ability to write into law items that had never been voted on by any of the 132 members of the state Legislature. Unfortunately, the Senate never took up the bill. At the time, Senate Majority Leader Judy Robson, D-Beloit, and Senate President Fred Risser, D-Madison, assured the people of Wisconsin it really wasn’t that important and that the Senate just didn’t have the time to be bothered by such trivial legislation.
By all accounts, there were enough votes in the Senate to pass the Assembly’s bill, but Sen. Robson allowed the Frankenstein Veto to live another year. It will be interesting to see whether or not new Majority Leader Russ Decker, D-Weston, places a little bit more importance on the concept of open and honest government than did his predecessor.
Unfortunately, this was not the only Frankenstein Veto that Mr. Doyle used on this budget. Several times he used his pen to cross out single words and change definitions to fit his own political agenda. Mr. Doyle eliminated numerous spending caps for individual agencies and vetoed legislative oversight of several programs. Some of his vetoes are exceptionally narrow and, at first glance, it is difficult to see who benefits and why he made the changes.
Each time his Wisconsin Covenant proposal was mentioned in the budget, it was referred to as "Aid to the Wisconsin Covenant Foundation, Inc." Yet each time, Mr. Doyle vetoed the words "Aid to" and "Foundation, Inc." Given his past record with his veto pen, one has to ask why the governor would make such a specific change to one of his most important legislative goals. The question becomes, who receives a benefit from the change, and how much is it going to cost taxpayers?
It is a shame that these questions have to be asked, but by his actions, Mr. Doyle has given us no other choice.
Normally, Frankenstein is just one of those great, classic legends told around Halloween to get us all good and scared. Unfortunately for the citizens of Wisconsin, it is a frightening reality.
Mike Hahn (mhahn@badgerherald.com) is a senior majoring in history and political science.
Anonymous (October 30, 2007 @ 7:41am):
Mike Hahn, why aren't you happy? You seem like you need a hug or something.
If this was a Republican Governor using the Frankenstein veto, you'd probably have nightly wet dreams. Next time your party runs for Governor, just be sure not to nominate a partisan zombie like Mark Green.
Oliver Kiefer (October 30, 2007 @ 9:38am):
Mr. Hahn,
I seem to recall a constitutional amendment to ban the "Vanna White" Veto, which was passed in response to Governor Thompson's use of single letters to create new words, with equally egregious outcomes to the ones you cite here.
You also fail to mention the initial intention of the line-item veto (a veto power granted to governors in many states, although Wisconsin's is one of the strongest), which is to help governors balance state budgets that cannot run deficits.
I believe that kind of reporting is dishonest, and quite frankly I think we're all better served by a fair assessment of the veto power than by more of the same partisan bickering. If the last four months have shown us anything, it's that we can (and must) do a better job of working together than our leaders at the capitol.
-Oliver Kiefer
Chair, College Democrats of Madison
Anonymous (October 30, 2007 @ 11:31am):
quoting the badger herald from yesterday:
"Before Doyle signed the budget, however, he did make some line-item vetoes -- although they were the fewest made to a state budget in three decades."
the fewest made in 3 decades doesn't exactly sound like a "gross abuse of power.":
Anonymous (October 30, 2007 @ 12:08pm):
Let's be honest--the Frankenstein veto needs to die. Watch for it on the ballot as a constitutional amendment come April or November that simply states a word cannot be crossed out unless the entire sentence is crossed out. That at least avoids the stitching together of words to make entirely new meanings. This is a bipartisan issue that ruins the separation of powers that is so fundamental to our government. Wisconsin has the most expansive veto power in the country. It's time, no matter what party is in charge, to reduce the power and make it a true line-item veto.
Mike Hahn (October 30, 2007 @ 1:14pm):
I wasn't a columnist during Tommy Thompson's time as governor. What previous governors did does not change the inpropriety of Governor Doyle's actions. Governor Thompson is no longer in office - he hasn't been for more than 7 years. I am commenting on Governor Doyle's abuse of the veto pen.
If you must know, I am familiar with Governor Thompson's veto practices and guess what? Those were wrong too! As for the state Supreme Court rulings, I am not debating the legality of Governor Doyle's actions but the ethical and policy implications of his vetoes.
The way in which the line-item veto is structured in Wisconsin is wrong. Period. It doesn't matter which party is in power.
It would be nice if Mr. Kiefer and other commentors would take issue with the substance of the column and not waste time with comments that are the intellectual equivalent of: "Well, the other guy did it first." Governor Doyle's vetoes are the issue at hand, not what happened back in the nineties.
Am I right to assume then that the people who have so far left comments are defending Governor Doyle's vetoes?
Anonymous (October 30, 2007 @ 3:01pm):
I think everyone is fine with banning the veto, but just not while their party is in power. Ban the Vanna White veto, pass the bill now, but have it take effect in ten years. Or, we could wait until a Republican wins the governor's position, and do it then....but I'm pretty sure no one will want to pass it then either.
Anonymous (October 30, 2007 @ 3:18pm):
Regardless of who's in charge, I like the veto power that the Wisconsin governor has. Clinton had the line-item veto, and I thought that was terriffic. Face it, if more executives used their veto pen, our states and our country wouldn't need to rely so much on deficit spending.
Keep up the good work, Governor.
Oliver Kiefer (October 30, 2007 @ 3:45pm):
Very true, Mr. Hahn. Yet I think the lack of background on the line-item veto is part of the substance of the column, and I think that the quickest way to distance the opposition is to immediately call out their guy as the one reponsible for all of the problems.
If memory serves me, the State Senate was going to consider an end to the veto that would have taken place in 2011, so that the next governor (regardless of party affiliation) would have to deal with the consequences. After eighteen years of Republican governors, it seems like a pretty fair compromise to me.
That said, I think what's most regrettable is that we really do agree on the big picture here, it's just the devil in the details. And yes, I do defend the veto you mentioned in your column.
I think local governments should be given more leeway in how they run their communities. If people think their property taxes are too high, they should elect mayors and alders who will push for lower taxes. Same deal for schools. Local control, simple as that.
Best Wishes, Mike. Thanks for your reply.
-Oliver
Anonymous (October 30, 2007 @ 9:58pm):
Hahn, if you could get past being a partisan and stop regurgitating GOP talking points then we might actually be able to take your opinion seriously. The fact that you refused to present the whole history of the veto makes it sound like your point is that Doyle is the first and only governor to abuse the veto power. Just the spin that you wanted, I am sure! Your online comment that Thompson was wrong too is actually too little, too late. It should have been part of your column. Come on! You are a UW student! We are better than vile partisans like Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, etc. If you actually think they are worthy role models then keep up these crappy columns with half the story!
Anonymous (November 7, 2007 @ 4:28am):
Shocked, shocked i say to find out Mike Hahn is calling Democrats unethical liars...
Mike, seeing as every single week you write basically the exact same thing, you would save yourself a lot of time and energy by writing an all-encompassing column with all of your talking points, a "cliffnotes" column if you will. then you could just have that printed every week, saving you the trouble of having to find new ways to spew the same old rhetoric that you espouse. ponder that thought...
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
